|
Qwark/ Ozgrade 3
Comparisons with other illnesses/events based on numbers alone is irrelevant. The majority of the population will be infected with COVID-19 eventually. For most it will be a relatively mild illness, no worse than the flu. But for some it will be severe and need intensive care support over a prolonged period and for a significant minority of those >80yrs (i.e. 1/5) it will be fatal. The rationale of current measures is to stop everyone becoming infected all at once, which would overload healthcare systems (look at what has happened in Italy) and lead to such things as having to leave people to die, mass graves etc because of a lack of facilities, equipment and staff. This is not hype, but the inevitable result of the cold hard metrics of pandemics. Luckily we have fearless leaders who (eventually) listen to those who have spent their careers studying and preparing for these sort of events. Hard as this is going to be for all of us, the alternative of doing nothing would have lead to the same economic outcome but with far more deaths. |
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
(Post 10721120)
Problem is SecretAngel, there is limited factual verifiable information. We just don't have the information to do the gold standard "Double Blinded Crossover Randomised Controlled Trials" Most of it is aggregated anecdotal evidence and case studies. We only really have the SARS data, even then, most of it is animal studies as SARS was totally eradicated from the human population. We are dealing with an enormous amount of uncertainty, and unfortunately, we all have to wait for more incoming information. In many ways, we actually dodged a very large bullet with SARS. The one positive was the lack of asymptomatic transmission.
There is a good book by the WHO providing excellent background information, SARS: How a Global Epidemic Was Stopped (direct link to WHO download). It doesn't take long into the book to see the timeline of events unfolding almost identically to that of COVID-19, substitute Wuhan for Guangdong). The one advantage we have now from SARS is the knowledge to use of PPE and quarantine by healthcare workers up front. A large number of transmissions (the book documents 250 infections from a single case alone in a Hong Kong hospital). This disease, COVID-19 will probably have half the CFR compared to SARS, however, its transmission is both symptomatic & asymptomatic, and we therefore we will have many more cases. The final number of fatalities globally will likely be many orders of magnitude higher than SARS for this reason. In a perfect world, with access to a modern fully functioning health care system, the CFR is likely to be about 10x the flu. If there is a breakdown in the system (case study Italy) that number could be 30 to 50x the flu. The fatalities are likely to be in all age categories >20+, although skewed to the higher brackets and those with major underlying health conditions. Because the entire global population is naive to this disease, there are no natural firebreaks to slow the transmission, unlike the flu. There are no other control options with the exception of essentially stopping all human to human contact until a vaccine or other treatment agent is discovered. The Washington post has done a nice visual simulation of the various strategies: Why Outbreaks Like Coronavirus Spread Exponentially and How to Flatten the Curve. This goes to Aerial's point too - he's right that if you factor in the asymptomatic and mild cases that never get tested, the fatality rate goes down. That said, you could do the same for most illnesses - there are stacks of people who get the flu, but never get officially diagnosed too. It's still potentially tens or hundreds of millions of deaths, if the pandemic went unchecked. |
"So why didn't we have travel bans, border closures and mass panic with these numbers in 2019,2018,2017................etc etc etc"
Ozgrade 3 Accepting a mean fatality rate of 4% (it is likely more see: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ ) then in the US alone (pop. 327.2 million) there would be 13 MILLION deaths during this pandemic (i.e. the total number of deaths from flu in the same period would be 0.2% of the total deaths from COVID-19). Now expand that out to 80% of the population of earth (which will be the number infected eventually) and you start to see why our leaders are doing what they are doing. |
Ever wondered why Trump has just done a massive backflip from it’s a nothing to rapidly locking down the country in a few days?
Sure, there are some unknowns from the COVID-19 but most is known ie 2.2 million deaths in the US in 3 months if not using any mitigation strategies, that’s 37 times the entire US Vietnam war losses in 3 months. Here’s the article that changed his mind from the Imperial college of Medicine London. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf It might be a little heavy on details if your not used to reading Scientific papers but if you do it is extremely sobering.. |
Originally Posted by xyze
(Post 10721135)
Qwark/ Ozgrade 3
Comparisons with other illnesses/events based on numbers alone is irrelevant. The majority of the population will be infected with COVID-19 eventually. For most it will be a relatively mild illness, no worse than the flu. But for some it will be severe and need intensive care support over a prolonged period and for a significant minority of those >80yrs (i.e. 1/5) it will be fatal. The rationale of current measures is to stop everyone becoming infected all at once, which would overload healthcare systems (look at what has happened in Italy) and lead to such things as having to leave people to die, mass graves etc because of a lack of facilities, equipment and staff. This is not hype, but the inevitable result of the cold hard metrics of pandemics. Luckily we have fearless leaders who (eventually) listen to those who have spent their careers studying and preparing for these sort of events. Hard as this is going to be for all of us, the alternative of doing nothing would have lead to the same economic outcome but with far more deaths. are you insinuating that the leaders of countries like Singapore, Korea, NZ, Italy, France, the UK, the USA, Belgium, Australia know more about this than some crackpot pilots who post here. something about HIV or that the health professionals who are advising them might also know more. something more about HIV and that all these things the leaders are doing they are not just doing for kicks or to scare us or to purposely destroy the economy. even more about HIV gosh, say it isn’t so.. anyway I have a plane to pilot. Does someone have a $2 coin. It doesn’t work without one. oh wait. I can’t go , my carer hasn’t arrived. |
Originally Posted by xyze
(Post 10721140)
"
Accepting a mean fatality rate of 4% (it is likely more see: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ ) |
Best estimates at the actual mortality rate are close to 1%. This accounts for lack of testing, asymptomatic carriers, etc. Published in New Scientist magazine, 14 March.
|
Originally Posted by Dookie on Drums
(Post 10719450)
Here's hoping we can get the world back on it's axis PDQ. |
I work in the Gov health sector; this is the best paper going on predictive modelling of the impact of the pandemic, and is informing government policies worldwide. All models have to use assumptions, but this appears quite robust to me.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf |
Originally Posted by CamelSquadron
(Post 10721006)
What a........
"Imagine if the money spent on share buybacks ....had been used to ....buy aeroplanes" Fat lot of good that would do right now when aircraft are grounded.....Think before you type!!! Those funds were being returned to shareholders - if they had not been used to buyback shares they would have been used to pay dividends - either way the cash leaves the company. QF had a target optimal debt level - any surplus funds are returned to shareholders. It turns out that QF debt level had dropped well below its targetted debt level - so it is in better shape than it otherwise would be. Finally - employees are not saving the company by burning all their leave and entitlements - the company still has to pay out the cash for those. What employees are doing is SAVING THEIR JOBS. Because the alternative is to make the employees redundant or send them home on LWOP. You know nothing "What The" !!!! Well just maybe there are some(or many) that want that option but instead of being given that option are being forced to use THEIR LEAVE. It is not the company's fault that this has happened but by not giving options to employees it gives the company every option possible,very 1 sided & very obvious how they think. |
Originally Posted by Ozgrade3
(Post 10720852)
So we have wiped put our airline industry, decimated our economy......for 6 deaths. By that measure shouldn't we ban cars immediately as we frequently have more than 6 fatalities on the roads in a single day.
Imagine the hypothetical situation..... NASA have detected an asteroid heading for earth. It will crash down mid afternoon tuesday next week and they reckon it will land right in the centre of the Melbourne CBD. They think it will wipe out everything and everyone in a radius of 50km of the impact point. Other experts have also detected the object. They agree with the impact point and time but think that the object is bigger and that the radius of damage is more like 200km. Questions for you if you were the one to make the decisions? 1. Would you really use the fact that meteorites have hardly killed anyone in the history of humans as the reason not to evacuate the city? 2. Does the differing expert opinion justify not evacuating the city? Your argument that more are killed on the roads in a day than by coronavirus in Australia to date is like point 1. As the financial advisors say past experience is not an indicator of future performance. Point 2 is like people arguing about if the death rate is 1% or 4%. Either number (and the number likely to be infected) justifies the measures to contain it... |
It doesn’t matter if the fatality rate is 4% or 0.5% (I suspect in reality it’s closer to the latter). Australia has 3 advantages over Italy. Time to prepare, lower median age, lower proportion of smokers. Should be better.
The fact otherwise is that people have stopped flying. Until the media starts reporting good news constantly, (disease rates bottoming, a potential cure being developed in Qld becoming widespread) people won’t be back flying close to their original numbers. In the meantime we need to heed Jerry Springer’s words and “Take care of yourselves, and each other” |
Originally Posted by dr dre
(Post 10721190)
It doesn’t matter if the fatality rate is 4% or 0.5% (I suspect in reality it’s closer to the latter). Australia has 3 advantages over Italy. Time to prepare, lower median age, lower proportion of smokers. Should be better.
|
Well whatever the outcome of this disease is and how long the recovery period is, I think its fair to say that globalisation as we know it is probably dead (cant say Im too upset about that) and the way the worlds economies are run will fundamentally change forever.
One can only hope that puts an end to crony capitalism and the culture of CEO's and directors earning millions whilst the regular staff fight for peanuts. CEO's and directors are just employees as well and this greed of the 1% has to be stopped one way or another. Its time the power and money was put back into the peoples hands with strict laws holding those at the top accountable for their actions with severe penalties for abuse.. |
Arguments around the mortality rate seem to be missing a major point- mortality from every other condition requiring hospitalisation will increase as a consequence of this disease because of the strain it places on the health care system. Obviously it has been mentioned elsewhere many times but our hospitals are not designed to cope with such an influx. Expect all cause mortality to be higher (I wouldn’t proffer a figure), including the road toll, if this is not adequately contained.
|
Originally Posted by Daddy Fantastic
(Post 10721274)
Well whatever the outcome of this disease is and how long the recovery period is, I think its fair to say that globalisation as we know it is probably dead (cant say Im too upset about that) and the way the worlds economies are run will fundamentally change forever.
One can only hope that puts an end to crony capitalism and the culture of CEO's and directors earning millions whilst the regular staff fight for peanuts. CEO's and directors are just employees as well and this greed of the 1% has to be stopped one way or another. Its time the power and money was put back into the peoples hands with strict laws holding those at the top accountable for their actions with severe penalties for abuse.. I haven’t had a belly laugh for about a week! (BTW: Have you done any study of history? Just asking for no particular reason.) |
Virgin Atlantic taken a 47% hit
|
LB - yes, I'd ask the same question.
History tells a very different story |
Originally Posted by Daddy Fantastic
(Post 10721274)
One can only hope that puts an end to crony capitalism and the culture of CEO's and directors earning millions whilst the regular staff fight for peanuts. CEO's and directors are just employees as well and this greed of the 1% has to be stopped one way or another.
Its time the power and money was put back into the peoples hands with strict laws holding those at the top accountable for their actions with severe penalties for abuse.. I would imagine the other percent not mentioned are Politicians. |
Allan Joyce says they might consider stacking shelves at Woolworths.
Hey been there I did that so I could study and graduate flight school! wtf? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:32. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.