How long should the lock down last?

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted836128
  • Start date Start date
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Members don't see this ad.
GeneralVeers said:
People like Siggy keep praying to the alter of the high and mighty "science".

Science in the case of COVID is a set of data based on observations, testing, and statistical analysis. "Science" does not tell us whether to open or close the economy, as science doesn't care one way or the other.

The decision to open or close the economy is a political, not a scientific one. The decision is based on data (science), culture, and the political climate, hopefully balanced against job loss, deaths from despair, and degradation to the healthcare system.

The "Science" has led politicians to generally favor shut downs without balancing the other end of the equation.

I wholeheartedly disagree with Siggy, who likely has a secure job with at least some income that putting 30-40 million people out of work, and destroying livelihoods was worth the balance of theoretical saved lives. We still haven't calculated the loss of life, mental health, livelihoods from the shutdowns, but it will almost certainly eclipse 200,000, mostly elderly people at the end of their lives who will be claimed.

The arrogance of all these politicians and scientists who have secure jobs who advocate for the destruction of other poeple's lives is astonishing. I think their opinion would change if they were forced to go without salary, and had to quit their jobs through the extent of the lockdowns.\\\

For many people lockdown = death.
Click to expand...

You're so much better at this than I am.
 
Interestingly the Nevada Governor is considering mandating masks in public. We have almost no Corona deaths at the moment and patients admitted for Corona are stable or decreasing. We did have an increase in cases, most likely to vastly increased testing. It's bizarre how the public policy is not matching up with "the science" these days.

I will gladly go out in public without a mask. They can issue me a ticket which I will not pay, and I will go to jail if needed.
 
The equation is pretty simple. People who have never dealt with poverty are 100% for complete shutdowns because they're completely oblivious to what that actually entails. "oh they can just get another job". You might as well be saying just get a small loan of a million dollars from your parents.
 
GeneralVeers said:
I will gladly go out in public without a mask. They can issue me a ticket which I will not pay, and I will go to jail if needed.
Click to expand...

Despite the growing evidence that masks do provide benefit in controlling the spread of the virus, you, a physician, will "gladly" go out in public without one?
 
GeneralVeers said:
People like Siggy keep praying to the alter of the high and mighty "science".

Science in the case of COVID is a set of data based on observations, testing, and statistical analysis. "Science" does not tell us whether to open or close the economy, as science doesn't care one way or the other.

The decision to open or close the economy is a political, not a scientific one. The decision is based on data (science), culture, and the political climate, hopefully balanced against job loss, deaths from despair, and degradation to the healthcare system.

The "Science" has led politicians to generally favor shut downs without balancing the other end of the equation.

I wholeheartedly disagree with Siggy, who likely has a secure job with at least some income that putting 30-40 million people out of work, and destroying livelihoods was worth the balance of theoretical saved lives. We still haven't calculated the loss of life, mental health, livelihoods from the shutdowns, but it will almost certainly eclipse 200,000, mostly elderly people at the end of their lives who will be claimed.

The arrogance of all these politicians and scientists who have secure jobs who advocate for the destruction of other poeple's lives is astonishing. I think their opinion would change if they were forced to go without salary, and had to quit their jobs through the extent of the lockdowns.\\\

For many people lockdown = death.
Click to expand...
They don’t care about “science.” They were the ones that called me an ignorant “science denier” early in this thread, then after I shared more CDC data and scientific articles than anyone else on this thread, without reading any of it, they overruled all of the “science” with a 2 cups of anecdote and a 3 pounds of hysteria all rolled up into a burrito bomb of emotion.

This virus is here to stay, life will go on, and some are coming to grips with that better than others.
 
bravotwozero said:
I believe there is mounting evidence that the wearing of masks in public helps to stop the spread of coronavirus.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Cloth masks do a decent job of preventing droplet spread. People with symptoms of cough, cold, sore throat, congestion etc should absolutely wear them. People at risk either due to age or medical problems should absolutely wear them.

The asymptomatic, healthy adult should not be required, but if they are fearful then go ahead.

To mandate mask-wearing outdoors is simply ludicrous. Unless it's a huge group of unrelated people in very close quarters there is literally no chance of spread from casually walking by someone.
 
Last edited:
GeneralVeers said:
People like Siggy keep praying to the alter of the high and mighty "science".

Science in the case of COVID is a set of data based on observations, testing, and statistical analysis. "Science" does not tell us whether to open or close the economy, as science doesn't care one way or the other.

The decision to open or close the economy is a political, not a scientific one. The decision is based on data (science), culture, and the political climate, hopefully balanced against job loss, deaths from despair, and degradation to the healthcare system.

The "Science" has led politicians to generally favor shut downs without balancing the other end of the equation.

I wholeheartedly disagree with Siggy, who likely has a secure job with at least some income that putting 30-40 million people out of work, and destroying livelihoods was worth the balance of theoretical saved lives. We still haven't calculated the loss of life, mental health, livelihoods from the shutdowns, but it will almost certainly eclipse 200,000, mostly elderly people at the end of their lives who will be claimed.

The arrogance of all these politicians and scientists who have secure jobs who advocate for the destruction of other poeple's lives is astonishing. I think their opinion would change if they were forced to go without salary, and had to quit their jobs through the extent of the lockdowns.\\\

For many people lockdown = death.
Click to expand...

As of now I don't think anyone on this board is arguing for a complete shut down.
I posted above pointing out that yes science seems to indicate that this virus does not affect people like influenza, rsv etc and it is causing morbidity in different ways. I will try to post links later, but there were plenty of hospitalizations in my area for covid were in the age range of 44-65, which is prime working time for many. It is not enough to look at just the mortality.

My partner is in an industry that will likely take years to recover from this. His work has all been canceled at the moment. Our finances are now **** because of this virus.
Most of my patients are on medicaid and live below the poverty line.
I certainly know what poverty looks like.
NYC was criticized because they took a long while to shut schools down (and pretty much everything else) because they were worried about exactly that...kids not being fed, abuse, etc. So yes people are certainly thinking about the implications.

So please don't act like those of us who are looking at the data, choosing to wear a mask out in public and think that this virus overall should be taken seriously don't understand the implications of how shut downs affect the economy, mental health, physical health, etc. This is a novel virus, we're learning new things daily. No one right now is arguing that everything should go back to being shut down.
 
AMEHigh said:
So please don't act like those of us who are looking at the data, choosing to wear a mask out in public and think that this virus overall should be taken seriously don't understand the implications of how shut downs affect the economy, mental health, physical health, etc. This is a novel virus, we're learning new things daily. No one right now is arguing that everything should go back to being shut down.
Click to expand...

I've never said we shouldn't take the virus seriously. I've said that most of the one-size-fits-all government policies have caused more destruction than the virus, are illogical, inconsistent, or purely draconian.

As I've posted several links, CNN, has advocated re-shutting down. I don't think it's "no one".
 
GeneralVeers said:
I've never said we shouldn't take the virus seriously. I've said that most of the one-size-fits-all government policies have caused more destruction than the virus, are illogical, inconsistent, or purely draconian.

As I've posted several links, CNN, has advocated re-shutting down. I don't think it's "no one".
Click to expand...

I don't watch CNN cause it's a bunch of crap, so not sure what has been said there.
You were talking about a poster on this board in regards to shut downs, I thought we were talking about the opinions of doctors on this board.
There is a person (doctor?) I quoted above who certainly seems to not want to take things seriously since only mentioned mortality and saying it's just old people dying, which is why I brought up morbidity.

I think wearing a mask when in close proximity to others is a reasonable action, yet there are people literally yelling and angry about it, refusing to comply, which unfortunately seems to be some doctors as well. It makes no sense to me.
Didn't you just say you'd go to jail instead of wearing a mask if asked to do so?

States are requiring masks in indoor settings, not if you just walk outside and aren't going to be around anyone:
www.littler.com

Facing Your Face Mask Duties – A List of Statewide Orders | Littler

********************************************************NOTE: Given the reduction in activity on this topic,THIS POST WILL NO LONGER BE UPDATED, as of November 10, 2022.
www.littler.com www.littler.com
 
GeneralVeers said:
I agree completely. Cloth masks do a decent job of preventing droplet spread. People with symptoms of cough, cold, sore throat, congestion etc should absolutely wear them. People at risk either due to age or medical problems should absolutely wear them.

The asymptomatic, healthy adult should not be required, but if they are fearful then go ahead.

To mandate mask-wearing outdoors is simply ludicrous. Unless it's a huge group of unrelated people in very close quarters there is literally no chance of spread from casually walking by someone.
Click to expand...
Outdoors absolutely agree. I can't say I love restaurant staff not being required to.
 
People who work in jobs that are generally lower paying like restaurant workers, nail salons, retail stores, etc deserve the right to be protected from customers by asking them to wear masks. They interact with a lot of people throughout the day, people cough, sneeze, etc. It's a shame that people are yelling about freedom and not wanting to take a simple measure to help protect others.
 
AMEHigh said:
I don't watch CNN cause it's a bunch of crap, so not sure what has been said there.
You were talking about a poster on this board in regards to shut downs, I thought we were talking about the opinions of doctors on this board.
There is a person (doctor?) I quoted above who certainly seems to not want to take things seriously since only mentioned mortality and saying it's just old people dying, which is why I brought up morbidity.

I think wearing a mask when in close proximity to others is a reasonable action, yet there are people literally yelling and angry about it, refusing to comply, which unfortunately seems to be some doctors as well. It makes no sense to me.
Didn't you just say you'd go to jail instead of wearing a mask if asked to do so?

States are requiring masks in indoor settings, not if you just walk outside and aren't going to be around anyone:
www.littler.com

Facing Your Face Mask Duties – A List of Statewide Orders | Littler

********************************************************NOTE: Given the reduction in activity on this topic,THIS POST WILL NO LONGER BE UPDATED, as of November 10, 2022.
www.littler.com www.littler.com
Click to expand...

If you're talking about me, you're wrong. See that's the issue. I'm against a lockdown and only asked for data about mortality and morbidity of the young. And your first defense, like many others in your position, that essentially just say "Well you think it's just the flu and don't care about old people dying. You're the worst thing to ever happen. And you're probably racist, why not". Take a second and critically think beyond your closed mind on what I was talking about, but none of you can do that since it doesn't align with your personal little agenda. Yes , this is way worse than the flu, but is it enough to close everything and destroy millions of more lives? Or should we actually put thought into it beyond just shutting things down and printing money And yes I'm a doctor.
 
GeneralVeers said:
Interestingly the Nevada Governor is considering mandating masks in public. We have almost no Corona deaths at the moment and patients admitted for Corona are stable or decreasing. We did have an increase in cases, most likely to vastly increased testing. It's bizarre how the public policy is not matching up with "the science" these days.

I will gladly go out in public without a mask. They can issue me a ticket which I will not pay, and I will go to jail if needed.
Click to expand...

Why are you so opposed to wearing a mask? I simply consider it a nice thing to do for other people while we're in this situation. It's kind of like letting someone merge or making sure to put the toilet seat back down.
 
Last edited:
AMEHigh said:
People who work in jobs that are generally lower paying like restaurant workers, nail salons, retail stores, etc deserve the right to be protected from customers by asking them to wear masks. They interact with a lot of people throughout the day, people cough, sneeze, etc. It's a shame that people are yelling about freedom and not wanting to take a simple measure to help protect others.
Click to expand...

How do you eat with a mask on?
 
WilcoWorld said:
Why are you so opposed to wearing a mask? I just consider it a nice thing to do for other people. Kind of like letting someone merge or making sure to put the toilet seat back down.
Click to expand...

It's uncomfortable, gross (the mask gets wet really quickly), and I can't breathe very well while walking at a brisk pace. So I'm not willing to endure mild discomfort just to virtue signal and make others feel better.

Plus I'm contrarian, and generally don't obey arbitrary or non-sensical rules.
 
Rekt said:
If you're talking about me, you're wrong. See that's the issue. I'm against a lockdown and only asked for data about mortality and morbidity of the young. And your first defense, like many others in your position, that essentially just say "Well you think it's just the flu and don't care about old people dying. You're the worst thing to ever happen. And you're probably racist, why not". Take a second and critically think beyond your closed mind on what I was talking about, but none of you can do that since it doesn't align with your personal little agenda. Yes , this is way worse than the flu, but is it enough to close everything and destroy millions of more lives? Or should we actually put thought into it beyond just shutting things down and printing money And yes I'm a doctor.
Click to expand...

Huh? I’m confused.
The person I originally quoted only talked about mortality, which is why I brought up morbidity.

I never said you were racist.
I have no personal agenda, not sure exactly what that means. I’m just trying to keep myself safe and my patients safe, especially those that are more vulnerable.

I did get home from work a little while ago and just had dinner, so yes I’ll provide some data.
I already did provide 1 link in regards to kidney complications from covid.
I never said there are thousands of young people dying, I just said that we should consider morbidity as well (again the poster I quoted only talked about mortality) and I was genuinely curious to know whether their patients were doing better with recovery than many of my patients.

Not sure what caused you to go off on a rant towards me, but yes I will provide some links in regards to morbidity when I’m on a laptop.
 
GeneralVeers said:
It's uncomfortable, gross (the mask gets wet really quickly), and I can't breathe very well while walking at a brisk pace. So I'm not willing to endure mild discomfort just to virtue signal and make others feel better.

Plus I'm contrarian, and generally don't obey arbitrary or non-sensical rules.
Click to expand...

Of course I’m willing to change my mind as more data emerges, but why do you think wearing a mask inside when you’re around people is non-sensical? Have you read some of the thoughts behind why a mask might be helpful when you’re around people?

Your job isn’t requiring masks? Unless I was unconscious, if I showed up to the ED and my doctor wasn’t wearing a mask I would definitely leave because I’d assume they/their employer lack judgement.
 
I mean surgeons use masks during surgery as to not contaminate the field. Immunocompromised people wear masks often to try to avoid getting sick. People are acting like a mask is a new concept that can’t potentially help stop the spread of a brand new virus that we don’t have immunity to. Again, why are people so selfish that they are refusing to wear a mask when they’re inside around other people? Why has that become some people’s hill to die on?
*i know there are a small minority of people that have trauma associated with masks/face coverings (my friend was raped while having her mouth covered with a cloth), so I’m not talking about those people.
 
There's potential upside to wearing a mask when around people in public, and very little downside. For that reason, I think it makes sense to wear a mask. However, anytime I go in public in my town, 99% of people aren't wearing masks to protect me. That makes it hard to stay motivated to wear one to protect those who aren't wearing one to protect me. For this reason I forget to wear one, probably 99.9% of the time.

But yes, wash your hands often. And in an ideal world, also wear a mask as much as possible.
 
Last edited:
You guys might be talking past each other. There’s a difference between wearing a mask generally “in public” and specifically wearing one when you’re in an office or business around other people. I find mask-wearing while walking down the street to be bizarre. Businesses are enclosed places and they’re also private entities that are free to mandate masks. So I do. But I won’t wear one in the park, on my bike, or on my own porch (as a neighbor scolded me). And ugh, no stifling cloth mask for me. We have plenty of access to surgical masks.
 
I carry one with me everywhere but only wear them indoors whether the place I'm in requires it or not. I've been doing this for weeks now and our state is now mandating indoor masks (with exceptions for restaurants and gyms and a couple of other places).

I'd be more in favor of mandating wearing a mask correctly if you're going to wear one, than mandating wearing one in general.
 
www.bbc.com

Coronavirus: Asymptomatic transmission still an 'open question'

The WHO's head of emerging diseases said evidence from 'two or three' studies suggested people with symptoms should be the main focus.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

It makes sense that asymptomatic persons likely can't transmit the disease as they aren't producing droplets, which infect with a big viral dose. Unless you are making out with COVD+ asymptomatic people, I'd put the likelihood close to zero that you can get it from being just in proximity.

The "Science" says universal masks probably make no sense. Just like locking down young, healthy people at no risk made no sense.
 
GeneralVeers said:
www.bbc.com

Coronavirus: Asymptomatic transmission still an 'open question'

The WHO's head of emerging diseases said evidence from 'two or three' studies suggested people with symptoms should be the main focus.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

It makes sense that asymptomatic persons likely can't transmit the disease as they aren't producing droplets, which infect with a big viral dose. Unless you are making out with COVD+ asymptomatic people, I'd put the likelihood close to zero that you can get it from being just in proximity.

The "Science" says universal masks probably make no sense. Just like locking down young, healthy people at no risk made no sense.
Click to expand...
At first the lock down made perfect sense because we just didn't know very much about this thing. I for one don't trust the China data and the data from Italy initially had a pretty high death rate for the 20-40 cohort compared to everything else we see regularly (somewhere around 5X the flu in that age group getting significantly worse with each decade).

Now once we knew that young people were at significantly lower risk, easing up on things made sense and most states that weren't hit all that hard did start to open up (you can't really blame NY for not wanting to).

What remains to be seen, and my state of SC is apparently going to be a great test of this, is whether rising numbers like we're seeing result in significantly more hospitalizations/deaths. So far in my little corner of the state, that doesn't seem to be the case but I want to give it another 1-2 weeks after this impressive surge before I pass judgement. And my concern, like everyone's initially, is not to overwhelm the hospitals. We get reports every few days on inpatient COVID patients. During the lockdown we hovered right around 20. We've been around 25 the last 2 weeks. So certainly not an impressive change. But we also went from 1-2k cases/week in the state to 4k last week and we're at 2k right now (our reporting weeks start on Friday).
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
At first the lock down made perfect sense because we just didn't know very much about this thing. I for one don't trust the China data and the data from Italy initially had a pretty high death rate for the 20-40 cohort compared to everything else we see regularly (somewhere around 5X the flu in that age group getting significantly worse with each decade).

Now once we knew that young people were at significantly lower risk, easing up on things made sense and most states that weren't hit all that hard did start to open up (you can't really blame NY for not wanting to).

What remains to be seen, and my state of SC is apparently going to be a great test of this, is whether rising numbers like we're seeing result in significantly more hospitalizations/deaths. So far in my little corner of the state, that doesn't seem to be the case but I want to give it another 1-2 weeks after this impressive surge before I pass judgement. And my concern, like everyone's initially, is not to overwhelm the hospitals. We get reports every few days on inpatient COVID patients. During the lockdown we hovered right around 20. We've been around 25 the last 2 weeks. So certainly not an impressive change. But we also went from 1-2k cases/week in the state to 4k last week and we're at 2k right now (our reporting weeks start on Friday).
Click to expand...

Yeah I think nobody can claim to know the right move, especially early on. I'm coming around to the idea that this thing just has to run its course, everywhere, on its own time, and our interventions really only matter around the margins. I'm in Michigan, and my brother is 200 miles away in Ohio. Michigan's case/hosp/death curve looked very similar to NY through April and May, in shape if not in magnitude (high peak and then drop), while Ohio stayed flat. Now our numbers are bottoming out as we open. In Ohio, my brother laughs at how people worry about a second wave when they never even saw a first wave. It now seems likely that they will, it's just a matter of when. But Michigan and Ohio both took basically the same strategy early on regardless - lockdown - and they're coming out of it in roughly the same way too. But Ohio came out of hiding just as numbers started going up, not on the way down (just like Texas, California, and a few dozen other states). But what was the alternative for those states that locked down before ever seeing a first wave? Stay locked down forever? So their cases will rise now. Will ours and New York's? Who knows? The best thing you can say about Arizona, Texas, etc, is that they could see a wave like New York's but with these last 3 months to prepare, which is by definition a better situation than what New York had. So people will get sick, some will get hospitalized, and some will die. Again, unless the alternative is to stay inside forever what else is there to discuss?
 
The states that didn't lock down, NE, SD, ND, AS didn't have a huge number of deaths relative to other states. Also as of this week, NE has an unemployment rate < 6% versus Michigan with 21%. If broad lockdowns worked, we should have seen astronomically higher death rates in the non-lockdown states.
 
And before anyone twists my "some will die" comment to make me sound heartless, as physicians we know the truth of that. We would love to live in a world where nobody died of pneumonia, flu, sepsis, and now covid. We don't live in that world and never will.

General - I take your point, and to me it just shows again how little we know. If lockdowns work, we would expect locked down states to be flat and then see numbers go up as they open, which we are seeing in some places. But we're also seeing locked down states that haven't seen numbers rise as they open, as well as states you mentioned that never locked down and seem to be doing just fine. And then of course there's New York, New Jersey, and Michigan, which locked down HARD and still had very high peaks. I saw it written somewhere that even if you assume lockdowns work, they are by definition too early (thus just delaying everything) or too late (when the disease has already taken hold). No way to do it perfectly even if such a thing existed.
 
I mean, I remember how SD's governor got raked in the media for daring to take a different strategy. As late as late April there were still op-eds being written that she MUST ACT NOW. So... what does that prove? SD is fine. Maybe they'll have a big wave in the fall. Maybe not. Would anyone put money on it either way?
 
MHYDE said:
General - I take your point, and to me it just shows again how little we know. If lockdowns work, we would expect locked down states to be flat and then see numbers go up as they open, which we are seeing in some places. But we're also seeing locked down states that haven't seen numbers rise as they open, as well as states you mentioned that never locked down and seem to be doing just fine. And then of course there's New York, New Jersey, and Michigan, which locked down HARD and still had very high peaks. I saw it written somewhere that even if you assume lockdowns work, they are by definition too early (thus just delaying everything) or too late (when the disease has already taken hold). No way to do it perfectly even if such a thing existed.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that the states all vary in population density, public transit, age, and health. It would be very hard to compare NYC with MT with CA as they all have very different factors at play. This was why the one-size lockdowns were so poorly thought out.
 
MHYDE said:
And before anyone twists my "some will die" comment to make me sound heartless, as physicians we know the truth of that. We would love to live in a world where nobody died of pneumonia, flu, sepsis, and now covid. We don't live in that world and never will.
Click to expand...

The real "New normal" that no one wants to talk about. COVID is here and people are going to die, for who knows how many years to come. No matter it you're red or blue. Lockdown or not. Mask or not. If it's Biden or Trump in office. Etc. People are going to be dying from covid from now on. People need to understand this.
 
GeneralVeers said:
I think the problem is that the states all vary in population density, public transit, age, and health. It would be very hard to compare NYC with MT with CA as they all have very different factors at play. This was why the one-size lockdowns were so poorly thought out.
Click to expand...

To a certain extent, I agree with this. So using examples of NE, SD, ND, AS (American Samoa?), among the least densely populated states in the country, to try to show that not locking down doesn't lead to high death rates probably isn't a great exercise.

A lockdown is only as good as it's thought out, enacted, and then observed by the population.

So perhaps a better example is to see how a low-key or "light" lockdown fares versus a more stringent lockdown. Let's see what happens in Florida.
 
Rekt said:
The real "New normal" that no one wants to talk about. COVID is here and people are going to die, for who knows how many years to come. No matter it you're red or blue. Lockdown or not. Mask or not. If it's Biden or Trump in office. Etc. People are going to be dying from covid from now on. People need to understand this.
Click to expand...

Right. So the deathmeter goes away not when Covid goes away but when we lose interest. Can you imagine CNN still posting daily counts five years from now?
 
Rekt said:
Do you have the data to support any of these claims? I often hear of people saying the "young are affected too!!!!!", But then disappear when asked to produce anything beyond a simple anecdote. Even with these anecdotes about "young people" they purposefully fail to mention they're HD patients that are morbidly obese with HTN DM etc.

Also it's always people saying well I tube a covid 26 and 30 year old!!! So? What about the 20-30 year olds I code every 2-3 shifts for overdoses (not to mention that's gone up recently). All the morbidity and mortality from CP patients, stroke patients, bleeds, etc avoiding the ED from media hysteria? Why do all these people matter less?
Click to expand...

Ok as promised here's some information and data in regards to morbidity I was discussing. I didn't say people with other health conditions matter less. I also don't think we should shut down things forever, if that is what the assumption is. I was just pointing out that I don't think we can look at just the mortality rate of covid, but the long term implications that absolutely affect people younger than the age of 65, most of whom are still working and contributing to society an the economy. People are refusing simple things like wearing a mask when in close proximity to others indoors and I think there is severity of covid and it's complications that we should absolutely as a whole try to do simple things like masks to help lower the spread.

No I can't find specific data about comorbid conditions in all of these studies. Considering half the country is obese I don't think we should ignore obese people and say oh well, since covid-19 doesn't affect non-obese people as much it's not a big deal.
Based on studies from other countries as well it seems like the complications and morbidity (clots, kidney failure, etc) are affecting not just americans.

Maybe it's out there, but I can't find exact ages of ICU vs non-ICU hospitalizations and a break down of specific ages, but I tried to include info about hospitalizations in general.

But here are some links in regards to morbidity and mortality here:

So first I wanted to discuss post-ICU syndrome. I think most Americans think yay a person survived the ICU, they're going to go home and be great and everything is back to normal, but I think we as physicians know that that isn't the case. Again, it's anecdotal since I can't find exact numbers of people in the ICU due to covid, but the fact that my hospital converted mostly all floors to covid floors and more ICU space, yes there were absolutely more people receiving ICU care than usual and yes this did include younger people under the age of 65. I have patients that are still recovering from ICU stay, now receiving home care, PT, etc that before this were absolutely productive working members of society.
my.clevelandclinic.org

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS): What Is It?

PICS can cause mental, physical and emotional symptoms in people who receive ICU care.
my.clevelandclinic.org my.clevelandclinic.org

"For both patients discharged alive and those who died, the percentage of patients who were treated in the ICU or received invasive mechanical ventilation was increased for the 18-to-65 age group compared with the older-than-65 years age group."
jamanetwork.com

Clinical Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among Patients With COVID-19 Hospitalized in the NYC Area

This case series describes clinical characteristics, health services use, and outcomes of patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cared for at 12 hospitals of a single health system in the New York City (NYC) area.
jamanetwork.com jamanetwork.com

Covid complications:

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) - Complications | BMJ Best Practice US

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a potentially severe acute respiratory infection. Respiratory transmission is the dominant mode of transmission, with proximity and ventilation being the key determinants of transmission risk. Transmission is more likely if contacts are exposed shortly befor...
bestpractice.bmj.com bestpractice.bmj.com

About 9% of the patients in the 18-44 age group had to be hospitalized, compared to 22% of patients 45-64.
www.cbsnews.com

Many of New York City's coronavirus patients are young people

One 37-year-old who always considered herself healthy told a harrowing coronavirus tale.
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com

Hospitalization rate ages 45-64 = 885/100,000

(23%) had failure of 2 or more organ systems. This early study shows that COVID-19 can result in a significant disease burden in children but confirms that severe illness is less frequent, and early hospital outcomes in children are better than in adults. significant but far less frequent than in adults
jamanetwork.com

Outcomes of Children With COVID-19 Admitted to US and Canadian Pediatric Intensive Care Units

This cross-sectional study describes and characterizes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection in North American pediatric intensive care units, including mode of presentation, presence of comorbidities, severity of disease, therapeutic interventions, clinical trajectory, and early outcomes.
jamanetwork.com jamanetwork.com

In early March, the healthy 32-year-old felt an intense burning sensation, like acid reflux, when she breathed. Embarrassed, she didn’t initially seek medical care. When her shortness of breath kept getting worse, her doctor tested her for Covid-19.
Her results came back positive. But for Nichols, that was just the beginning. Over the next eight weeks, she developed wide and varied symptoms, including extreme and chronic fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, tremors, headaches, difficulty concentrating, and short-term memory loss. But Nichols is one of many Covid-19 patients who are finding their recovery takes far longer than the two weeks the World Health Organization says people with mild cases can expect.

“The difficulty is sorting out long-term consequences,” says Joseph Brennan, a cardiologist at the Yale School of Medicine. While some patients may fully recover, he and other experts worry others will suffer long-term damage, including lung scarring, heart damage, and neurological and mental health effects." The UK National Health Service assumes that of Covid-19 patients who have required hospitalization, 45 percent will need ongoing medical care, 4 percent will require inpatient rehabilitation, and 1 percent will permanently require acute care. Other preliminary evidence, as well as historical research on other coronaviruses like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), suggests that for some people, a full recovery might still be years off. For others, there may be no returning to normal.
www.vox.com

The emerging long-term complications of Covid-19, explained

“It is a true roller coaster of symptoms and severities, with each new day offering many unknowns.”
www.vox.com www.vox.com

Large vessel stroke as a presenting feature of covid-19 in the young
 
Birdstrike said:
We all agree that,

1-COVID sucks, and,

2-Life must go on.

Why are we all still pretending we disagree on the two most important things?
Click to expand...

Yep true.

It just seems that when I posted about morbidity considerations there was an attack with this response:

"Take a second and critically think beyond your closed mind on what I was talking about, but none of you can do that since it doesn't align with your personal little agenda."

And other people have posted that those of us wearing a mask are doing so for some other agenda item.
Other people are saying they won't wear a mask because they like to be defiant.
When all of us are on different pages, that affects others since this is a communicable disease.

I think my critical thinking skills are ok, I'm generally pretty open minded and I have no personal agenda. I just want to be safe and want to help keep my patients safe with the current data we have now. There just seems to be a disagreement on the seriousness of covid and what this new normal should look like. Not sure why that has to delve in to attacks that some of us have a "personal agenda." (I still don't know exactly what that means).
 
MLNS said:
I’ve been intrigued about this last article for quite some time now. I’ve seen it before, from a family member freaking out. But, dude the n is literally 5... freakin’ FIVE...

Saying they were grasping for straws with this article is an understatement, wouldn’t you agree?
Click to expand...

Clearly strokes in young people didn't happen before Covid.

I understand that Covid is prothrombotic, but five patients is kind of silly to make an argument that it's a presenting and/or common feature.
 
Dr.McNinja said:
Contract tracing is less effective than masks, and nobody has been able to do it correctly yet.
Click to expand...
US. 7,100 cases per million
South Korea 242 cases per million

Apparently someone has figured it out.


Putting words in my mouth.
Coddling people is not what I want to do in any way shape or form. However, you have to realize delivery means something, and if you call someone stupid, you get nothing. Or, more importantly, 4 more years of Trump. Think about it.
Click to expand...

You say you don't want to coddle people, but you aren't willing to call out magical thinking.

By the way, the President just said that we should slow testing and then said, "I was just joking." I remember when I was 5 and used the "I was just joking" excuse... it didn't work.
 
SeekerOfTheTree said:
You use distraction as a tool in your arguments. They don't answer questions; all they do is bring up things that are not related to this discussion at all and hope you will do a good job in stringing together random statements to prove something? Not sure what you're trying to prove at this point. We should do 300million tests every 14 days? Is that your point?

Did I say anything about the light or disinfectants?
Click to expand...

You're trying to say that the side that believes in Trump, less testing, just open everything up is the same as the side that wants to actually use science. If you're endorsing Trump's approach of "open all the things," then you're endorsing the rest of his statements, like, " "Suppose that we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it's ultraviolet or just very powerful light," Trump said at the White House coronavirus press briefing, adding: "Supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way.""

No one is arguing that we should have 100% testing every two weeks... however one side is saying that if we stop testing we'd have very few cases. That side is opposed to the basic tenets of science, medicine, and logical thought.

-https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-wants-bring-light-inside-the-body-to-kill-coronavirus-2020-4
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

alpinism
Resident ITE scores have plummeted 25% in the last 5 years
2
Replies
94
Views
6K
HemorrhagicShock
HemorrhagicShock
Bro Jenkins
How was the job market in 08 recession
Replies
15
Views
2K
gamerEMdoc
gamerEMdoc
miamidoc101
  • Question Question
How much do yall work?
2 3
Replies
144
Views
8K
doitalldoc
D
T
Should I Quit?
2 3
Replies
128
Views
15K
Old_Mil
Old_Mil
W
Dogs in the ED
Replies
15
Views
1K
WorkNoteEmergency
W
Top