Alright, since you're keeping score. Here we go ...
In addition to your rigorous journal quotations...you have also posted gems such as:
The CDC stats that you're referring to (below) were accurate on that day. I'd be happy to look at any correction you can find that shows they were wrong at that time. I simply posted facts with no conclusions drawn, so any incorrect conclusions made from that were yours, because I presented the stats without comment. You can't honestly believe that when the CDC posts numbers of how many people have gotten a disease at a given time, that they're telling you no additional people will ever get the disease, right?
Absolutely 100% accurate at the time posted, almost 2 months ago (Feb 3rd):
2019-2020 US Deaths
Influenza: >8,000 (including >50 children)
Coronavirus: 0
-CDC
This was also accurate when posted (today):
Influenza: 23,000-59,000 deaths
(149 children, season, 5 children, past week)
COVID-19: 1,001 deaths (1
child, which now they're saying
may not be due to COVID-19.)
So, I'm not sure how the posting of accurate and well-sourced statistics, presented without comment or conclusion, is bad in your view, but whatever. They are accurate statistics. If you think posting accurate statistics is bad, I'm okay with that.
It is not hard to either use Google, pick up a newspaper, turn on the news, network with current doctors/nurses to see that multiple hospitals are already underwater due to ventilator issues, PPE shortages, staffing, etc. NY seems to be at epicenter right now, but other cities/communities also struggling. Wake up.
Yes, we all know of the news reports of NY having a lot of coronavirus cases and that they're getting slammed. I've posted multiple articles, including a big one yesterday with multiple pictures on the "What do I need to know about coronavirus" thread, railing De Blasio for not busting up virus-spreading crowds right outside his mansion window. I've posted the CDC stats and virus-tracker (Johns Hopkins) numbers multiple times which document New York's case numbers. I'm aware of what's going on in New York. I know they're getting slammed. I know Trump ordered a 1,000 bed hospital ship to New York harbor as well as 4,000 more vents. So, I'm not sure where the disagreement is on this, specifically.
It's also worth noting though, that so far 100% of the respondents to the poll on this thread which includes people in EDs all across the country, are reporting that their EDs have the same or slower volume and 0% report being overwhelmed. That's not to say it won't change. It might. Or it might not. I hope the "overwhelmed" numbers stay as close to 0% as possible, on this poll and anywhere currently not overwhelmed. We know what's going on in New York. That matters. But not everyone on this thread works in Manhattan. What's happening in their departments matters, too.
This one that you've referred to is a little tougher to parse out, because there's a lot here, and some of it needs more time to play out. But I'll tell you what I think I got right and wrong in this post, so far, below:
Next up: People are going to start testing for coronavirus in the millions, and it's going to unjustifiably create a panic-generating spike in positive cases, not due to new and rapidly spreading infections, but simply by them finding the thousands of pre-existing cases we didn't know were spreading around, causing mostly benign colds and "flu-like" viral illnesses. Wait for it. It'll be in the news in about a week and it won't be a sign of The End of Days, but if fact the opposite. They'll be finding the virus was benign enough (99.9% of the time) to be spreading around without us even knowing it all along.
As far as the ramp up in testing causing a spike in positive cases causing more anxiety, I think that absolutely has happened. People were anxious when this whole thing started. We weren't testing much more. The numbers were growing but not by a lot initially. Testing started to ramp up and therefore we're finding more cases that were out there, most of them mild, and now those numbers are bigger and it's causing more anxiety. I think that has happened and is happening. If I had to write that over again, I'd take the word "unjustifiable" out, since we are dealing a communicable disease and any level of anxiety is justified if it's you, your family or friends affected or potentially affected.
I will admit at this point that I was wrong in assuming SARS-COV-2 would fizzle out as quickly as SARS-COV in 2003-2004. I was clearly wrong about that. It's gotten
worse than that coronavirus, for sure, worldwide and in the US. That being said, I still think the estimates of 1.6 and 2.2 million Americans dying of this were way wrong and that we won't get even close. I sincerely hope to God, I'm not wrong on that one. I also think that despite disagreeing with the initial panic inducing "worst case scenarios," that my statements early on about simultaneously
agreeing with the precautions we were taking and agreeing with the shutdowns, have aged well. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best. Feel free to go dig those statements up too, because there are many, Don't just dig up the ones you disagree with.
Next up: People are going to start testing for coronavirus in the millions, and it's going to unjustifiably create a panic-generating spike in positive cases, not due to new and rapidly spreading infections, but simply by them finding the thousands of pre-existing cases we didn't know were spreading around, causing mostly benign colds and "flu-like" viral illnesses. Wait for it. It'll be in the news in about a week and it won't be a sign of The End of Days, but if fact the opposite. They'll be finding the virus was benign enough (99.9% of the time) to be spreading around without us even knowing it all along.
This one is tougher to assess, right now. There is some data starting to come out that COVID-19 may have been around longer than we thought (by a few months) and that very large portions of the populations of countries have already been exposed and didn't know it (read links in quoted post below). It's preliminary, it's still early in this and everything is changing too fast to know for sure on this yet. We clearly know it's the majority that are benign, but we won't know exactly what that percentage is until we do antibody testing to determine what part of the population has already been exposed and resolved without knowing it. At least one group out of Oxford published a paper a few days ago that estimates that >50% of certain countries have already been exposed and that the 99.9% number may not be far off. I could turn out right or wrong on this, but it's way too early to say for sure. Regardless, here's what the Oxford group thinks:
Here's study out of Oxford’s Evolutionary Ecology of Infectious Disease group estimating that 36-68% of the U.K. population and 60-80% of Italy likely have already have been infected with COVID-19, that COVID-19 was around longer than we thought, that fewer than 1 in a 1000 of those infected will become ill enough to need treatment in a hospital, while also agreeing with the social distancing measures enacted.
Here's
the study itself.
Here's a
layman's summary from
@thegenius 's fave, Financial Times.
Either way, what I do know with 100% certainty, is that this pandemic needs to end, because it's causing me to spend
w a y too much time on SDN. In that sense, I think we can all agree the end to this pandemic will be a great help to us all

.