Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
James Daulton

Government Response To The Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

It is based on exactly as much scientific research which went into making the decision.  

You know who else felt the same way you do... that all of this is a gross overreaction? Rudy Gobert. You think he still believes we are overreacting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

You could size-limit the crowds to say 50 percent.  You could educated older people and people at risk on not going to such events.  You can educate people on staying home if they are sick.  You could screen people for fever.   

So I'm low risk and have a ticket to a sporting event with 10,000 people. We're all low risk but could be contagious without showing symptoms. Now I get infected, am highly contagious, but symptom free. Over the weekend I go visit my 73 year old father (who happens to live in a retirement community) and pass the virus on to him. He's very high risk and it could be very dangerous for him. Now he's contagious but still symptom free.

I'm at his house leaving germs all over the place and his neighbor comes over. Now the neighbor is infected but all of us are STILL symptom free. Two weeks go by and now we're all sick. Maybe I just have a low fever and a sore throat but the retirement community is now in danger.

Cool with that?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Wearing masks?  Yeah...thats not what would help.

https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/?
 

Its rhetoric like this that is dangerous and leads to more spread.  Please...leave it to experts who have said the measures being taken are needed rather than spreading misinformation.

This is pretty much already proven false. I brought this up much earlier in this thread that this pissed me off because it was a horrible way to try and keep supply in the hands of medical professionals. 

But the CDC has now admitted that even not properly fitting non-N95 masks will actually help. They arent ideal, and they arent full protection, but they are better than no mask. Which is just simple logic if you really think about it.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

We aren't shut down jon.  Closing off some events and mass gatherings isn't shutting down.

And yes...it is making us safer.  Please stop acting as if you are some expert...

So it's dangerous to be in large groups, eh?  Like an amusement park?

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/217533-disney-vacation/?do=findComment&comment=22566124

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, msommer said:

Anybody going to Disney now is asking for it. Kind of like licking the statues in Qom

Yeah or Universal.  Odd to be hammering Jon here while sending your child to a large amusement park with lots of people.

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

This is pretty much already proven false. I brought this up much earlier in this thread that this pissed me off because it was a horrible way to try and keep supply in the hands of medical professionals. 

But the CDC has now admitted that even not properly fitting non-N95 masks will actually help. They arent ideal, and they arent full protection, but they are better than no mask. Which is just simple logic if you really think about it.   

Panic-stricken people don't have much of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

This is happening all over the world, so I would kind of discount blaming it on our current leader.  He has not helped, but I have my doubts any President would have made a huge difference.   

You know what the president could do to make a difference? Lead by example. Yet Trump refuses to get tested himself. Once again, the correct course of action is to do the opposite of whatever Trump is doing. 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

Panic-stricken people don't have much of that.

Good dig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

Yeah or Universal.  Odd to be hammering Jon here while sending your child to a large amusement park with lots of people.

Jon would approve, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phandango said:

You know what the president could do to make a difference? Lead by example. Yet Trump refuses to get tested himself. Once again, the correct course of action is to do the opposite of whatever Trump is doing. 

If I had to wager he's been tested. They just didn't tell anyone.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Panic-stricken people don't have much of that.

What actions that have been taken do you consider to be panic?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Endowed said:

You can see the definite science vs belief split.

That's not accurate, I'm a believer, but I strongly believe the science about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The General said:

If I had to wager he's been tested. They just didn't tell anyone.

If he had been tested and the test was negative they would blast it out so loud so it could be heard unaided in India. That opens another possibility, obviously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kal El said:
26 minutes ago, Endowed said:

You can see the definite science vs belief split.

That's not accurate, I'm a believer, but I strongly believe the science about this.

The belief in question was not religious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, msommer said:

If he had been tested and the test was negative they would blast it out so loud so it could be heard unaided in India. That opens another possibility, obviously

I don't think he can announce he's tested because if I understand correctly the vast majority of voters can't get tested.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More odd to worry so much about one person to go from a Disney thread to here.  BTW I support the closing down of those parks.  My child is not high risk...Im glad he gets to go and precautions will also be taken upon his return.

And the point of bringing that up in here?  Was it to advance any discussion?  We know the answer to that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The General said:

What actions that have been taken do you consider to be panic?

I'm talking about all of the hyperbole and off the charts drama happening in these threads and in the media.  CNN alone is amping the panic up to 11.

And it's all "TRUMP!" based.  Heck, Sheriff Bart was in here yesterday proclaiming 1000 people a day were going to die.  He was so panicked he went into Joe's thread and changed his panic level to a 10 from a 7 after reading that.

That's the type of stuff I'm talking about.  Believing everything you read and that's posted on Twitter as long as it's anti-Trump.  I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously, but this is getting ridiculous.  SARS, MERSA, Avian Flu - all were much more deadly.  I mean, I don't want ANYONE dying from this, but panic is not the way to attack this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BladeRunner said:

I'm talking about all of the hyperbole and off the charts drama happening in these threads and in the media.  CNN alone is amping the panic up to 11.

And it's all "TRUMP!" based.  Heck, Sheriff Bart was in here yesterday proclaiming 1000 people a day were going to die.  He was so panicked he went into Joe's thread and changed his panic level to a 10 from a 7 after reading that.

That's the type of stuff I'm talking about.  Believing everything you read and that's posted on Twitter as long as it's anti-Trump.  I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously, but this is getting ridiculous.  SARS, MERSA, Avian Flu - all were much more deadly.  I mean, I don't want ANYONE dying from this, but panic is not the way to attack this problem.

not even close to true.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I think cancelling basketball games and all outings of more than 250 people is pretty unreasonable.   This could be managed much better without all the panic.  

Why?  They are protecting their brands.  It's a calculated measure.  If they are on the wrong side of this, history won't be kind to them.  

ETA:  Should be obvious, but I am speaking to the cancelling basketball games" portion of the statement....the second part I am fully in the "it depends" group.

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Panic-stricken people don't have much of that.

I blame poor messaging on this one. I mean the surgeon general all but called people idiots for wearing masks. 

I get what they wanted ultimately with the message, but it was dishonest and I don't like that one bit. It also doesnt help when every doctor I know on facebook and twitter was broadcasting it as well. I was like wtf? I have seen the studies and mask usage obviously has a net positive effect, albeit small. So many people were saying things like wearing a mask makes you touch your face even more! If it isn't properly fit by a professional it doesnt help! Etc etc.

I get wearing safety glasses with only one lens in isn't great, but nobody would ever argue that wearing no safety glasses is just as good. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, moleculo said:

not even close to true.  

Yeah. SMH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sho nuff said:

More odd to worry so much about one person to go from a Disney thread to here.  BTW I support the closing down of those parks.  My child is not high risk...Im glad he gets to go and precautions will also be taken upon his return.

And the point of bringing that up in here?  Was it to advance any discussion?  We know the answer to that 

I brought it up in here because you are hammering another poster who believes large gatherings should not be cancelled due to the health risks of everyone yet you send your child to one of those.   I didn't say a word about your own child's health.  What if your child gets the virus while there and brings it back home to your community?   Isn't that the whole point of not having large gatherings so we can help prevent the spreading?    I'll have the discussion if you want to.   I'm not playing the b-b-b-b but politics games you are doing with Jon though.   

I'd say your actions clearly state you're okay with large gatherings.  Prove me wrong

  • Like 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A little bit will happen when the Potus and his admin lies to you repteadly.

Down to one case yet? None?

It's been contained, right?

Everyone can get tested if they want?

Edited by Endowed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm talking about all of the hyperbole and off the charts drama happening in these threads and in the media.  CNN alone is amping the panic up to 11.

And it's all "TRUMP!" based.  Heck, Sheriff Bart was in here yesterday proclaiming 1000 people a day were going to die.  He was so panicked he went into Joe's thread and changed his panic level to a 10 from a 7 after reading that.

That's the type of stuff I'm talking about.  Believing everything you read and that's posted on Twitter as long as it's anti-Trump.  I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously, but this is getting ridiculous.  SARS, MERSA, Avian Flu - all were much more deadly.  I mean, I don't want ANYONE dying from this, but panic is not the way to attack this problem.

Trump's reaction to this has been pathetic but removing that discussion.

Was more interested in people's reaction to what has been put in place so far - banning gatherings, WFH, closing travel, etc.

Are those things appropriate in your opinion?

Edited by The General
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

This is happening all over the world, so I would kind of discount blaming it on our current leader.  He has not helped, but I have my doubts any President would have made a huge difference.   

We have no mas testing while many other countries do.  Trump dragged his feet on this because he was wishing it away.  Not facing reality.  

ANY OTHER President we would have mass testing going on.  Seems like we are only a few weeks away from that.  Trump delayed this more than a few weeks playing politics.  No other President would have done that.  

Forget Presidents.  I don't know of any people who would have delayed testing.  It is abnormal behaviour.  But hey, we elected a beauty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news on whether COVID19 has been in U.S. population since Dec.?  Testing old samples?

Even during the heavy cold/flu season had many co-workers go down harder than most years.  Was a topic of conversation at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

You could size-limit the crowds to say 50 percent.  You could educated older people and people at risk on not going to such events.  You can educate people on staying home if they are sick.  You could screen people for fever.   

i actually like this idea as long as there was screening at the place you were going to.  i think the UFC is doing something where they were going to check your temperature or something at the actual event.  if you are high then you weren't allowed in.  I like that and wished all events did that.  If they did that then I would support opening things up

But to assume that people will do all the work for you is naive as hell.  Remember Rudy Gobert had no idea he was infected when his dumb ### starting touching and hugging things.    And had no thought of getting tested.  he is the norm in this situation whether people want to admit it or not

Edited by hammerva

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Daywalker said:

Any news on whether COVID19 has been in U.S. population since Dec.?  Testing old samples?

Even during the heavy cold/flu season had many co-workers go down harder than most years.  Was a topic of conversation at the time.

They did this with H1N1, back testing, took them a long time though. Hope they can do this faster this time. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Donald actually address the crowd gathering issue the other night? That's a fairly big disruption of daily life and I'm not seeing any tweets about the subject. Any comments from him re: sports leagues suspending play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

I blame poor messaging on this one. I mean the surgeon general all but called people idiots for wearing masks. 

I get what they wanted ultimately with the message, but it was dishonest and I don't like that one bit. It also doesnt help when every doctor I know on facebook and twitter was broadcasting it as well. I was like wtf? I have seen the studies and mask usage obviously has a net positive effect, albeit small. So many people were saying things like wearing a mask makes you touch your face even more! If it isn't properly fit by a professional it doesnt help! Etc etc.

I get wearing safety glasses with only one lens in isn't great, but nobody would ever argue that wearing no safety glasses is just as good. 

 

I have some non prescription eye glasses arriving today.  Will be wearing them to help prevent me from rubbing eyes when out in public.  Going to tell co-workers they are blue light blockers.  Ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

no becasue that's a bit morbid, and I don't like cheering for things I don't want to happen. 

SARS - 774 deaths since 2012

MRSA 19832 deaths in 2017.  COVID: over 5k in 3 months with no signs of stopping or even slowing down.

Avian Flu - 455 deaths since 2003.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Daywalker said:

Any news on whether COVID19 has been in U.S. population since Dec.?  Testing old samples?

Even during the heavy cold/flu season had many co-workers go down harder than most years.  Was a topic of conversation at the time.

My family and I had a HORRIBLE flu back in early January even though we had a flu shots.  I've heard from a few local nurses that they suspect Covid-19 has been here for a while. I have no idea if they're right or not, but it does seem a bit curious.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, KiddLattimer said:

My family and I had a HORRIBLE flu back in early January even though we had a flu shots.  I've heard from a few local nurses that they suspect Covid-19 has been here for a while. I have no idea if they're right or not, but it does seem a bit curious.

A co-worker floated this same theory yesterday re: her husband's flu a couple of months ago.

Edited by roadkill1292
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, moleculo said:

no becasue that's a bit morbid, and I don't like cheering for things I don't want to happen. 

SARS - 774 deaths since 2012

MRSA 19832 deaths in 2017.  COVID: over 5k in 3 months with no signs of stopping or even slowing down.

Avian Flu - 455 deaths since 2003.

You didn't read my link, did you?   You asked me the other day to "show my work" and then you don't even bother to read the work?  Why did you ask if you weren't going to read it?

Edited by BladeRunner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BladeRunner said:

You didn't read my link, did you? 

I did.  It listed CFR but not aggregate totals.  If you are talking about how deadly something is, I think looking at the big picture numbers is more helpful.  CFR is great for an estimate for what things have the potential to do, but it doesn't tell the whole story - that's how likely you are to die if you get it, but CFR doesn't give any measure of how likely it is to spread.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, moleculo said:

I did.  It listed CFR but not aggregate totals.  If you are talking about how deadly something is, I think looking at the big picture numbers is more helpful.  CFR is great for an estimate for what things have the potential to do, but it doesn't tell the whole story - that's how likely you are to die if you get it, but CFR doesn't give any measure of how likely it is to spread.  

But that's not what you said.  You said I was wrong when, in fact,  I was correct that those other viruses were much more deadly than COVID.

Now, I'll extend a branch and leave open the possibility that it could increase, but at this point right now it's no where near as deadly as the other ones.  Yes, it's not to be taken lightly, though, and we shouldn't just gaffe it off.

But in the context of OUR conversation, I was correct.

Edited by BladeRunner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, KiddLattimer said:

My family and I had a HORRIBLE flu back in early January even though we had a flu shots.  I've heard from a few local nurses that they suspect Covid-19 has been here for a while. I have no idea if they're right or not, but it does seem a bit curious.

Yeah, it's tough to tell.  I bet it's probably possible, even probable.  I wonder if there is a way to test and find out?  Is that even possible?  would there be traces they could detect?

Edited by BladeRunner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BladeRunner said:

But that's not what you asked for.  I was correct that those other viruses were much more deadly than COVID.

Now, I'll extend a branch and leave open the possibility that it could increase, but at this point right now it's no where near as deadly as the other ones.  Yes, it's not to be taken lightly, though and we shouldn't just gaffe it off.

CFR is actually likely to go down.  that time article is a few days old (and this stuff changes quickly).  Curerntly, we are at 2.24%, and I estimate it to end up around 1%, assume we can get thing thing turned around.  If we don't, it will end up around 5% (Italy is at 6.7%, for reference).  

If you want to argue that the CFR here is less than some others, I won't argue.  But if you want to say that this will end up killing fewer people, that's where I take issue.  If you define "deadly" purely by looking at CFR, you would be correct but I think aggregate fatalities is probably more meaningful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they went to the doctors, they would have been tested for the fllu. If the test came up positive then it wasn't covid, no matter how sick they got. If they didn't get tested and had a dry cough, then maybe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, moleculo said:

CFR is actually likely to go down.  that time article is a few days old (and this stuff changes quickly).  Curerntly, we are at 2.24%, and I estimate it to end up around 1%, assume we can get thing thing turned around.  If we don't, it will end up around 5% (Italy is at 6.7%, for reference).  

If you want to argue that the CFR here is less than some others, I won't argue.  But if you want to say that this will end up killing fewer people, that's where I take issue.  If you define "deadly" purely by looking at CFR, you would be correct but I think aggregate fatalities is probably more meaningful.

fair enough. Thank you for the excellent conversation.  :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

A lot of folks will be inheriting money soon.

I noticed a couple of days ago how happy my kids were except when they were arguing over what color to get the Lamborghini. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
  • Thinking 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

1992 confirmed cases in the US as of now. Predicting more than 2000 confirmed cases by midnight.

ETA: That would mean that even with restrictive testing it's doubling every three days. What that means for total current cases is unknown

Edited by msommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2020 at 5:38 PM, zoonation said:

If I set the number of total infected (symptomatic or asymptomatic) in America at 12,000, would you take the over or the under?

I'd hammer the over.

What do you think is a good over/under now?  200,000?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JbizzleMan said:

No you limit large-scale gatherings until our testing can ramp up and start isolating those that test positive. Eventually the number of new cases will decline. It's called SCIENCE.

YEAH, MR JBIZZLEMAN! YEAH, SCIENCE!!!!!!

Edited by Thunderlips
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would think having warehouses of sanitizer on the ready would be an obvious measure to have in place.  Just circulate it out to avoid expiring issues.

Scary how unprepared we are for a known threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member