Non-IT News Thread
-
@mlnews said in Non-IT News Thread:
Coronavirus: First US deaths weeks earlier than thought
An autopsy in California has revealed that the first US coronavirus-related death came weeks earlier than previously thought.
The first previously known death in the US was in Seattle on 26 February and the first in California on 4 March. New information from a Santa Clara county coroner changes that timeline. Autopsies on two people who died on 6 February and 17 February show they died with Covid-19. Samples from the autopsies were sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirmed the presence of the virus, California's Santa Clara County coroner's office said in a statement on Tuesday.This would indicate that they were sick and contagious for up to a month prior, most likely.
-
@mlnews said in Non-IT News Thread:
Coronavirus: First US deaths weeks earlier than thought
An autopsy in California has revealed that the first US coronavirus-related death came weeks earlier than previously thought.
The first previously known death in the US was in Seattle on 26 February and the first in California on 4 March. New information from a Santa Clara county coroner changes that timeline. Autopsies on two people who died on 6 February and 17 February show they died with Covid-19. Samples from the autopsies were sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirmed the presence of the virus, California's Santa Clara County coroner's office said in a statement on Tuesday.You really think nobody left China the second the first person got it? It obviously did a lot of spreading around the world before anyone started reacting to it.
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@mlnews said in Non-IT News Thread:
Coronavirus: First US deaths weeks earlier than thought
An autopsy in California has revealed that the first US coronavirus-related death came weeks earlier than previously thought.
The first previously known death in the US was in Seattle on 26 February and the first in California on 4 March. New information from a Santa Clara county coroner changes that timeline. Autopsies on two people who died on 6 February and 17 February show they died with Covid-19. Samples from the autopsies were sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirmed the presence of the virus, California's Santa Clara County coroner's office said in a statement on Tuesday.You really think nobody left China the second the first person got it? It obviously did a lot of spreading around the world before anyone started reacting to it.
Exactly - there are so many more people who have it than they realize.
I won't be a bit surprised if this thing ends up being only slightly more deadly than the Flu.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@mlnews said in Non-IT News Thread:
Coronavirus: First US deaths weeks earlier than thought
An autopsy in California has revealed that the first US coronavirus-related death came weeks earlier than previously thought.
The first previously known death in the US was in Seattle on 26 February and the first in California on 4 March. New information from a Santa Clara county coroner changes that timeline. Autopsies on two people who died on 6 February and 17 February show they died with Covid-19. Samples from the autopsies were sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirmed the presence of the virus, California's Santa Clara County coroner's office said in a statement on Tuesday.You really think nobody left China the second the first person got it? It obviously did a lot of spreading around the world before anyone started reacting to it.
Exactly - there are so many more people who have it than they realize.
I won't be a bit surprised if this thing ends up being only slightly more deadly than the Flu.
What? So you mean in something like 50 years? Please clarify, because the numbers don't lie.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I won't be a bit surprised if this thing ends up being only slightly more deadly than the Flu.
In the last decade, the most deadly estimate for any annual flu for the US was 61K deaths. That's the highest, and it's for a year.
In the last ~month, or maybe two at most, coronavirus has already killed 47,680 in the US with most people still sick, the bulk of the infections still active, and lots of coronavirus dead not being counted yet because they are still figuring out how many older cases are from that. NY, for example, just found like 3K cases that weren't counted last week.
We are still increasing the rate of infection in the US, and we are still increasing the rate of death in the US. And we are currently between 2,000 and 3,000 per day. So about 5-9 days away from having a 1.5 month death toll higher than the recent flu record. And we are just about to start the first big round of intentional infections (GA and TX stopping the preventative measures) and we have incredibly high numbers of currently infected that just haven't died yet.
Even if we level off now, and even if we find a miracle cure in two weeks, we'll make the flu look pretty tame. We are already past the point of maybe being "slightly more deadly than the flu." And all of this is with the US working hard to downplay how bad it is. If this is downplayed, imagine how bad it actually is!
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
Exactly - there are so many more people who have it than they realize.
Example, for the day that just ended....
30,000 new tested infections and 2,341 deaths. That's a single day, the on upward slope of the pandemic in this locality!
And that's how bad it is with all reasonable states in the most extreme lockdown in history. No flu has ever had this level of medical or political care taken to restrict it. None, ever.
I think we are worlds past "bad as the flu." We are solidly into "holy effing shit, this is so much worse than any flu" category already.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
In the last decade, the most deadly estimate for any annual flu for the US was 61K deaths. That's the highest, and it's for a year.
But that is with an available and used vaccination in the market...
According to this page from the CDC, over 65% of those who are aged 60+ have been getting the flu vaccination for longer than the last decade. I seen some articles that said it was higher! And also, roughly half of all adults!
So I think that has a significant impact on reducing the number of deaths due to the flu in the U.S., making it seem like it's a whole lot less of a deal than it actually is.
Here's a page from the CDC that's more recent, but with less info.
I'm not saying COVID-19 is less deadly than the flu, what I'm saying is that the flu is worse than you just portrayed, without the high yearly vaccination rate for well over this last decade, especially the elderly.
-
-
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Cool chart, what point of mine is it meant to address?
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Cool chart, what point of mine is it meant to address?
Just supporting your post.
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
According to this page from the CDC, over 65% of those who are aged 60+ have been getting the flu vaccination for longer than the last decade. I seen some articles that said it was higher! And also, roughly half of all adults!
So I think that has a significant impact on reducing the number of deaths due to the flu in the U.S., making it seem like it's a whole lot less of a deal than it actually is.Good point. I know of almost no one that gets it and truly forget it even exists until I stop to think about it. I've almost never known someone to have the flu even as a child when vaccines didn't exist, probably rural NY just wasn't likely to spread it. It's weird, because as an adult we talk about the flu like it is a real risk. But before we had vaccines, it was essentially unheard of. So much so, they called other things the flu (norovirus) and even knowing that the flu was a real thing is recent. As recent as 2013 I had a doctor that used the term for things that weren't actually flu and his nurse had to explain that he didn't know what the flu actually was after he left the room.
-
@Grey said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Obsolesce https://www.abc.net.au/cm/lb/12090836/data/fallback-image-data.png
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2020-04-17/coronavirus-vaccine-ian-frazer/12146616
Needs Spain. And normalized for population.
-
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
-
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
It was on the ML Telegram group chat.
-
@black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
Well it means those employees were getting RAISES to be unemployed AND are angry to have free money taken away for being lazy. They should just be fired.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
Business first.
Well it means those employees were getting RAISES to be unemployed AND are angry to have free money taken away for being lazy. They should just be fired.
Thanks for explaining that.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
I'm not sure where we were talking about the extra $600 for unemployment - but it definitely has bad side effects.
"The anger came from employees who’d determined they’d make more money by collecting unemployment benefits than their normal paychecks."
Well, we hate them, so meh.
You can't really expect people to not do what's in their own best interest. It was ridiculous to pay so much, or not make tiers... yeah yeah, excuses to get things done faster.. whatever, this is really damning to the smaller businesses out there that pay those low wages.
