Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Coronavirus/COVID-19 (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=341)
-   -   It's not a hoax (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=1197581)

Seattle Forrest 04-06-20 10:12 PM

It's not a hoax
 
Texas Woman Who Claimed COVID-19 Was ‘Media Driven’ Hoax Dies From Virus

A friend sent this to me. The article is written in such a way that I can't quote much without getting this sent to P&R. The title says everything you need to know.

Please take this seriously.

nomadmax 04-07-20 03:10 AM

I'm no expert, but from this layperson's standpoint the COVID thing does appear to be a very real thing.

ridelikeaturtle 04-07-20 03:33 AM

Is this a widespread, general representative attitude in the USA, currently (7 April 2020)? If so, get the bulldozers and open pits ready.

Clyde1820 04-07-20 04:47 AM

A ~3% death rate (if contracted) is nothing to sneeze at. Though it's no smallpox or plague.

Definitely worth being concerned over, given how extremely communicable this one is. Not likely to cause a huge percentage of people to pass, no, but for those who catch it and get hammered by it, it can indeed be deadly.

The real issue is: this one's a first-timer, a "novel" virus. So it's not fully understood, yet, how well people recover, whether there are long-term impacts upon a person's overall health once "recovered," etc. Might well come back with a vengeance, in a given person. Might well permanently damage the lungs. It's all guess-work, this first season through this thing. Hence the caution by governments and communities.

I wish that the governments didn't utterly erase economies, for this, given the awful impacts of that alone. But with limited tests/testing, limited ability to fight it (with anti-viral drugs), limited resources for precautions (masks, PPE, disinfectant), limited procedures to do all business at arms-length (or remotely, ie schooling) ... there aren't a lot of choices.

Can't imagine this person's position is all that commonplace, given the percentage of people in most countries complying with guidelines. Outliers are in every community, with all sorts of opinions: this or that drug cures it, this or that precaution is/isn't necessary, it's a weaponized deliberate thing, it's a hoax, yadda yadda yadda.

Irrespective of the range of outlier opinions in some, out there, I suspect that the practical realities of full global economic shutdown are going to hit hard, soon. Without means of travel, without supplies, without economics supporting productivity, there will be shortages in foodstuffs and other resources. If a community of 200 people gets a bit short on supplies, that's one thing. If a megacity of 20M+ has a tough time acquiring food, that's an entirely different thing.

livedarklions 04-07-20 05:08 AM


Originally Posted by Clyde1820 (Post 21404802)
A ~3% death rate (if contracted) is nothing to sneeze at. Though it's no smallpox or plague.

Definitely worth being concerned over, given how extremely communicable this one is. Not likely to cause a huge percentage of people to pass, no, but for those who catch it and get hammered by it, it can indeed be deadly.

The real issue is: this one's a first-timer, a "novel" virus. So it's not fully understood, yet, how well people recover, whether there are long-term impacts upon a person's overall health once "recovered," etc. Might well come back with a vengeance, in a given person. Might well permanently damage the lungs. It's all guess-work, this first season through this thing. Hence the caution by governments and communities.

I wish that the governments didn't utterly erase economies, for this, given the awful impacts of that alone. But with limited tests/testing, limited ability to fight it (with anti-viral drugs), limited resources for precautions (masks, PPE, disinfectant), limited procedures to do all business at arms-length (or remotely, ie schooling) ... there aren't a lot of choices.

Can't imagine this person's position is all that commonplace, given the percentage of people in most countries complying with guidelines. Outliers are in every community, with all sorts of opinions: this or that drug cures it, this or that precaution is/isn't necessary, it's a weaponized deliberate thing, it's a hoax, yadda yadda yadda.

Irrespective of the range of outlier opinions in some, out there, I suspect that the practical realities of full global economic shutdown are going to hit hard, soon. Without means of travel, without supplies, without economics supporting productivity, there will be shortages in foodstuffs and other resources. If a community of 200 people gets a bit short on supplies, that's one thing. If a megacity of 20M+ has a tough time acquiring food, that's an entirely different thing.

Gotta push back on one thing--the estimates are that about 70% of the population will end up getting this. A 3% death rate would mean about 7 million deaths in the US. That's horrible numbers. And there's no reason to assume they'll be evenly distributed geographically.

livedarklions 04-07-20 05:09 AM


Originally Posted by ridelikeaturtle (Post 21404786)
Is this a widespread, general representative attitude in the USA, currently (7 April 2020)? If so, get the bulldozers and open pits ready.


There's a few of these people posting on BF, although they don't specifically claim hoax.

tds101 04-07-20 05:41 AM

It's definitely not a hoax, but I don't think we'll get to a 3% death rate. At least I hope not. Right now, considering there's no "magic bullet" anywhere in site, I'd say social distancing is pretty much our only option. Hopefully this is on the downturn (according to more "experts"), but we really won't know until time passes.

As for the woman who cried "HOAX!", I'm so sorry she had to pass away for people to see that anyone can get this virus. It knows no race, religion, creed, color, or political background.

livedarklions 04-07-20 06:49 AM


Originally Posted by tds101 (Post 21404851)
It's definitely not a hoax, but I don't think we'll get to a 3% death rate. At least I hope not. Right now, considering there's no "magic bullet" anywhere in site, I'd say social distancing is pretty much our only option. Hopefully this is on the downturn (according to more "experts"), but we really won't know until time passes.

As for the woman who cried "HOAX!", I'm so sorry she had to pass away for people to see that anyone can get this virus. It knows no race, religion, creed, color, or political background.


Not to get political, but Boris Johnson was making a big point of shaking hands at the hospitals a few weeks ago. I really hope we don't need any more "poster children" before people get the point of how real this thing is.

tds101 04-07-20 07:28 AM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21404932)
Not to get political, but Boris Johnson was making a big point of shaking hands at the hospitals a few weeks ago. I really hope we don't need any more "poster children" before people get the point of how real this thing is.

I totally agree. Too many people where I live have the same cavalier attitude. It'll get much worse if this type of mindset persists.

Clyde1820 04-07-20 07:49 AM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21404813)
Gotta push back on one thing--the estimates are that about 70% of the population will end up getting this. A 3% death rate would mean about 7 million deaths in the US. That's horrible numbers. And there's no reason to assume they'll be evenly distributed geographically.

Indeed. If it turns out this covers communities anything like the "common" cold, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a great majority of a population to contract the thing. 2-3% would be large numbers, no doubt.

Still, point was: it's not smallpox; and, at some point, non-functioning supply chains are going to have lasting, hard-to-reverse effects on the food supply, medical equipment/drug supply, possibly fuels. If say, sufficient works for field harvesting cannot be obtained then food supply will get impacted. If a good portion of the airline industry goes belly up, due to extended inability to cover costs and loss of staff, it'll be years of follow-on impacts globally. And so forth.

Bad situation. Economically, one that simply cannot last.

livedarklions 04-07-20 08:01 AM


Originally Posted by Clyde1820 (Post 21405014)
Indeed. If it turns out this covers communities anything like the "common" cold, it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a great majority of a population to contract the thing. 2-3% would be large numbers, no doubt.

Still, point was: it's not smallpox; and, at some point, non-functioning supply chains are going to have lasting, hard-to-reverse effects on the food supply, medical equipment/drug supply, possibly fuels. If say, sufficient works for field harvesting cannot be obtained then food supply will get impacted. If a good portion of the airline industry goes belly up, due to extended inability to cover costs and loss of staff, it'll be years of follow-on impacts globally. And so forth.

Bad situation. Economically, one that simply cannot last.

Yes, but what that misses is that the death rate is a small fraction of the number of the people who will be debilitated by the illness for some unknown amount of time. There will have to be a strategy for flattening the curve while reopening things or any effort to do a general reopening will just result in plague-level debilitation of the economy with a higher death rate. Handled wrong, a reopening could actually prolong the dire impact both on public health and on the economy. And if history has taught us anything about economies, it's that total failure is always an option.

Clyde1820 04-07-20 08:20 AM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21405029)
And if history has taught us anything about economies, it's that total failure is always an option.

History has strictly localized examples only.

Even WWII wasn't global in the shutdown aspect. True enough, portions of France, much of Germany, much of Ukraine, a lot of western Russia, much of Japan, were all severely damaged. But even in many areas, economies were co-opted and output redirected ... they weren't terminated at the roots. Not global, those impacts (on the economy). Only local to those specific nations, portions of regions blasted.

Yes, blindly refusing to keep people distant will have repercussions on the infection rate (and resultant death rate).

But so will extended periods of non-economic activity globally. The effects of which, because of its global nature, have no real precedent.

Thankfully, so far, many major economic engines haven't yet been fully stifled. Even in the U.S., it's not fully so. Good thing.

Imagine, though, if this thing hangs around for months upon months. And repercussions begin to include lack of foodstuffs. THEN it'll be hard to justify, even at an ultimate rate of up to 3% deaths of up to 70% of the global population.

Tough balancing act. Hinging on the hope that it'll only be "a bit longer."


One article highlighting the distinction: Has Sweden Found the Right Solution to the Coronavirus?


Has Sweden Found the Right Solution to the Coronavirus?

By John Fund & Joel Hay

April 6, 2020 6:30 AM

A street with less pedestrian traffic than usual as a result of the coronavirus outbreak in Stockholm, Sweden, April 1, 2020. (TT News Agency/Fredrik Sandberg via Reuters)
Unlike other countries, it has so far avoided both isolation and economic ruin.

If the COVID-19 pandemic tails off in a few weeks, months before the alarmists claim it will, they will probably pivot immediately and pat themselves on the back for the brilliant social-distancing controls that they imposed on the world. They will claim that their heroic recommendations averted total calamity. Unfortunately, they will be wrong; and Sweden, which has done almost no mandated social distancing, will probably prove them wrong.

Lots of people are rushing to discredit Sweden’s approach, which relies more on calibrated precautions and isolating only the most vulnerable than on imposing a full lockdown. While gatherings of more than 50 people are prohibited and high schools and colleges are closed, Sweden has kept its borders open as well as its preschools, grade schools, bars, restaurants, parks, and shops ...

livedarklions 04-07-20 09:02 AM


Originally Posted by Clyde1820 (Post 21405059)
History has strictly localized examples only.

Even WWII wasn't global in the shutdown aspect. True enough, portions of France, much of Germany, much of Ukraine, a lot of western Russia, much of Japan, were all severely damaged. But even in many areas, economies were co-opted and output redirected ... they weren't terminated at the roots. Not global, those impacts (on the economy). Only local to those specific nations, portions of regions blasted.

Yes, blindly refusing to keep people distant will have repercussions on the infection rate (and resultant death rate).

But so will extended periods of non-economic activity globally. The effects of which, because of its global nature, have no real precedent.

Thankfully, so far, many major economic engines haven't yet been fully stifled. Even in the U.S., it's not fully so. Good thing.

Imagine, though, if this thing hangs around for months upon months. And repercussions begin to include lack of foodstuffs. THEN it'll be hard to justify, even at an ultimate rate of up to 3% deaths of up to 70% of the global population.

Tough balancing act. Hinging on the hope that it'll only be "a bit longer."


One article highlighting the distinction: Has Sweden Found the Right Solution to the Coronavirus?


If you're posting National Review articles, there's no way this is going to stay non-political.

And to answer the question posed in the title, apparently, NO!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...virus-response

Economists predicting what pandemic measures will have the lesser impact is a really bad idea. They keep getting humiliated.

VinceXE 04-07-20 09:31 AM

heh, you know what the conspiracy people will say about this. they'll say stuff like "she didn't die from corona she was killed". Corona is very real, no matter where it might've come from.

tds101 04-07-20 11:05 AM

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...323a29972f.jpg

tyrion 04-07-20 11:42 AM

5G cellular might be a factor in the coronavirus spread, but I also think we need to consider the prevalence of disc brakes as being another possible factor.

tds101 04-07-20 11:49 AM


Originally Posted by tyrion (Post 21405451)
5G cellular might be a factor in the coronavirus spread, but I also think we need to consider the prevalence of disc brakes as being another possible factor.

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

Seattle Forrest 04-07-20 11:51 AM


Originally Posted by Clyde1820 (Post 21404802)
A ~3% death rate (if contracted) is nothing to sneeze at. Though it's no smallpox or plague.

I've been reading about the Black Death lately. Helps my anxiety to be reminded how much worse this could be. Plague (Y Pestis) has about a 3% death rate today, at least according to one source. That doesn't mean anything, without treatment it can be up to 98% depending which form it takes.

I didn't know this, but there's some legitimate question whether the Black Death was in fact only the plague. It was without a doubt part, but there's some reason to think that anthrax played a role as well, and possibly an unknown/extinct hemmoragic fever. Rats were widespread in port cities, but not as much inland. It spread like wildfire in Norwegian winters and Greek summers, outside the temperature range for the type of flea involved. It spread from human to human, but not as quickly as it did. Or maybe this is all wrong, for sure it's just conjecture, plague DNA has been extracted from mass graves of the era, and plague is pretty much a consensus. We all have an abundance of time lately and reading, exposing yourself to new ideas, is as good a way to fill it as almost anything else.

Meandering back to the point, outbreaks devistated the old world economy, but improved it in the long run. Many (mostly larger) companies have been especially generous with sick leave. Microsoft is paying parents their full salary to stay home, not work, and take care of their children. Work from home has taken the world by storm. People are generally more productive WFH. Unemployment has been injected with steroids. It isn't clear how much of this will be scaled back once we have a vaccine. Reducing stress has been shown to improve productivity, that's why companies pay for EAP.

tyrion 04-07-20 11:59 AM


Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest (Post 21405484)
...Helps my anxiety to be reminded how much worse this could be.

I often think how much worse this whole thing would be without the internet.

1979schwinn 04-07-20 12:11 PM

The 1918 Spanish Flu lasted almost three years. Deaths came in three waves. Largest spike was when every one went back to school. The spread was mostly from solders, returning from WW1. It is estimated to have caused 20 million or more deaths, with some 500 million infected, world wide. This was before medical science was as developed as it is today.

washed up 04-07-20 12:32 PM


Originally Posted by livedarklions (Post 21404813)
Gotta push back on one thing--the estimates are that about 70% of the population will end up getting this. A 3% death rate would mean about 7 million deaths in the US. That's horrible numbers. And there's no reason to assume they'll be evenly distributed geographically.

I'm pretty confident this is 100% wrong.

wgscott 04-07-20 12:38 PM


Originally Posted by tyrion (Post 21405507)
I often think how much worse this whole thing would be without the internet.

Or how much worse it would be in a country that systematically discredited and underfunded science.

wgscott 04-07-20 12:42 PM


Originally Posted by washed up (Post 21405588)
I'm pretty confident this is 100% wrong.

A pessimist is an optimist in possession of the facts.

bobwysiwyg 04-07-20 01:02 PM


Originally Posted by wgscott (Post 21405603)
Or how much worse it would be in a country that systematically discredited and underfunded science.

... and education in general. :(

Clyde1820 04-07-20 01:35 PM


Originally Posted by tyrion (Post 21405507)
I often think how much worse this whole thing would be without the internet.

Yup.

The "desktop publishing" revolution certainly ensured people could get additional information, challenge sources, have discussions/debate, outside the standard (even government "approved") communications channels.

Of course, with that comes misinformation, owness on the person to verify sources, putting additional pressure on governments and traditional sources to get it right else face much more extreme blowback/challenges. And there's the whole ability to work remotely, given what computing (and internet connectivity) allows.

A net benefit, IMO. Despite the sticky consequences.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:40 PM.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.