Corona please read very important

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

FYI, Scribd have made their entire collection of millions of ebooks, audiobooks and magazines free for the next 30 days to help people pass the time while they self-isolate.

More info in this blog post from the company's CEO...
https://blog.scribd.com/home/2020/3/17/a-letter-from-the-scribd-ceo-to-our-community

 

[MurrayMurray is verified member.]

A crisis is an opportunity

I don't know who or how but people will profit from corona, people who are already very wealthy

People add an extra step that since they're profiting maybe they had a hand in starting it, I wouldn't go that far, but who knows

It's not too different than the memes on twitter of people joking toilet roll companies started it

It's also an opportunity for governments to introduce new authoritarian laws they might not have been able to get through otherwise

And again that will make people suspect because they see someone getting a benefit

I like a good conspiracy theory myself, not that I believe them all, but sometimes they make a lot more sense than official stories and you can understand the logic

Oh yeah I missed out a big obvious one, you hear all the time about over-population, the dangers of ageing population etc etc then a virus hits that mainly effects the elderly and infirm

Just google "dangers of an ageing population" and you find million articles

It's a perfect eugenics tool

 

[bonusmedia]

It's reassuring to read the stuff where people focus on evidence, reliable sources, science, practical help, etc. The challenges are going to be enormous. It's definitely helpful to amplify good information and counter bad information. Some things get through to huge numbers of people much more effectively than others - e.g. that Arnie video was a brilliant public service message. Some people are more maths/science/medicine/logistics etc literate than others, we all need to help each other. However - to be blunt, for me personally at least there isn't time (or any point) reasoning with folks who have gone a bit daft, or don't value reason, or want to settle scores, or complain about minorities etc.

I appreciate different folks handle things in different ways, but in my view we could do with strict moderation to allow folks to discuss this sensibly without the distractions. Similar issues with FB/Twitter/Reddit/Linkedin really.
Though great to see the local helpers groups, that's brilliant.

Certainly don't mean any offence to admin, but maybe this is just not a great setup to discuss a major crisis. News is just a constant flow of everything getting worse, I don't even want to think about comment sections.

Can anyone suggest anywhere that's handling this issue better? Facilitating measured discussion etc?
Are there any reliable hubs, aggregators, subreddits, forums, groups etc I'm missing?

If not, on the basis that there are plenty of smart folks here who can work together constructively, is anyone interested in a dedicated space for this? I guess maybe something like a wikipedia ethos, but with no access for trolls/griefers etc. Single purpose, no ads/profits/bullshit. For one thing, we could do with at least separate threads for different issues (e.g. maybe Resources, Medical Response, Stats and Tracking, Economics, Psychology etc, whatever works.)

Things are moving very quickly. I think there is value in organizing good information properly and getting sensible people to discuss/work the problems - even if it keeps us busy until there's something better to be doing?

 

[bonusmedia]

Obviously working our keyboards is not exactly front-line response and obviously the most important message is the government public health advice, but that doesn't mean we should just leave the response to the government. There are many groups of experts doing modelling and forecasting etc, I'm all for listening to experts. Lots of techie people are good at finding and analyzing information, people doing the maths for themselves figured a lot of this out early. Some people have an audience or platform or network, some are organisers, some have relevant experience or expertise, some build stuff. Some people have high levels of common sense and that's what we'll probably all need most

 

[bonusmedia]

Some ideas for goals:
Reach and help maintain a clear and broad understanding of the issues as quickly as possible.
Consider/discuss/plan realistically for the challenges ahead.
- Gather, share and promote reliable, sourced information and rational analysis. Amplify effective public safety messages, share good practice/results, coping strategies, support etc.
- Join, collect/share information about local and specialist helper groups, useful resources etc
- Organize and present information as clearly as possible, attributed properly. Separate and amplify established facts, solid evidence, qualified/expert advice from the noise.
- Counter misinformation, conspiracy theories, rumour, fake news, reactionary panic. Sensitive and polite but firm.
- Work to avoid/counter logic and maths errors, psychological biases, fear of others etc.
- Explain the basis for opinions. Support positions with evidence, facts, reason, logic where possible.
- Be sensitive to emotional responses but stay realistic and constructive.
- Avoid unnecessary conflict, frame things neutrally where possible, keep disagreements constructive.
- Link/cite sources, co-operate to check reliability/workings/assumptions.
- "Work the problems" - The big problem is going to cause a cascade of other problems, and what would normally be easily solved may now be difficult.

 

[AdminAdmin is verified member.]

I'm not sure I get your full meaning @bonusmedia - it's entirely your choice as to whether you wish to read and contribute to this thread. It's just a platform, I actually think a pretty good one. Compared to some of the exchanges I read on facebook groups and other places this thread is pretty darn good with largely intelligent people sharing opinions. These opinions are going to vary wildly because its such a complex economic and societal challenge we face. Stay safe, Stay home.

 

[bonusmedia]

That's all very fair comment. Definitely not for me to criticize Acorn or your approach.
Maybe I am looking for something different, just want to know what others think, especially if i'm missing anything.
I'm sure we're all looking at all sorts of sources/sites, no harm in havinf different approaches .

 

[LCHappy]

Deaths of people with Corona Virus up 700+ in one day (total 4900'ish). They have a death to confirmed infected rate of around 9.0%, not a mortality rate as they don't know how many have been infected overall.

Holy moly that is some jump

 

[mallymally is verified member.]

Deaths of people with Corona Virus up 700+ in one day (total 4900'ish). They have a death to confirmed infected rate of around 9.0%, not a mortality rate as they don't know how many have been infected overall.

Holy moly that is some jump

scary figures. the uk population needs to wake up

 

[AdminAdmin is verified member.]

Some might find this interesting

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[AlistairM]

I was watching a Joe Rogan video on YT from a few years ago, unrelated to viruses but near the end, he mentions about the fear of climate change causing new viruses. I'm not too hot on climate change or this virus but it made me think. I found some of this article quite interesting, maybe this virus is the shape of things to come?

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-change/news/coronavirus-climate-change-and-the-environment/

 

[deedee is verified member.]

Just saw this on Facebook. People need to stay home.

 

[Adam HAdam H is verified member.]

This says it all, we'll be locked down before the end of the week I'd imagine. We're going to be much worse than Italy as everyone is too arrogant to think the advice applies to them :

 

[EdwinEdwin is verified member.]

Everyone is sharing the same graphic:

It's missing 2 key lines:

20-Mar: 177
21-Mar: 233

In other words, we have exactly the same number of deaths as Italy had at the same stage of its progression.

So we can project forward fairly easily just by scanning down the table's left-hand column. Which is horrid.

Except... that only works until we run out of critical care beds and ventilators. At that point, the figures won't match any more if we run out at an earlier stage than Italy did.

 

[LCHappy]

What is going on?

 

[martin-s]

of the sickest who end up in intensive care on a ventilator, 50% will die

That's exactly the conversation I had with a doctor friend last night. Truly shocking.

 

[diablo]

Everyone is sharing the same graphic:
Except... that only works until we run out of critical care beds and ventilators. At that point, the figures won't match any more if we run out at an earlier stage than Italy did.

Some small crumbs of comfort: we have more ventilators and more ventilators per head of a younger population than Italy.

Plus NHS has just signed deal with private hospitals. An extra 8,000 hospital beds across England, nearly 1,200 ventilators and almost 20,000 fully qualified staff will be available from next week.

Not going to be easy but don't write us off just yet! We have come through far worse.

 

[crazihoscrazihos is verified member.]

This is what a top heart and lung surgeon has posted. It's fucking terrifying what we may have coming.

https://twitter.com/Sprok/status/1241317307416264706?s=20

These NHS workers are amazing and are going to need a huge amount of support for PTSD after this.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Approx 1450 people die every day in the UK. Life expectancy is 80yo

What percentage of deaths would you say were over 79? 60%...70%...80% or more?

The average age of deaths 'related' to CV are of people 79 years old or older. With an average of 2.7 pre-existing conditions.

How many people are dying 'because' of CV?

How many of these people would have died whether they had CV or not? 90%? More? (Italian Institute of Health think more).

Rational perspective.

----------------

Irrational perspective is to look at the graphs and lists of cases and deaths posted several times above, and think that all those deaths wouldn't have occurred without CV.

 

[bonusmedia]

View attachment 2685

What is going on?

It certainly makes sense that lots of vulnerable people are projected to die soon anyway.
The tweet talks about a scenario where we flatten the curve enough to keep it to 20,000 deaths. So, if the current measures work well it may still be possible to have limited extra mortality, but that's a pretty big if at the moment.
Saying 'theoretically, it shortens life by 12 months' is talking about a possible average across a whole population, not the impact on you or people you care about. The idea we might only lose a year of life each on average is not reassuring

Both of those sources support the current measures:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

If anyone is saying that the measures are disproportionate, then what level of risk or death would be acceptable?
It's not like there is any way a normal economy could be maintained at this point anyway.