Jump to content
DeeCee

Coronavirus | COVID-19 | Global Pandemic | PLEASE KEEP DISCUSSION TO THIS THREAD

Recommended Posts

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

German numbers seem odd, the country has as many elders as the rest of the hardest hit european countries so I dunno ...


The first cases in Germany resulted from young travellers to Italian and Austrian ski resorts, and as a result the initial spread of the disease occurred mostly among younger people. The average age of COVID cases in Germany is substantially lower than other European countries, even though the overall population profile is similar.

German testing has also been better - even though it's comparable to Italy's on a per capita basis, comparing the number of tests to confirmed cases is a much better metric. Generally, if there are more tests relative to cases, then a higher proportion of infections will be captured by the data. Even more importantly, Germany started a policy early on of testing even asymptomatic individuals if they had any kind of contact with infected individuals, greatly increasing their detection of mild and asymptomatic cases. This results in a higher confirmed case count, lowering the fatality rate.

Additionally, Germany has had more intensive care beds available than other European countries and therefore has been able to ensure that interventions are available for anyone with severe illness, unlike what has happened in other European countries, most notably Italy.

A German Exception? Why the Country’s Coronavirus Death Rate Is Low
 

Quote

The average age of those infected is lower in Germany than in many other countries. Many of the early patients caught the virus in Austrian and Italian ski resorts and were relatively young and healthy, Professor Kräusslich said.

 

“It started as an epidemic of skiers,” he said.

 

As infections have spread, more older people have been hit and the death rate, only 0.2 percent two weeks ago, has risen, too. But the average age of contracting the disease remains relatively low, at 49. In France, it is 62.5 and in Italy 62, according to their latest national reports.

 

Quote

On a Friday in late February, Professor Streeck received news that for the first time, a patient at his hospital in Bonn had tested positive for the coronavirus: A 22-year-old man who had no symptoms but whose employer — a school — had asked him to take a test after learning that he had taken part in a carnival event where someone else had tested positive.

 

In most countries, including the United States, testing is largely limited to the sickest patients, so the man probably would have been refused a test.

 

Not in Germany. As soon as the test results were in, the school was shut, and all children and staff were ordered to stay at home with their families for two weeks. Some 235 people were tested.

 

“Testing and tracking is the strategy that was successful in South Korea and we have tried to learn from that,” Professor Streeck said.

 

Quote

Before the coronavirus pandemic swept across Germany, University Hospital in Giessen had 173 intensive care beds equipped with ventilators. In recent weeks, the hospital scrambled to create an additional 40 beds and increased the staff that was on standby to work in intensive care by as much as 50 percent.

 

“We have so much capacity now we are accepting patients from Italy, Spain and France,” said Susanne Herold, a specialist in lung infections at the hospital who has overseen the restructuring. “We are very strong in the intensive care area.”

 

All across Germany, hospitals have expanded their intensive care capacities. And they started from a high level. In January, Germany had some 28,000 intensive care beds equipped with ventilators, or 34 per 100,000 people. By comparison, that rate is 12 in Italy and 7 in the Netherlands.

 

Edited by Jason
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh s***...

Quote

(There is no proof that cats can transmit the virus to humans... yet. But wash your hands after petting them)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

She mentioned that it would probably happen and then didn't immediately shut down the entire country (or strongly suggested it to local authorities). It shows that she was taking into account other factors in this crisis, economical or political. Saving lives by containing the virus wasn't the #1 priority.

 

People have rightly mocked Boris Johnson and his "herd immunity strategy", but it seems it was implicitly the mainstream European strategy after containment failed, for a couple of weeks at least - before the death toll exploded in Italy then Spain.

The goal always was to slow down the outbreak so that the health care won't be overwhelmed. And as numbers grew bigger more and more parts of the daily life have been shut down. It still is a mitigation policy and not suppression, so either 70% of the population will be infected in the next years or there will be a vaccination. I would have prefered to do it more like SK but the government really was far too sleepy for that to happen - as I said, they did awful in prevention and the could have done better facing the outbreak.

 

I don't think her handeling of this crisis is in any way comparable to BJ. When they had to shut down they did. It just isn't possible to do things as fast as in China. He didn't want to shut down things until he was forced to.

 

3 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

But the pandemic condition is to lock everyone in their homes, it isn't a great time to celebrate the great European freedoms.

Competent doctors and critics were also been "silenced"/ignored in European media, the stock market was more important than saving lives (and perhaps still is). It doesn't get worse than the current situation given the wealth of these countries, or what has been achieved elsewhere. It is a systemic failure of historic proportions.

These lock downs are temporary. Freedom ends where someone elses begins. People can be free again when this is over, but most here think it's the right thing to safe the vulnerable.

 

I think doctors being "silenced" (and especially ignored) here is very different from there.

 

Things are by no means perfect here. Some may be better elsewhere. But europe has some advantages and I'm happy to live here.

 

As a side note, what I find funny is that things China was accused for a few months or weeks ago (drones monitoring crowds, lockdowns...) are done here now. Doesn't change my post though.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, terrestrial said:

 

Bias like you describe it, is interpreting actions of... as positive or negative.

 

There is a huge difference between bias (some of it got enlarged for reasons, like a reaction to injustice...) and systematically misinforming and / or lying, hiding behind ‚opinion‘.

 

FAUX News did not start with e.g. Obama, it stated long before that.

Even if you describe yourself as a conservative, there are way better outlets than FAUX News, who also uses propaganda methods, uses psychology based manipulations and worse.

 

Someone in this thread stated the news got worse since in the ‘80. In that time Ronald Reagan refused to sign the extension of an existing law: roughly it said to speak the truth in news. 

In my POV still the most impacting thing one statesman did (or caused by refusing to do). Its impact spread like cancer.

Yes, there was no regulation for new media, but instead of looking into how to prepare for that.... 

 

What you're referring to is the Fairness Doctrine, which Reagan's administration killed in 1987. Eliminating that requirement led to the unchecked rise of conservative talk radio shows like those of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, and the Fox News Network. These entities would simply not exist if the Fairness Doctrine was still in place. It is a classical case of big money buying a message and not even pretending there's no bias, but hiding the real motives behind it.

 

This is one of the reasons I say today's Republican party is the party of Reagan, in full bloom. They can look science right in the face and say "Nah, I just don't believe it", never have to even contemplate any other perspective, and keep spouting misinformation and lies. There is no check, no consequences. After decades of this going on it inevitably led to a scenario where a president and his de facto state TV network can say "Ignore coronavirus, it'll just magically go away and it is no worse than the flu anyway" and their whole base soaks it up like it is the truth.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The other thing I want to point out is that nobody could have foreseen how Covid-19 was gonna behave.

That's incorrect. There have been simulations of these exact cases that have been played through over the years. In fact, there was one exercise like that just last year held by the Trump government. It dealt with a virus of similar infectiousness and lethality that spread over the world after starting in China. The result was that the USA was utterly unprepared, there was no proper leadership, and medical supplies were lacking. Guess what was done about that, oh that's right, absolutely nothing.

 

Granted, you couldn't know with 100% certainty that the virus would behave exactly like that, but indications from China were very clear. They didn't shut down an entire area just for the fun of it. Everyone was lackluster in the initial reponse to that, but when you know that you are unprepared due to the exercise you just held, and still don't do anything in preparation, then there is something very wrong with you. Then again, if you didn't do anything after the exercise happened, it isn't exactly unexpected.

 

 

lilmac trying to pretend that this has something to do with bias and anti-Trump sentiment is just nonsense. No one forced Trump to call the thing a hoax or lie about it virtually every day to the point his own experts had to openly contradict him during the press conferences day after day. No one forced Trump to shut down the epidemic response team which existed to deal with this exact scenario. No one forced Trump to end the project that coordinated a worldwide effort to prevent pandemics. No one forced Trump to give or withhold help to states based on whether they throw endless adulation at him or not. No one forced Trump to lash out and insult a journalist who gave him the softball of all softball questions "what do you say to all the Americans who are scared right now?". No one forced the Trump administration to lie about what the federal reserves of medical supplies was for. No one forced the Republicans to put their usual agenda of utterly pathetic attempts at cutting down the rights of women and minorities, help for the rich and nothing for the poor in the very bill that existed to help Americans overcome this crisis. The list goes on and on. Basically no one else acted like that, apart from a complete clown like Bolsonaro. Even Boris Johnson didn't act as moronic, and he still had to backpaddle a ton after it became obvious what was going on.

 

It's one thing to not be perfect, no one is. It's something entirely different to neglect your own country for no real gain, and be a general failure when it comes to being a leader. If Trump had kept the team around, reacted to the exercise as he should have, been generally helpful and reassuring to the public, and had listened and enacted what the experts had been saying after the virus started to spread from China, then you couldn't put more blame on him than on any other leader. Because then he would have done his job, and everything beyond that would have been out of his hands. But he didn't, so he has to take responsibility for his own actions.

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

681 deaths in Italy, lowest in almost two weeks. Too soon to tell, but it looks like it is starting to trend downwards, as predicted by their experts back when the lockdown was announced; let's hope it is the case.

38 minutes ago, Aristis said:

Things are by no means perfect here. Some may be better elsewhere. But europe has some advantages and I'm happy to live here.

The point is that the response in Europe has been absolutely dreadful, this isn't about how much you love freedom or hate communism. There is nothing about democracy or human rights that prevented competence in this crisis, especially for rich countries. If the obvious superiority of the Chinese response bothers you so much, then look at South Korea (who had to deal with a significant outbreak and share a border with China), Taiwan or New Zealand.

 

Quote

These lock downs are temporary. Freedom ends where someone elses begins. People can be free again when this is over, but most here think it's the right thing to safe the vulnerable.

If 70% of people get infected then the vulnerable won't be saved.

Edited by MrGlass2
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MrGlass2 said:

The Futurist's rants are not a good source of information, in general but especially not in this thread.

 

I wouldn't put Germany in the group of countries who handled it "pretty well", the number of cases and deaths speak for itself: the pandemic isn't contained. Merkel has been about as bad as other European leaders, at one point she was open to the idea of letting ~70% of the population get infected. And I don't know if the end of the lockdown would be easier to manage there, they have the same problem as everyone else: how to prevent another major outbreak?

 

Germany may be the most competent of the big European countries but that is not a very high bar. It also isn't clear if the lower numbers are not mainly for geographical reasons, as the parts of Europe worst hit at first were west and south-west; East European countries have an even better record (for now at least).

 

And living in Chinese conditions doesn't so bad at the moment when it comes to pandemics measures, at least they are allowed to leave their houses.

Germany looks competent because they didn't destroy their manufacturing base.

 

People in UK complain that there's not enough testing, you can't test if you don't physically have the tests. We don't have the means to manufacture surgical gowns, gloves, ventilators or anything else in volume.

 

We can't even feed ourselves, 10000 dairy farms lost in 10 years because it's cheaper to import, this is just typical over all sectors.

 

Now, when the chips are down, we see that it's every man for himself.

 

Globalisation is as much to blame for this pandemic as the virus itself.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MrGlass2 said:

I wouldn't put Germany in the group of countries who handled it "pretty well", the number of cases and deaths speak for itself: the pandemic isn't contained. Merkel has been about as bad as other European leaders, at one point she was open to the idea of letting ~70% of the population get infected. And I don't know if the end of the lockdown would be easier to manage there, they have the same problem as everyone else: how to prevent another major outbreak?

 

Germany may be the most competent of the big European countries but that is not a very high bar. It also isn't clear if the lower numbers are not mainly for geographical reasons, as the parts of Europe worst hit at first were west and south-west; East European countries have an even better record (for now at least).

 

Plus your other post

 

Here (and elsewhere) the medical experts still are not sharing the same POV, still share not a common priority goal.

 

I am by no means a fan of Merkel... but every government leader who is not a medically educated person him-/herself has to argue, act,... as per how they were advised. 

I like the current leader of my state even less, but one sentence he said left an impact:

he did at first not speak / decide for a shut-down, as his team of medical advisors said no. 2 days later he ordered it - long before the majority of the other states did order it (not bcs he was earlier, bcs or nearness to hotspots it got bad in certain regions real fast), saying: the scientists only can advice per conclusions out of data, if additional data changes the conclusion the decision has to change too.

 

Also: I think in the freer countries they did too much reducing / ignoring for cost reduction over the last 2 decades or so.

If your systems are reduced you need too much time to reactivate.

If you start a shut-down before your system is on, .... I think that might too be a reason for why some countries reacted too slowly. Not that they ever would voluntarily admit to that - I think.

 

Here in Germany, my perception is:

It hit in a bigger way the more wealthy counties / cities, where people who do a lot of traveling (business or vacation), first, also such that boarder at hotspots. Plus there were people who were at bigger sports events.

= I think here they underestimated the amount of people spreading the virus that fast who got NOT infected where they looked intensely too, the fast majority got NOT infected by people coming from China nor per plane, they got infected during vacation, sport / party events (big carnival)

 

In addition, as George Parr already stated, its here not the German government that does health, its the state‘s job.

But even within our states, the per county health people‘s speed, how good they were prepared or able (those counties have too own POVs) differed quite a lot. And still are differences to see.

In addition: we had in March a state wide election - sadly too late to still apply for voting per letters (term?)

For all the counties, cities, and municipalities. Where the same people got re-elected, good for the situation, where not, depended a bit.

 

 And that is another reason why there are so big differences within Europe:

where do a lot of people travel during Christmas holidays (schools out for 2 weeks, thousands over thousands here in my state drive a short jump to the Mountains for skiing (big hot-spot) or try to avoid deep temps with 2 - 3 additional car drive and visit e.g. North Italy. Where e.g. a big European soccer game took place, with a sports club from North Italy vs a sports club from Spain.

Guess where two of the big hotspots in both countries are?

Or shortly after: Karneval parties locally or.... e.g. in Venedig (short enough driving time for a long weekend)

 

Plus in the area of mountains = cities tend to be cramped. Lots of cool restaurants, very cramped (Bavaria, Austria, Italy,...) 

Those vacation places are traditionally picked, eastern regions less. Bcs:..... cold war. In a Way. People do go on city trips and vacations to eastern regions countries, but I think it depends a lot on when in the year.

In summer I think the differences where to drive to for trips did got ~ diluted, but especially for the boarder states I think in winter it is still majorly the ‚old‘ places. Like why would a Moskau person fly to Austria to ski if there is so much more near lots to ski reachable with the own car (ever took skis per plane with you?) or the other way around?

 

German numbers differ within the country not only state to state, but even within county to neighboring county in a state.

Those who had events, bad, those who had not, maybe only 20% of what their neighbor county got per 100000 people. 

We have in our state counties from ~ 1000 infected per 100000 to only 50. Those two are rather near to each other (I think one or two counties in between).

 

Bavaria was one of the early ones, but still at least 2 - 3 weeks too late with the lock-down/shutdown.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MrGlass2 said:

Merkel has been about as bad as other European leaders, at one point she was open to the idea of letting ~70% of the population get infected.

Is any western leader no open to that idea ? (I think they almost all have a flatten the curve strategy, no ?)

 

If there is no perfect vaccine for this, I imagine virtually everyone currently under 40 will get this, maybe multiple time during their life, quite possible with a vaccin as well (has we will probably vaccinate at risk people in priority like we do for the flu).

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Futurist said:

German numbers seem odd, the country has as many elders as the rest of the hardest hit european countries so I dunno ...

They are very similar to South Korea or the cruise ship.

 

Germany: 1,330 / 92,150 known case

South Korea: 177 / 10,156 known case

Diamond Princess: 11 / 712 known case

Iceland: 4 / 1,417 known cases

 

France/Spain/Italy numbers look quite odds versus the rest of the world, but they are completely overwhelmed I imagine.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

India - 1,023 COVID-19 cases linked to Tablighi Jamaat: Govt

 

Quote

As many as 1,023 COVID-19 positive cases found in 17 states have been traced to the Tablighi Jamaat congregation, the Union health ministry said on Saturday, underlining that about 30 per cent of the total novel coronavirus cases in the country are linked to "one particular place".

 

In case anyone wants Churches packed for Easter. ^^^

Edited by a2k
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Is any western leader no open to that idea ? (I think they almost all have a flatten the curve strategy, no ?)

Not in Iceland or Norway I believe, but yes most of them have been. And it shows a horrific mix of incompetence (they did try to contain at first, after all) and disregard for human life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, doublejack said:

What you're referring to is the Fairness Doctrine, which Reagan's administration killed in 1987. Eliminating that requirement led to the unchecked rise of conservative talk radio shows like those of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, and the Fox News Network. These entities would simply not exist if the Fairness Doctrine was still in place. It is a classical case of big money buying a message and not even pretending there's no bias, but hiding the real motives behind it.

 

This is one of the reasons I say today's Republican party is the party of Reagan, in full bloom. They can look science right in the face and say "Nah, I just don't believe it", never have to even contemplate any other perspective, and keep spouting misinformation and lies. There is no check, no consequences. After decades of this going on it inevitably led to a scenario where a president and his de facto state TV network can say "Ignore coronavirus, it'll just magically go away and it is no worse than the flu anyway" and their whole base soaks it up like it is the truth.

O.K., please be aware, this is all out of my mind/brain... from the news then. Literally.

Like if you say that was in 1987, I believe you, I know it was in the ‘80, and think it was in the second half of that decade. Friends say I am an elephant 🐘, but not if it is about dates. 😉

 

If I remember it right, it were 2 different cases:

one was to extend a pre-existing law, that he refused to sign, as such it lapsed.

The other was a try to get the new medias and changes into ... either something new or to reformulate it. Not sure if that got ever to

~ let‘s vote about that stadium, so I am not sure if we speak about the exact same thing, but it definitive is the same general thing. 😎

 

His input to that was massive, as such I hold him to a very high % responsible for all that sh... that followed.

Not only the examples you gave, but it spread to other countries too, a lot of the actual culture of dismissing others, judging so extreme, all seems by too many only be seen in black and white

= all of that got at least enhanced a LOT, to the degree too many seem to think that is ‚normal‘ (like it always was so), when it is not.

 

Hence why for me he was one of the worst of the presidents of the US (no matter which party). Without him in no way the actual one would even have gotten the candidate.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MrGlass2 said:

Doubtful. Some much poorer countries have higher life expectancy than the US.

Also:

 

 

Maybe during the peak of recessions (has lower activity save life during that time as well), but how much of the opiate - suicide diminishing life expectancy in the USA is linked to the economy of thoses regions going down and is it taken into account ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Not in Iceland or Norway I believe, but yes most of them have been. And it shows a horrific mix of incompetence (they did try to contain at first, after all) and disregard for human life.

Not in Canada, to show how little containment was tried we never even stopped air travel coming in. I do not remember any western country trying containing it, looked like slowing it down from the start (here right away they talked about flattening the curve and the importance of not peaking the healthcare system, without any talk that it could realistically be contain once the denial that it was even an issue stopped).

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Not in Iceland or Norway I believe, but yes most of them have been. And it shows a horrific mix of incompetence (they did try to contain at first, after all) and disregard for human life.

Ahm, they can not fully quarantine all at risk people and more for roughly 2 years. Theoretical time needed for full approval vaccines

 

Containment tries were not succesful, as the pandemic experts did not count for a change in the ~ distribution, nor for a such big of multiple spreaders at once. E.g. the soccer match? I think someone said 45000 people there alone.

Only bcs I am curious, did you ever see a soccer match in Europe, especially a southern temper one? 

 

In countries where people work more from home, live not that clustered .... its another situation than in countries where people live rather clustered, have a lot of people living to a rather high age (and as such a lot of those in - again densely together - care homes) and other differences.

Countries with a free and high standard medical access people might get older in average, in such a situation a lot more can be there who are to protect and care for per 100000 population.

Countries with a high online school count, highly developed Internet over the whole country (as such even allowing for home office and school at home) can react maybe faster than countries who do not have the same. Meant as it is not a point to discuss over, as based on the situation its a no-brainer. Countries with Doctors appointments per Internet/Digital already a stamdard might have less spreading whilst patients wait together in the waiting room....

 

Weather, season,... differ too.

 

And many other differences why there are not 1 to 1 comparable

 

There is a lot of blame to spread, but not mistakes made where based on greed.

 

 

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.