How long should the lock down last?

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted836128
  • Start date Start date
Panacea Financial Contract Review
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.
We already spend the majority of healthcare dollars on futile end of life care so I think we all know what happens if there's a second wave.
 
Lay people wearing N95s over thixk facial with visible gaps, and sometimes not even covering their noses.
anonperson said:
The mask situation is ridiculous.

Lay people using N95s to go grocery shopping or walk outside. I see it on a regular basis.

Unfortunately valuable hospital supplies are getting used up by people who don't need them and are wearing then incorrectly as well.
Click to expand...

Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile
 
Pretty much all of my patients are wearing masks from home, and I am noting an odd trend where if the patient is having difficulty hearing me through my mask, they pull their own mask down off their face, like it's gonna help them hear or something...Then I let them know I can hear them fine with their mask on, in order to cue them to put it back.
 
Pretty much all of my patients are wearing masks from home, and I am noting an odd trend where if the patient is having difficulty hearing me through my mask, they pull their own mask down off their face, like it's gonna help them hear or something...
 
NurWollen said:
Lay people wearing N95s over thixk facial with visible gaps, and sometimes not even covering their noses.

Sent from my SM-G930V using SDN mobile
Click to expand...

Yup, I see it all the time.

Even I can't wear a regular mask all the time at work. I do when I go into a patient room, sometimes in the hallway, but when I'm in the doc box I take it off.

It fogs my glasses and I find that extremely irritating.

Sometimes I tape the superior edge of the mask to my cheeks, but taking the tape off frucking hurts. I feel like I'm ripping off my skin.
 
thegenius said:
Yup, I see it all the time.

Even I can't wear a regular mask all the time at work. I do when I go into a patient room, sometimes in the hallway, but when I'm in the doc box I take it off.

It fogs my glasses and I find that extremely irritating.

Sometimes I tape the superior edge of the mask to my cheeks, but taking the tape off frucking hurts. I feel like I'm ripping off my skin.
Click to expand...

Only wear the mask in patient rooms because they expect it. If I think COVID, then N95. Out in public, nothing, cuz masks don't filter viruses. It's probably good for the general public just to keep them aware, and to not put their fingers in their mouths/nose, but as an infection control device the benefit is dubious.
 
GeneralVeers said:
Only wear the mask in patient rooms because they expect it. If I think COVID, then N95. Out in public, nothing, cuz masks don't filter viruses. It's probably good for the general public just to keep them aware, and to not put their fingers in their mouths/nose, but as an infection control device the benefit is dubious.
Click to expand...
Dubious is being pretty generous.

I consider them the public health equivalent of the airport porno-scanners. Unnecessary and ineffective but, hey look, we're doing something!
 
Birdstrike said:
Here's my current "bias." I think these two things can coexist:

1) Coronavirus is a serious matter.

2) Life must go on.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. And I am willing to bet a grand total of $50, with 2-1 odds, that 90% of Americans would “agree” with both of those statements. They can either “agree” or “disagree” with those two statements.

So why is there so much argument and divisiveness among us?

BTW that is a rhetorical question and I don’t expect, nor want an answer.
 
Everything is black and white on here. Republican or Democrat. Socialist or Libertarian. Pacifist or Warmonger.

The divisiveness is pretty damn silly.
 
GeneralVeers said:
Only wear the mask in patient rooms because they expect it. If I think COVID, then N95. Out in public, nothing, cuz masks don't filter viruses. It's probably good for the general public just to keep them aware, and to not put their fingers in their mouths/nose, but as an infection control device the benefit is dubious.
Click to expand...

Yea. I wear a mask because I'm required to.
Writing just on sensibilities...I would wear appropriate PPE if someone could have COVID, but I think it's kind of dumb to wear a surgical mask with other complaints: ankle pain, my anus is throbbing, etc.

We all know that we wear plain old masks to protect other people, not ourselves.

I don't think it's idiotic. The reason is that some countries to seem to handle viral outbreaks better than the US. Apparently they just don masks when begins to spread. Like Taiwan, Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, and other Asian countries. I don't think their governments mandate it, at least initially. And they don't touch and kiss each other too. It's just part of their culture. So they probably wash their hands, wear a mask and seem to get viral transmission under control more or less.

That still doesn't prove that wearing masks helps, but my guess is it probably helps more than we think. It's probably situationally dependent. It's stupid to wear while hiking, but if you are in the train station or some other crowded area I bet it helps.
 
thegenius said:
Yea. I wear a mask because I'm required to.
Writing just on sensibilities...I would wear appropriate PPE if someone could have COVID, but I think it's kind of dumb to wear a surgical mask with other complaints: ankle pain, my anus is throbbing, etc.

We all know that we wear plain old masks to protect other people, not ourselves.
Click to expand...

Well, the reason to wear a mask w/ unrelated complaints is to protect the patient's from you (asymptomatic infection is a possibility amongs HCWs as well).

But, the main reason I've been wearing a mask w/ every patient for the past 3 months is because the official policy here is still to keep people out of work for two weeks if they're been exposed to a case w/o PPE on.
 
MediMike said:
Everything is black and white on here. Republican or Democrat. Socialist or Libertarian. Pacifist or Warmonger.

The divisiveness is pretty damn silly.
Click to expand...

It is silly. But why are lockdown governors mostly on the Left and open governors on the Right? One would think there could be a generally agreed upon middle-ground balance between keeping the economy going, and infection control.
 
GeneralVeers said:
It is silly. But why are lockdown governors mostly on the Left and open governors on the Right? One would think there could be a generally agreed upon middle-ground balance between keeping the economy going, and infection control.
Click to expand...

My internal biases (see prior posts) lead me to believe that the left leaning governors are listening to reason and science, while the right leaners are pandering to their bases and the current administration... but that would be a fallacy.

I think people are scared, and I think those fears range from a fear of having proverbial blood on their hands to a fear of economic collapse with a smattering of fear surrounding their chances for reelection. ( Should we start a thread on term limits for all?)

The governor's are all pretty much following what the majority of their constituents want. I'm up in the PNW, myself and the rest of the tree huggers west of the Cascades are all for a gradual, graded reopening. "Coasties" make up the biggest population base, and as such the governors have been slow and methodical, regardless of the howls of dismay from the groups east of the Cascades.

Are there any states where there is a mismatch in the political leanings of the populace and that of the governor where there are major conflicts in their approach to handling the stay at home stuff?

I figure if they are listening to thei constituents they're at least succeeding at one part of their job.
 
MediMike said:
My internal biases (see prior posts) lead me to believe that the left leaning governors are listening to reason and science, while the right leaners are pandering to their bases and the current administration... but that would be a fallacy.

I think people are scared, and I think those fears range from a fear of having proverbial blood on their hands to a fear of economic collapse with a smattering of fear surrounding their chances for reelection. ( Should we start a thread on term limits for all?)

The governor's are all pretty much following what the majority of their constituents want. I'm up in the PNW, myself and the rest of the tree huggers west of the Cascades are all for a gradual, graded reopening. "Coasties" make up the biggest population base, and as such the governors have been slow and methodical, regardless of the howls of dismay from the groups east of the Cascades.

Are there any states where there is a mismatch in the political leanings of the populace and that of the governor where there are major conflicts in their approach to handling the stay at home stuff?

I figure if they are listening to thei constituents they're at least succeeding at one part of their job.
Click to expand...

The science and reason part are up for debate. We won't know if the "science" was right until we can take a retrospective look at the death rates in different countries that tried different approaches. As for "reason", well that's a matter of opinion. I don't consider it reasonable for government to essentially confiscate all private businesses to protect us from a disease with a sub 1% mortality that disproportionately effects extremely elderly people. But that's my opinion.

In this case the constituents are so terrified by the CNN death counter that they will accept almost any measures. I have many non-healthcare friends in their 20's and 30's who are convinced that they have a high chance of dying if they contract this virus. This is in contradiction to the actual science and data. They support our Governor's continued closure of businesses because they feel there is a dire threat to their health.

For once I wish we were Sweden with non-panicking politicians, and a pragmatic, reasonable population.
 
Mr. Hat said:
This. One of my wife’s friends, who based on age and health status literally has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying if she gets this, cannot and will not be convinced that she isn’t highly likely to die this year. She gets upset if my wife so much as hints that anything should be re-opened because “I can’t die and leave my kids behind”. And try to tell her the numbers, and she’ll start going on about all the stories she’s read and heard about healthy young people dropping like flies. This is an educated, professional woman with a Master’s degree. And yes, she does watch CNN.
Click to expand...
Honest question - is she overweight? Wasn't that shown to be an independent risk factor?
 
Apollyon said:
Honest question - is she overweight? Wasn't that shown to be an independent risk factor?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately a lot of studies don't count obesity as a diagnosis when the reality that people need to realize is that being morbidly obese is probably the worst chronic disease you can have. I think two studies from Europe showed that ~90% of their patients in the ICU were obese
 
Mr. Hat said:
This. One of my wife’s friends, who based on age and health status literally has a 1 in 1000 chance of dying if she gets this, cannot and will not be convinced that she isn’t highly likely to die this year. She gets upset if my wife so much as hints that anything should be re-opened because “I can’t die and leave my kids behind”. And try to tell her the numbers, and she’ll start going on about all the stories she’s read and heard about healthy young people dropping like flies. This is an educated, professional woman with a Master’s degree. And yes, she does watch CNN.
Click to expand...
She can’t help it. Addiction to panic porn is a disease and must be treated as such.
 
At this point the only graph we need is this one:

www.worldometers.info

Sweden COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

Sweden Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info www.worldometers.info

Sweden’s deaths are clearly NOT exponential (or even remotely catastrophic) despite not shutting down at all.

Why are all the headlines still pointing out that their deaths are “way higher” than similar countries even when they are relatively still tiny percentages despite not shutting down (and there is good evidence they will still end up at the same final tally, just quicker?

Maybe the headlines should say perhaps that lockdowns were the largest economic self-inflicted mistake in history?
 
doctalaughs said:
At this point the only graph we need is this one:

www.worldometers.info

Sweden COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

Sweden Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info www.worldometers.info

Sweden’s deaths are clearly NOT exponential (or even remotely catastrophic) despite not shutting down at all.

Why are all the headlines still pointing out that their deaths are “way higher” than similar countries even when they are relatively still tiny percentages despite not shutting down (and there is good evidence they will still end up at the same final tally, just quicker?

Maybe the headlines should say perhaps that lockdowns were the largest economic self-inflicted mistake in history?
Click to expand...

Nope they wont.

I don't think people are comparing or making comments that Sweden has, or continues to have exponential death rate growth. I haven't said that, and I'm not aware others are saying that.

What they are saying is - if it's generally OK to compare Norway, Sweden and Finland:
Sweden has 2x the population of Norway and Finland (10M vs about 5M and 5M)
and about 10x their total deaths.

So I would consider that their deaths are "way higher" than similar, neighboring countries.

As to the cause, it could be any number of things.

I hope Sweden is doing much better economically than Finland and Norway. But it appears right now that the economic impact of COVID-19 will be similar in all three countries. See the link I posted several posts above.
 
Last edited:
thegenius said:
Nope they wont.

I don't think people are comparing or making comments that Sweden has, or continue to have exponential death growth. I haven't said that, and I'm not aware others are saying that now.

What they are saying is that - if it's generally OK to compare Norway, Sweden and Finland:
Sweden has 2x the population of Norway and Finland (10M vs about 5M and 5M)
and about 10x their total deaths.

So I would consider that their deaths are "way higher" than similar, neighboring countries.

As to the cause, it could be any number of things.

I hope Sweden is doing much better economically than Finland and Norway. But it appears right now that the economic impact of COVID-19 will be similar in all three countries. See the link I posted several posts above.
Click to expand...

We will see how it shakes out. They make peak sooner and drop faster. At the end of the day it will be difficult to compare approaches. South Korea isn't an approach that a Western society can really use. Sweden is the only example of an entire Western country not shutting down. Here in the States it would be valuable to compare South Dakota with other prairie states who shut down to see if there was any difference.
 
Mr. Hat said:
Alright here's something else I don't get. And feel free to flame me, but I'm just going to say it. For close to a decade now I've been working with people who go on and on and on about how horrible it is when nursing home granny is full code, and how stupid it is when cancer patients get experimental therapies or ongoing chemo with stage 4 disease, and what a waste of resources it is when Great Grandma Mildred goes to the OR for a some repair when she's going to die soon anyway, and how insane it is that we spend 50% of healthcare dollars on the last 6 months of life, and yadda yadda yadda. I listen to them prattle on and on about how all of those wasted resources on people who are near the end of their lives anyway could be used to help children and young families who can't afford medical care and food and housing and blah blah blah. Why aren't we thinking of the children.

But the minute that Covid hits, these same colleagues are all of the sudden like "We can't put our nursing home population at risk for the sake of the economy!!! Every life matters and is precious, who are you to say that they don't deserve 6 more months to live, if it saves just one life we have to do this no matter the cost. If young families are going bankrupt left and right it doesn't matter, because life comes first!!! You monster!!!".

I swear to god from now on when I hear any of these people say anything about code status or chemo or end of life care, I'm going to start saying "How can you talk that way? If coding 100 nursing home patients saves just one life, even to give them 6 more months, then it's worth it. If spending a billion dollars that could have been used to help struggling children saves just one end-stage cancer patient's life, it will have been worth it because saving lives comes first. If spending 9% of national GDP on what you call end of life care somehow finds a way to save just one person, then it all will have been worth it. No matter the cost to anyone else. YOU MONSTER!!!".

That is all. Carry on.
Click to expand...
I've noticed the same moral preening about this issue from some of the most previously callous and misanthropic sounding people I've ever known. It's quite a stark contradiction, isn't it?
 
"The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data

John P.A. Ioannidis

Departments of Medicine, of Epidemiology and Population Health, of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA E-mail: [email protected] Funding: METRICS has been supported by a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Conflicts of interest: None It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253.this version posted May 19, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint 2


ABSTRACT


Objective

To estimate the infection fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from data of seroprevalence studies.


Methods

Population studies with sample size of at least 500 and published as peer-reviewed papers or preprints as of May 12, 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, preprint servers, and communications with experts. Studies on blood donors were included, but studies on healthcare workers were excluded. The studies were assessed for design features and seroprevalence estimates. Infection fatality rate was estimated from each study dividing the number of COVID-19 deaths at a relevant time point by the number of estimated people infected in each relevant region. Correction was also attempted accounting for the types of antibodies assessed.


Results

Twelve studies were identified with usable data to enter into calculations. Seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.113% to 25.9% and adjusted seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.309% to 33%. Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%.


Conclusions

The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 can vary substantially across different locations and this may reflect differences in population age structure and case-mix of infected and deceased patients as well as multiple other factors. Estimates of infection fatality rates inferred from seroprevalence studies tend to be much lower than original speculations made in the early days of the pandemic....





...DISCUSSION

Inferred IFR values based on emerging seroprevalence studies show a much lower fatality than initially speculated in the earlier days of the pandemic. Many IFR estimates are in the range of seasonal influenza IFR, but some are higher, and some others are lower than this range. It should be appreciated that IFR is not a fixed physical constant and it can vary substantially across locations, depending on the population structure, the case-mix of infected and deceased individuals and other, local factors. "

 
Birdstrike said:
"The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data

John P.A. Ioannidis

Departments of Medicine, of Epidemiology and Population Health, of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA E-mail: [email protected] Funding: METRICS has been supported by a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Conflicts of interest: None It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253.this version posted May 19, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint 2


ABSTRACT


Objective

To estimate the infection fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from data of seroprevalence studies.


Methods

Population studies with sample size of at least 500 and published as peer-reviewed papers or preprints as of May 12, 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, preprint servers, and communications with experts. Studies on blood donors were included, but studies on healthcare workers were excluded. The studies were assessed for design features and seroprevalence estimates. Infection fatality rate was estimated from each study dividing the number of COVID-19 deaths at a relevant time point by the number of estimated people infected in each relevant region. Correction was also attempted accounting for the types of antibodies assessed.


Results

Twelve studies were identified with usable data to enter into calculations. Seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.113% to 25.9% and adjusted seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.309% to 33%. Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%.


Conclusions

The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 can vary substantially across different locations and this may reflect differences in population age structure and case-mix of infected and deceased patients as well as multiple other factors. Estimates of infection fatality rates inferred from seroprevalence studies tend to be much lower than original speculations made in the early days of the pandemic....





...DISCUSSION

Inferred IFR values based on emerging seroprevalence studies show a much lower fatality than initially speculated in the earlier days of the pandemic. Many IFR estimates are in the range of seasonal influenza IFR, but some are higher, and some others are lower than this range. It should be appreciated that IFR is not a fixed physical constant and it can vary substantially across locations, depending on the population structure, the case-mix of infected and deceased individuals and other, local factors. "

Click to expand...


You don't need fancy calculations from antibody tests to determine that an IFR of 0.03% to 0.5% is not true.

As of this morning there are 20,376 deaths in NYC. There are about 8.4 million people in NYC. This is 0.24% of the NYC population. Not everyone in NYC has been infected so anything less than 0.24% is an underestimate
 
veaselhaufen said:
You don't need fancy calculations from antibody tests to determine that an IFR of 0.03% to 0.5% is not true.

As of this morning there are 20,376 deaths in NYC. There are about 8.4 million people in NYC. This is 0.24% of the NYC population. Not everyone in NYC has been infected so anything less than 0.24% is an underestimate
Click to expand...

It's interesting that fatality rates vary massively by locale. Whether or not you die from this is likely dose-dependent. NYC has high density, and a subway likely leading to people getting massive doses of viral particles. More spread out states like TX have 1400 deaths for 29 million people.
 
GeneralVeers said:
It's interesting that fatality rates vary massively by locale. Whether or not you die from this is likely dose-dependent. NYC has high density, and a subway likely leading to people getting massive doses of viral particles. More spread out states like TX have 1400 deaths for 29 million people.
Click to expand...
I was just about to comment that there have been 179 deaths in Harris County, Texas with a population of slightly more than 4.7 million people. That includes the third largest city (Houston) in the US.
 
veaselhaufen said:
You don't need fancy calculations from antibody tests to determine that an IFR of 0.03% to 0.5% is not true.

As of this morning there are 20,376 deaths in NYC. There are about 8.4 million people in NYC. This is 0.24% of the NYC population. Not everyone in NYC has been infected so anything less than 0.24% is an underestimate
Click to expand...
NYC is not the only place that got COVID-19 and the data there cannot necessarily be extrapolated to all locations. Multiple locations across the world were taken into consideration in this paper. See the tables in the paper for the list. The author acknowledges the infection fatality rate is "not a fixed physical constant" and will vary "across locations, depending on the population structure, the case-mix of infected..."

Consider reading the article: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v1.full.pdf
 
Last edited:
Ohio and Indiana have done remarkably well at managing Covid and are opening back up. I agree NYC isn't the end all. What I have noticed as a midwest trend is that the larger cities (Detroit, Indy, etc) have almost 1/3 of the state deaths. I know these cities have higher populations but also consider that they disproportionately have a higher death rate among minorities. Now we know that in these groups based on previous studies that undiagnosed medical conditions, lack of seeking medical care, non-compliance, distrust of the medical system, and obesity are huge. Add in the nursing home population and this accounts for a large chunk of death.

Kind of not expected when the person that missed dialysis 3 times a week shows up with Covid and dies.

This level of a shut down is not sustainable long-term. You can only make that money printer go brrr for so long.
 
CDC Reversal: COVID-19 does not spread easily via surfaces.

"COVID-19 is a new disease and we are still learning about how it spreads. It may be possible for COVID-19 to spread in other ways, but these are not thought to be the main ways the virus spreads.

  • From touching surfaces or objects. It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes. This is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads, but we are still learning more about this virus."

www.cdc.gov

COVID-19 and Your Health

Symptoms, testing, what to do if sick, daily activities, and more.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
 
Last edited:
There are a variety of communities in the US- urban, suburban and rural which have exceeded 0.1% mortality among their whole population. None of these communities have had their entire population be infected.
 
Birdstrike said:
CDC Reversal: COVID-19 does not spread easily via surfaces.

"COVID-19 is a new disease and we are still learning about how it spreads. It may be possible for COVID-19 to spread in other ways, but these are not thought to be the main ways the virus spreads.

  • From touching surfaces or objects. It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes. This is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads, but we are still learning more about this virus."

www.cdc.gov

COVID-19 and Your Health

Symptoms, testing, what to do if sick, daily activities, and more.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
Click to expand...
Have you seen the stuff coming out suggesting that kids aren't nearly the infection vectors they usually are?
 
SeekerOfTheTree said:
Ohio and Indiana have done remarkably well at managing Covid and are opening back up. I agree NYC isn't the end all. What I have noticed as a midwest trend is that the larger cities (Detroit, Indy, etc) have almost 1/3 of the state deaths. I know these cities have higher populations but also consider that they disproportionately have a higher death rate among minorities. Now we know that in these groups based on previous studies that undiagnosed medical conditions, lack of seeking medical care, non-compliance, distrust of the medical system, and obesity are huge. Add in the nursing home population and this accounts for a large chunk of death.

Kind of not expected when the person that missed dialysis 3 times a week shows up with Covid and dies.

This level of a shut down is not sustainable long-term. You can only make that money printer go brrr for so long.
Click to expand...

Indianapolis is close to 1/3 of the population of the state. Metro area is slightly over 2 million, in a state of 6.7 million. So this would make sense.
 
Birdstrike said:
CDC Reversal: COVID-19 does not spread easily via surfaces.

"COVID-19 is a new disease and we are still learning about how it spreads. It may be possible for COVID-19 to spread in other ways, but these are not thought to be the main ways the virus spreads.

  • From touching surfaces or objects. It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes. This is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads, but we are still learning more about this virus."

www.cdc.gov

COVID-19 and Your Health

Symptoms, testing, what to do if sick, daily activities, and more.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov
Click to expand...

Yeah this is not a recent release, I remember reading this maybe a month or two ago, and this was even mentioned on EMRAP.
 
We went off lockdown in early May. There was a bad tornado that hit our community in mid April at our projected COVID peak. Social distancing basically stopped then around here due to the immediate need for families to find shelter and clean up their properties.

I kept expecting to see a big spike in COVID cases due to the total collapse of distancing at the projected peak of the pandemic but haven’t had a positive patient in weeks.

I will say that the last two months of super easy shifts have just felt like one long vacation, but our volume is definitely returning with typical (but not covid) patients. 100% rvu here so bring it on.
 
GeneralVeers said:
Interesting huh? Yet the Teacher's unions continue to claim "It's not safe" for their members, while they sit at home collecting full pay for doing next-to-nothing.
Click to expand...
Maybe where you are, here everyone is trying to focus on how they can get the kids back to school in the fall.

My kid's school is even trying to start their summer program for July.
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Maybe where you are, here everyone is trying to focus on how they can get the kids back to school in the fall.

My kid's school is even trying to start their summer program for July.
Click to expand...

Here too...our summer program is largely online though, except for summer PE, football conditioning and marching band camp.
 
NCAA just announced college football and basketball can resume June 1.
 
In Nevada (#49 in education) we have very limited at home remote instruction. No plans are yet in place to bring students back for fall.

California, always a bastion of sensibility has effectively canceled fall University classes. Im sure primary school is to follow.
 
Mr. Hat said:
Alright here's something else I don't get. And feel free to flame me, but I'm just going to say it. For close to a decade now I've been working with people who go on and on and on about how horrible it is when nursing home granny is full code, and how stupid it is when cancer patients get experimental therapies or ongoing chemo with stage 4 disease, and what a waste of resources it is when Great Grandma Mildred goes to the OR for a some repair when she's going to die soon anyway, and how insane it is that we spend 50% of healthcare dollars on the last 6 months of life, and yadda yadda yadda. I listen to them prattle on and on about how all of those wasted resources on people who are near the end of their lives anyway could be used to help children and young families who can't afford medical care and food and housing and blah blah blah. Why aren't we thinking of the children.

But the minute that Covid hits, these same colleagues are all of the sudden like "We can't put our nursing home population at risk for the sake of the economy!!! Every life matters and is precious, who are you to say that they don't deserve 6 more months to live, if it saves just one life we have to do this no matter the cost. If young families are going bankrupt left and right it doesn't matter, because life comes first!!! You monster!!!".

I swear to god from now on when I hear any of these people say anything about code status or chemo or end of life care, I'm going to start saying "How can you talk that way? If coding 100 nursing home patients saves just one life, even to give them 6 more months, then it's worth it. If spending a billion dollars that could have been used to help struggling children saves just one end-stage cancer patient's life, it will have been worth it because saving lives comes first. If spending 9% of national GDP on what you call end of life care somehow finds a way to save just one person, then it all will have been worth it. No matter the cost to anyone else. BECAUSE LIFE. YOU MONSTER!!!".

That is all. Carry on.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with this sentiment, however I think there are a few important caveats:
1. This virus is not just knocking off those at the end of life, it's killing plenty of otherwise healthy elderly people. There's a lot of functional elderly who reside in the community or are relatively independant but reside in assisted living facilities who are succumbing. This is a big difference between covid and influenza
2. In the event of an unchecked spread, this thing has shown the capacity to overwhelm healthcare systems, potentially putting us in the situation of having otherwise salvageable patient die.
3. The economy would've been ****ed with our without gov't ordered shutdowns.

VA Hopeful Dr said:
Have you seen the stuff coming out suggesting that kids aren't nearly the infection vectors they usually are?
Click to expand...

Can you share?

Mr. Hat said:



A little something semi-topic appropriate just for the Lolz.
Click to expand...


Is this what passes for humor in the right-wing snowflake world?
 
turkeyjerky said:
I tend to agree with this sentiment, however I think there are a few important caveats:
1. This virus is not just knocking off those at the end of life, it's killing plenty of otherwise healthy elderly people. There's a lot of functional elderly who reside in the community or are relatively independant but reside in assisted living facilities who are succumbing. This is a big difference between covid and influenza
2. In the event of an unchecked spread, this thing has shown the capacity to overwhelm healthcare systems, potentially putting us in the situation of having otherwise salvageable patient die.
3. The economy would've been ****ed with our without gov't ordered shutdowns.



Can you share?



Is this what passes for humor in the right-wing snowflake world?
Click to expand...
www.businessinsider.com

An Australian study of how coronavirus spread in 15 schools found a transmission rate of far less than 1%

A preliminary government-backed study of 15 Australian schools found that children are unlikely to spread the coronavirus in the classroom.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
 
d2305 said:
Click to expand...


The last few minutes of the video is most telling.
He comments something like (paraphrasing) "Your young, you think you'll beat this. And you probably will. But you don't want this. It's not fun to have."

He was pretty close to dying. Good to see that he will come back and end up OK.
 
Birdstrike said:
"The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data

John P.A. Ioannidis

Departments of Medicine, of Epidemiology and Population Health, of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA E-mail: [email protected] Funding: METRICS has been supported by a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Conflicts of interest: None It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253.this version posted May 19, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint 2


ABSTRACT


Objective

To estimate the infection fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from data of seroprevalence studies.


Methods

Population studies with sample size of at least 500 and published as peer-reviewed papers or preprints as of May 12, 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, preprint servers, and communications with experts. Studies on blood donors were included, but studies on healthcare workers were excluded. The studies were assessed for design features and seroprevalence estimates. Infection fatality rate was estimated from each study dividing the number of COVID-19 deaths at a relevant time point by the number of estimated people infected in each relevant region. Correction was also attempted accounting for the types of antibodies assessed.


Results

Twelve studies were identified with usable data to enter into calculations. Seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.113% to 25.9% and adjusted seroprevalence estimates ranged from 0.309% to 33%. Infection fatality rates ranged from 0.03% to 0.50% and corrected values ranged from 0.02% to 0.40%.


Conclusions

The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 can vary substantially across different locations and this may reflect differences in population age structure and case-mix of infected and deceased patients as well as multiple other factors. Estimates of infection fatality rates inferred from seroprevalence studies tend to be much lower than original speculations made in the early days of the pandemic....





...DISCUSSION

Inferred IFR values based on emerging seroprevalence studies show a much lower fatality than initially speculated in the earlier days of the pandemic. Many IFR estimates are in the range of seasonal influenza IFR, but some are higher, and some others are lower than this range. It should be appreciated that IFR is not a fixed physical constant and it can vary substantially across locations, depending on the population structure, the case-mix of infected and deceased individuals and other, local factors. "

Click to expand...

Oh boy he is at it again.

I don't know this guy, but I used to have some amount of respect for him. But then he started spewing stupid stuff. He very early on said this is a nothing virus. We shouldn't get worked up over this at all. Easy peasy. And he has been proven, quite easily, wrong.

I do agree that IFR varies widely. In NYC it's > 1%. It's very easy math. Watch this.

NYC Population: 8.4M
Seropositive studies: estimate 20% have tested positive for antibodies. Studies have shown that.
Number of Deaths: Estimate 25K. It's very close to that.

8.4 M x 20% = 1.680 M

25,000 / 1,680,000 = 0.0148 = 1.5%

Dr. Ioannidis has proven that he is not objective. He has an agenda. He is wrong. He is now publishing non peer-reviewed data. It is really, really sad. (Two really's is more pronounced than one really.)
 
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