Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) outbreak discussion

[moXJO]

Toilet paper has disappeared from the shops in nsw again. I'm guessing that means we will see another lockdown.

 

[moXJO]

At this stage I'm not to worried. Northern beaches is known not to associate with the rest of Sydney.

People have been taking precautions as well.
Govt would be best to set strict rules in places of gathering. Especially lead up to Christmas.
NSW has done a stellar job so far in balancing freedom with precaution. Hopefully we can get through this.

 

[basilio]

Australia is fortunate in having largely halted COVID through our rigorous isolation policy.
The pressure on US medical facilities battling overwhelming illnesses is not going away.
Very sobering story from Nevada.

This doctor spent his year fighting coronavirus. His worst moment came when Trump tweeted about him

US hospitals treating COVID-19 patients rarely allow healthy people on their wards. But the health workers at this Reno hospital are so sick of hoax claims and scepticism about coronavirus, they invited the ABC to spend the day with them.

www.abc.net.au

 

[moXJO]

UK has knocked US back to 12th place for deaths per 1 million.
So either 11 other places are getting worse or US numbers have remained consistent. They hadn't budged from 11th place for months.
Sweden went from about 10th place to 25th.

 

[basilio]

UK has knocked US back to 12th place for deaths per 1 million.
So either 11 other places are getting worse or US numbers have remained consistent. They hadn't budged from 11th place for months.
Sweden went from about 10th place to 25th.

Reconsider your maths Mokjo and look at the whole picture.

The US has lost control of of COVID in the past 4 months deaths now sitting at 3000 plus per day vs 5-600 a few months ago. Infection 230k plus a day .
At the same time UK and many other European countries , including Sweden, have also lost control of COVID . Because they were coming off a smaller base the percentage increase has been higher than the US. Hence the jump in proportional deaths.

 

[basilio]

 

[moXJO]

None of that changes much. Its proportional to population size that matches whats happening. You are misdirecting by using deaths while ignoring population size differences. Its a bit weird except for propaganda purposes.

Lower populations should be able to deal with emergencies a lot faster then oversized ones.

 

[bellenuit]

UK has knocked US back to 12th place for deaths per 1 million.
So either 11 other places are getting worse or US numbers have remained consistent. They hadn't budged from 11th place for months.
Sweden went from about 10th place to 25th.

I've been watching it daily. The main reason the US has gone from 10th to 12th over the last few months seems to be related to a surge in countries in the old Yugoslavia and neighbouring region. Slovenia, Bosnia, North Macedonia and Montenegro. If these were still united, the US would be about 10th again.

 

[wayneL]

I've been watching it daily. The main reason the US has gone from 10th to 12th over the last few months seems to be related to a surge in countries in the old Yugoslavia and neighbouring region. Slovenia, Bosnia, North Macedonia and Montenegro. If these were still united, the US would be about 10th again.

View attachment 116928

Qué?

Okay, let's now consider if the old Soviet Union was still United, Germany still included parts of Poland and East Prussia... Dammit, what if the Roman empire were still in place... And the Ottoman Empire.

What if Pakistan and Bangladesh was still part of India?

IOW, how to feck is that even relevant?

 

[satanoperca]

Qué?

Okay, let's now consider if the old Soviet Union was still United, Germany still included parts of Poland and East Prussia... Dammit, what if the Roman empire were still in place... And the Ottoman Empire.

What if Pakistan and Bangladesh was still part of India?

IOW, how to feck is that even relevant?

I think you missed the point, take off those rose coloured glasses, it is easier to see.

 

[satanoperca]

None of that changes much. Its proportional to population size that matches whats happening. You are misdirecting by using deaths while ignoring population size differences. Its a bit weird except for propaganda purposes.

Lower populations should be able to deal with emergencies a lot faster then oversized ones.

Can you demonstrate where this has happened?

It is just not population but population density that is the key. Everything is in the detail.

 

[basilio]

None of that changes much. Its proportional to population size that matches whats happening. You are misdirecting by using deaths while ignoring population size differences. Its a bit weird except for propaganda purposes.

Lower populations should be able to deal with emergencies a lot faster then oversized ones.

Really ? That doesn't make any sense. Advanced countries should have the medical expertise and logistics to effectively tackle COVID regardless of population.

In any case the issue I was raising was the pressure on US medical facilities with COVID now raging out of control. And no doubt this pressure on hospitals is being felt across Europe as almost all countries are experiencing a rapid increase in illnesses and hospitalizations.

 

[wayneL]

I think you missed the point, take off those rose coloured glasses, it is easier to see.

If you stop being a pompous tw@t for a millisecond, maybe you can explain to me how bellanuit's comment is relevant and how my comment has anything to do with rose coloured glasses.

Excuse me for using a little bit of satire to expose how utterly ludicrous his point was.

Happy for you to point at how I am wrong, if you can.

 

[satanoperca]

If you stop being a pompous tw@t for a millisecond, maybe you can explain to me how bellanuit's comment is relevant and how my comment has anything to do with rose coloured glasses.

Excuse me for using a little bit of satire to expose how utterly ludicrous his point was.

Happy for you to point at how I am wrong, if you can.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

Read your own comments with those rose coloured glasses off, I don't provide online therapy.

 

[wayneL]

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

Read your own comments with those rose coloured glasses off, I don't provide online therapy.

Oh come on.

Tell me how I'm wrong.

Waiting... Waiting...

 

[wayneL]

And just to be sure... Words matter bro.

You will notice that I did not actually call you a pompous tw@t, rather, I invited you to stop behaving like one.

This is an important distinction.

It means I have every faith in you that you may be able to step away from such fallacious argument, and step up to actual logic driven argument.

I know you can do it bruh.

 

[bellenuit]

Qué?

Okay, let's now consider if the old Soviet Union was still United, Germany still included parts of Poland and East Prussia... Dammit, what if the Roman empire were still in place... And the Ottoman Empire.

What if Pakistan and Bangladesh was still part of India?

IOW, how to feck is that even relevant?

It's all numbers. The question was asked as to why the US has "improved" its deaths per million ranking from about 10th worst to 12 worst. I gave the correct reason, that it is because of an apparent outbreak among a group of small countries that were part of the former Yugoslavia. 4 countries from that region, with populations between just 600K and 3.3M, occupy places in the first 10 positions.

The fact that they have broken apart relatively recently is relevant. If they hadn't the US ranking would be worse. Correct?

If you don't see the relevance of a huge country having an extremely high deaths per million rate being a lot more significant in global terms that a bunch of minuscule countries having similar death rates, then little I can do. If the US improved its ranking because other countries with similarly large populations, China, India, Russia say, moved ahead of it in deaths per million people, then that would be significant reason to ask what is the US doing right or what are those countries doing wrong. But when it is a group of minnows from the same region, then their pure size relative to the US is the significant cause of the rate change. The fact they were all part of the same country not too long ago shows that their jump in rankings may be very much due to local issues and the US's improvement does not give us any insight into whether the US is doing better or worse.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

A good wrap up of "2020" The Movie by your favourite Film Critics



gg

 

[wayneL]

It's all numbers. The question was asked as to why the US has "improved" its deaths per million ranking from about 10th worst to 12 worst. I gave the correct reason, that it is because of an apparent outbreak among a group of small countries that were part of the former Yugoslavia. 4 countries from that region, with populations between just 600K and 3.3M, occupy places in the first 10 positions.

The fact that they have broken apart relatively recently is relevant. If they hadn't the US ranking would be worse. Correct?

If you don't see the relevance of a huge country having an extremely high deaths per million rate being a lot more significant in global terms that a bunch of minuscule countries having similar death rates, then little I can do. If the US improved its ranking because other countries with similarly large populations, China, India, Russia say, moved ahead of it in deaths per million people, then that would be significant reason to ask what is the US doing right or what are those countries doing wrong. But when it is a group of minnows from the same region, then their pure size relative to the US is the significant cause of the rate change. The fact they were all part of the same country not too long ago shows that their jump in rankings may be very much due to local issues and the US's improvement does not give us any insight into whether the US is doing better or worse.

That doesn't change by point... you can split or combine all sorts of Nations that have changed boundaries in the last 20, 30, 50 years to get the statistics that you want to make some sort of political point.

It's just not valid.

 

[bellenuit]

That doesn't change by point... you can split or combine all sorts of Nations that have changed boundaries in the last 20, 30, 50 years to get the statistics that you want to make some sort of political point.

It's just not valid.

Of course it's valid. You just do not like the answer.

If Yugoslavia hadn't disintegrated, the US would be number 9 in deaths per million. If, in addition, you excluded countries with populations under 80,000, the US would be the 7th worst. To see the true catastrophe that is the US response, it needs to be ranked against its peers, with insignificant outliers excluded. Of course doing that is making a political point. But the political point need making to counter the "we are the best in the world" claims of the liar in chief.