future got em
i love that profile pic. it reminds of a quote of one of his contemporaries (late 1800s) commenting on the batters, like Cobb, in the early 1900s. he said something like, "batters today have it so easy. you try hitting old hoss radbourn with a running start". in old hoss' day, the pitcher literally had a drawn box to throw from. he could start from the back and take a few crow hops before releasing the pitch.
i know; tl'dr.
I love it! Old Hoss set a record in 1884 win 59 wins and is the responsible for the first photographed middle finger. Quite an accomplished fellow.
Sorry I hit post before I typed my comment. But more and more signs point to a extended prolonged lockdown..
Yes, prolonged shutdowns has been a frequent topic of discussion in multiple other posts lately.
Buckle up because this could go on for a while. Even if COVID magically goes away overnight, we don't return to normal tomorrow.
I believe the 18 months is a worst-case scenario, including the time economically needed to fully recover, and not just the virus's presence. We have no idea what will happen in two months, let alone eighteen.
Remember: the Spanish Flu-far more lethal-had an initial impact range of 7-8 months worldwide. This thing is in its fifth month worldwide
Remember, too, that half a million people have recovered from this virus, and in the current pool of infected 97% are classified as mild regarding symptoms.
This isn't denial, btw; this is perspective.
We need to make testing for the virus and testing for the antibody widely available. For all we know, there could be a large majority of the population that had an extremely minor case of the virus and is now immune. Widely available testing will not only let us know what percentage of the population has the antibody, but also help isolate those who test positive for the virus
certainly not a "large majority" but i wouldn't be surprised if many million in the US have had the virus and had no or almost no symptoms.
Try half the population. Viruses blow through them like influenza.
The flu has resulted in 9.3 million to 49 million illnessesTrusted Source each year in the United States since 2010. Each year, on average, five to 20 percent of the United States population gets the flu.
https://www.healthline.com/health/influenza/facts-and-statistics#4
obviously because there is a vaccine, less people get it, but those percentages sre over the entire flu session.
April 13th, 2020 at 10:30 PM ^
"large majority" was definitely an exaggeration, but maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised
Finally some realistic perspective on this board.
I.E., not the take that the virus will kill every person it touches and we need to wait on a vaccine.
I hope you're right as well and there's a lot to be learned from the Spanish flu comparison.
One thing though, something more lethal typically burns out faster, not slower. Once it kills someone they can't pass it around to others.
And with very limited exceptions, nothing was closed.
The role government isn't to try to eliminate every preventable death, or we would make driving and it's 40k deaths per year illegal. And outlaw many other activities that make death more likely.
But we don't. Because we balance the risk of death against the rest of society's needs. And eliminating driving would cause many other problems that saving the 40k deaths wouldn't equal.
Just like putting working class people into poverty on purpose, and losing by most estimates, 25% of our small businesses for not months, permanently, has to be balanced against saving lives from a virus where 85% of the victims have little real issues, and 1% die. While we try to save every life we are creating misery in those who lost their jobs and livelihoods, with all the attendant social ills that causes, depression, increased suicide, increased divorce, etc.
Meanwhile all of the middle to upper class people who can easily work from home nod sagely and tell society to stay home, which they are well able to do. Because they know what's best for the those who can't do so.
Enforce some new rules for social distancing, allow those who are at higher risk of death from CV to opt out of returning to work without penalty, keep stay safe orders for the elderly, then open the economy.
The "X number of people die from car accidents yet we still drive" analogy is the quickest way for one to show their IQ.
Why though? I’d agree that car accidents and a contagious disease are very different. But I think it’s a fair point that society has a price on certain issues.
April 13th, 2020 at 10:46 PM ^
You obviously acknowledge they are quite different, and of course society places a price on certain things (flying, driving, etc.). I don't think anyone is debating that.
The issue is you're comparing a technological benefit to society with a virus. Outside of biological warfare nobody thinks a virus is good. So you're comparing the deaths caused by a societal positive (with some downside) with a pure societal negative. It's a comparison of a single factor ("X causes Y deaths") in an attempt to justify actions that don't line up because they aren't the same type of issue you're dealing with. For example:
- Does X serve a valuable purpose in society, and therefore we may be willing to tolerate downside due to its upside? Cars: yes. COVID: no
- Does X grow exponentially, and therefore containment measures may be an appropriate remedy? Cars: no. COVID: yes.
- Does X create a strain on the hospital system due to its death pattern, which could result in some otherwise preventable deaths occurring due to healthcare system overload? Cars: no. COVID: yes.
- Is X transmittable through certain activities (bodily fluid, social gatherings, etc) or spread through infection? Cars: no. COVID: yes.
- Does X create an increased risk for the immuno-deficient or those with compromised health? Cars: no. COVID: yes.
- Has significant time and money over the course of years been invested to make X safer and causing less deaths (safety measures, treatments, vaccines, etc)? Cars: yes. COVID: no.
- Are the deaths caused by X novel or new, and therefore have had less time to be studied and a treatment plan generated? Cars: no. COVID: yes.
The fact that people die from something don't make it comparable to a virus, whose whole existence is infecting people, unless its something that is in the same class. If there's a car crash near my house it doesn't mean that my neighbors may later die from it.
I'm all for having an educated, logical discussion on the benefits and drawbacks of social distancing techniques the economic consequences of them, but let's not make such silly comparisons.
April 13th, 2020 at 11:06 PM ^
Absolutely, I think we’re on the same page. I’d just like to see more measured analysis on the virus like the questions you mentioned rather than some of the all-or-nothing rhetoric I’ve seen.
April 13th, 2020 at 11:40 PM ^
Yeah, we're on the same page. I shouldn't have used "you're" there since I really meant "the person who does that" but yeah...
I agree, I dislike the summary piece of it and I think this also tends to get lost because it gets blended into politics which quickly makes it a shitshow.
April 13th, 2020 at 10:15 PM ^
Um, also the USA and other countries involved WWII suppressed news about the Flu. Considering in the 1918 flu, Kansas was the OG Wuhan
April 14th, 2020 at 12:40 AM ^
WWI*, but yeah.
We have read so many varying projections about this new virus and they are learning more each day. Epidemiology models vary pretty significantly and the CDC is working to figure things out.
However, I had to look up this guy. He is the 43 year old President of the smallest federal reserve district. A former investment banker and he ran for political office. He said he thinks there COULD be 18 months of rolling lockdowns. Great. I put him up there with the more educated posters here.
Definitely not something to add to concern IMO.
Why is this guy any more qualified to comment on this than any other random person? He's not. Got his name in the news though!
April 13th, 2020 at 11:47 PM ^
Brown liquor bad?
Curling could surge in popularity.
the only thing i'll be curling is my hair. it's getting a bit shaggy.
I’m looking at taking the buzz cut route. I like long hair but it’s not nearly as comfortable, long hair on me looks really bad in that long in-between phase and I already have a trimmer that can do the job.
Bob, You are teasing me.
April 13th, 2020 at 10:31 PM ^
Much like with curling, after watching COVID news for two weeks everyone thinks they’re an expert on the subject.
I am getting onboard with what some have said on here that there may be no sports until at the earliest fall of 2021. As I’ve said in other threads it’s going to get very scary in America and around the world. There are some 1 percenters on here that look at this like a nice little respite or vacation. But for the rest of us that have families to provide for, the middle class, it’s going to be VERY bad.
According to Chris Fowler, there's apparently a proposal (being debated amongst power brokers) that would push the 2020 college football season to Spring of 2021.
I'm on board with that assuming we're adequately prepared for wave #2.
I still don't see how that could be possible. What do you do with the Fall 2021 season? Push it to the winter so we are starting the season around Thanksgiving?
In short, yes.
Plausible timeline according to this proposal:
- 2020 season happens Spring 2021.
- 2021 season pushed back to, say, start of November in 2021.
- 2022 season starts in September 2022.
Highly doubtful based on these timelines. No way you can START college football in November. Well, unless you play in the SEC.
I've been to a fair share of November games in the Big House and my share of IM flag football games at Mitchell Field in December. I'll stay inside thank you
Isn't the SEC all that really matters?
Yes - - - \s
They won't let spectators into any sporting events until there is a vaccine for COVID-19. Meaning, if you don't have the vaccine, you won't be able to go to a sporting event. Right now we have a choice whether or not we want a flu shot but with COVID-19 pandemic they are going to force Americans to get the vaccine for it.
If we can't go to sporting events, will we ever go back to work? Open malls? If somebody works in a building with multiple floors, would you get on an elevator with 8-10 other people?
If your baseline is not being in anywhere with a crowd, the country will no re-open at all until their is a vaccine.
Agreed.
There's a world of difference between a packed stadium of 10-100k people and a building that has a fraction of that at best.
And you better believe that even as we start to open things up and get people working, social distancing precautions are still going to be the norm until we have a vaccine.
That can't be right. It'll be vaccine OR your natural antibodies if you've already recovered.
How are people spouting off this nonsense? Didn't we survive the Ebola and Spanish Flu outbreaks without a vaccine?
Wait, you're comparing Ebola to Covid-19 and then accuse others of "spouting off nonsense?"
And I don't think we want to repeat the Spanish flu.
Pick any disease you want. I don't think we've ever relied on a vaccine to return back to normal life. And I certainly don't think that's going to start with Covid-19.
it's different. the unknowns are greater with covid19. transmission appears to be much easier. the effects are stunningly austere for a segment of society.
Tell that to my mom and Jonas Saulk. Now I'm not comparing Polio to Convid but back when I was but a lad the Polio vaccine totally changed my world.
"Didn't we survive the Ebola and Spanish Flu outbreaks without a vaccine?"
Yes, we "survived" the Spanish Flu without a vaccine—675,000 Americans died, out of a population less than 1/3 of our current size.
Yes, and you're completely missing the point. That pandemic was much worse than the current one and we didn't wait for a vaccine to return to normalcy.
April 13th, 2020 at 10:26 PM ^
It is because we were in WWI and the government actively suppressed info about the flu