[aslyfox]

Just saying, if you live near the ocean, seawater is considered a natural antiseptic. Oops, now sea levels are going to lower as people horde seawater.

your advice might prevent some cities from being inundated

quick

call the authorities in Venice

[beholder3]

Currently, the data suggests that each infected person infects 2 more people which is making the number of new cases double every 4 days.

Here is a table that show how fast its is doubling (scroll down under the headline "Das Wichtigste zum Coronavirus"):
Aktuelle Nachrichten, Hintergründe und Kommentare - SZ.de

In the US cases double every 3.2 days. Germany every 3.7 days. And that is with abysmal speed and breadth of testing in both locals.
I speculate that the reality is less than 2 days to double.

The Chinese did the best thing and the South Koreans copied it quickly enough. The rest: fail.

In the Auustrian ski resort Ischgl some greedy #+&%$# did let the spreading party go on until last week. Infected hundreds of tourists from all over the place who then flew back home.

[BigMackCam]

I will say that there is a little too much doom and gloom out there. Testing has come on line. There have been about 60,000 tests administered so far and we haven't seen the "hundred thousand" cases that some were predicting to be discovered.

I wholeheartedly agree. That said, the excessive doom and gloom - especially in the media - has one constructive element (I hope) and that's striking some fear into folks that haven't been - or still aren't - taking reasonable precautions. Generally, I don't think fear per se should be applicable to a situation like this, unless of course a member of one's family is battling the virus - but if it urges folks to take action, then maybe it's not so bad after all.

[cmohr]

I just wanted to add, I am completely on board with everything governments are doing to help with this catastrophe worldwide, and, it has really hit home for me, I was hoping to buy a home for myself, but have put that back, due to work uncertainty, I have actually voluntary started a 3 day week taking holidays for the other days, because workload has dropped off so much, sharing the issue with my employer, hopefully to help ride out the next few months of downturn. I hope the trials of the anti vacs the QUT here in Brisbane are successful and within the year start to make a difference.

[yucafrita]

Does vinegar expire?

Well, I'd say yes. I have seen fungi growing in it.

[Rondec]

I wholeheartedly agree. That said, the excessive doom and gloom - especially in the media - has one constructive element (I hope) and that's striking some fear into folks that haven't been - or still aren't - taking reasonable precautions. Generally, I don't think fear per se should be applicable to a situation like this, unless of course a member of one's family is battling the virus - but if it urges folks to take action, then maybe it's not so bad after all.

Yes, but when it spurs them to hoard toilet paper and baby wipes and folks that need them can't get them, that's probably not so constructive.

[brewmaster15]

IN CT where I live , schools are closed... restaurants closed... malls closing.. town municipal buildings and state dmv ..closed.

THAT makes sense..

However, we have 68 cases confirmed and yet we have tested a whopping 240 people in a small densely populated state of 3.5 million.... yep we got this under control well.

AL

---

Last edited by brewmaster15; 03-18-2020 at 07:44 AM.

[Parallax]

Yes, but when it spurs them to hoard toilet paper and baby wipes and folks that need them can't get them, that's probably not so constructive.

I found a solution for that. I bought 12 pounds of cheese. I shouldn't need any toilet paper for quite a while.

[WorksAsIntended]

I will say that there is a little too much doom and gloom out there. Testing has come on line. There have been about 60,000 tests administered so far and we haven't seen the "hundred thousand" cases that some were predicting to be discovered.

This is not to say that we don't need to take it seriously or have more aggressive testing, but we just haven't seen the upsurge in positive tests that some thought we might if we have a bunch of carriers walking around dispensing virus to those around them.

I also don't see this lasting forever and being cyclical. Influenza is different, as there is an animal reservoir for the virus and you can transmission between ducks, pigs and humans. The supposed animal reservoir for this is bats and if contact with them is limited, then it should be a constant reinfection risk.

As long as the logarithmic plot stays a straight, true in European countries at the moment, the predictions are not too high. It is exponentially growing, doubling in two to three days.

[beholder3]

IN CT where I live , schools are closed... restaurants closed... malls closing.. town municipal buildings and state dmv ..closed.

THAT makes sense..

However, we have 68 cases confirmed and yet we have tested a whopping 240 people in a small densely populated state of 3.5 million.... yep we got this under control well.

AL

That tells you about 25% of those tested already have it.
The two questions are:
a) do you believe the selection for test process was super smart and broad enough?
b) do you believe it will spread more or no? Because the 75% who so far tested negative have zero right to assume they wont be affected tomorrow

The only safe side of the statistics is the „recovered“ number, who are the lucky ones, as they wont get it again in the near term.

[bobmaxja]

Please go and see why social distancing can work.
Easy explaining
with that model.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/

[beholder3]

Please go and see why social distancing can work.
Easy explaining
with that model.
Why outbreaks like coronavirus spread exponentially, and how to ?flatten the curve? - Washington Post

Cool stuff overall. Though I have to admit that the (anti-)quarantine showcase seems to be biased too obviously. Basically after 10% of the duration when the majority of the quarantined sample is infected letting 33% of them out to mingle with the others continuously seems utterly idiotic.

Basically the narrative spun in the article's models only holds true if

a) a "quarantine" doesnt work and a full third of the quarantined and infected still can move about as they please and
b) by contrast your "social distancing" works 100% to the degrees used in the model (25% movement only or even 12,5%).

Lastly, the voluntary mindset of the "social distancing" models will apply in the quarantine models as well to a large degree.

We will see soon enough which model really saves more people (the US infections would need to max out at around 20,000 active cases versus the current 7,200, as the total population is only 1/4 of China and the latter peaked around 80,000).

[photoptimist]

That tells you about 25% of those tested already have it.
The two questions are:
a) do you believe the selection for test process was super smart and broad enough?
b) do you believe it will spread more or no? Because the 75% who so far tested negative have zero right to assume they wont be affected tomorrow

The only safe side of the statistics is the „recovered“ number, who are the lucky ones, as they wont get it again in the near term.

a) The selection process for testing could not have been any broader given the limits on testing capacity. In the ideal world and with a virus that can make some people infectious without making them very sick, everyone who had the least bit of cold/flu/COVID symptoms or who had social contact with anyone else who had the least bit of cold/flu/COVID symptoms should have been tested (and retested). In the "we've only got enough supplies, equipment, and qualified staff to test 0.0007% of the population" scenario, almost no one can be tested except the highest-risk people.

b) It will spread and is spreading whether we test for it or not.

As for the „recovered“ number, even that isn't secure because: 1) there's some evidence that people can be reinfected (or maybe they were never truly cured); 2) corona virus immunity fades fairly quickly; 3) the virus can mutate although corona viruses tend not to mutate as quickly as flu viruses do.

[WorksAsIntended]

a) The selection process for testing could not have been any broader given the limits on testing capacity. In the ideal world and with a virus that can make some people infectious without making them very sick, everyone who had the least bit of cold/flu/COVID symptoms or who had social contact with anyone else who had the least bit of cold/flu/COVID symptoms should have been tested (and retested). In the "we've only got enough supplies, equipment, and qualified staff to test 0.0007% of the population" scenario, almost no one can be tested except the highest-risk people.

b) It will spread and is spreading whether we test for it or not.

As for the „recovered“ number, even that isn't secure because: 1) there's some evidence that people can be reinfected (or maybe they were never truly cured); 2) corona virus immunity fades fairly quickly; 3) the virus can mutate although corona viruses tend not to mutate as quickly as flu viruses do.

At least rhesus monkeys seem to be immune after the infection is over, which hopefully means humans will be immune too. Still no sufficient evidence of course.

[Digitalis]

This social isolation Idea is what I was born for, Netflix and plenty of Movies to catch up on, and even more computer games, a big chest freezer stocked with food..... i'm set. Lets just hope my stock of Martini olives holds out.

rhesus monkeys seem to be immune after the infection is over, which hopefully means humans will be immune too.

These viruses mutate too quickly, it will be back.Then it will be BOHICA.