OT: aOSU Moving all Classes Online for the Rest of the Month due to Coronavirus
Not released to the public yet, but OSU students have received an email from their president that the university will be moving all lectures, exams, etc. online until the end of the month because of newly confirmed cases of Coronavirus in Ohio. They are currently on spring break until next Monday.
No OSU students or faculty have been confirmed to have the virus, but looks like they're taking steps to prevent that from happening.
I'll just get this joke out of the way since it's a serious topic:
Justin Fields was reported as saying he was "very excited" to finally have classmates.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:50 PM ^
I regret that I have but one upvote to give to this comment.
It's a shame you didn't get all the points from this great one-line post. Is this broke dick forum ever gonna get fixed?
Not sharing coolers would also be quite effective.
In all seriousness, good for them.
Agreed.
They should be testing people like crazy. And they’re not. South Korea is doing this right. Mass testing and quarantine. Instead our fumbling, bumbling leadership is more concerned about short term stock prices and playing the blame game. This thing will be absolutely everywhere soon because of it.
People simply don’t know what to do if they come down with a fever. Period. And in the meantime they spread it.
You know that South Korea's not actually testing anyone in greater numbers, they're just collecting greater number of samples. Watch the JHU's virus tracker map... the cases are starting to asymptote, and there will be more new cases in areas that haven't experienced them yet, but for the most part, this isn't the superflu from The Stand. Just practice good health and hygiene and if you're in a susceptible group, take additional precautions.
South Korea's not actually testing anyone in greater numbers, they're just collecting greater number of samples
I'm apparently dumb and don't understand what you mean. Can you please explain further?
March 10th, 2020 at 10:22 AM ^
That means they have tons of samples sitting in a fridge waiting to be tested.
March 10th, 2020 at 10:25 AM ^
So just throw up our hands (and tests) because it’s endemic already? I have a mother in a retirement home, I expect the government to do everything within its power to limit the spread. Protect its people. Instead we got a GOP clown wearing a gas mask and the Clown King saying it’ll all be magically gone by April or down to zero from fifteen soon. Endless nonsense meant to prop up short term business interests, nothing more. And I’m an independent.
March 10th, 2020 at 10:51 AM ^
+1 Captain Trips
March 10th, 2020 at 12:56 PM ^
South Korea is testing in greater numbers than us. As of Sunday they had tested 189,000 people.
Nevertheless, in a country of 51 million people, that's still just a drop in the ocean.
March 10th, 2020 at 10:36 AM ^
It’s people like you that are contributing to the mass hysteria associated with this virus. Yes it’s spreading, yes it’s dangerous. We have 100, I repeat 100 testing kits available for the entire state of Michigan. There are a finite number of testing kits so testing is reserved for the sickest and the highest probability of positive diagnosis.
We would absolutely love to be able to swab everyone like we do the flu. This technology is not yet available. Furthermore, anyone who is deemed high risk and tested, has to remain in quarantine in a hospital for at least 2 days until the test comes back. If you want to cripple healthcare and have people dying in the streets(with your usual daily emergencies) because of inability to access healthcare due to hospitals being overwhelmed with quarantining everyone they test, then yes, test everyone. Until we are able to test people rapidly, like we do for the flu, there is no reason to test everyone.
If you are concerned you may have it, but aren’t extremely ill, call your health dept and quarantine yourself. Wash your hands people.
March 10th, 2020 at 11:29 AM ^
I’m not sure suggesting that there are only 100 testing kits in Michigan is the way to inspire calm. That suggests an utter lack of preparedness and a complete inability to handle even one case at a retirement home where presumably you would want to test both other residents and staff.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:46 PM ^
Of course the US is unprepared. I’m pretty sure that’s how things become a pandemic. Whether you test positive or not really doesn’t change the treatment course. It’s supportive care. If you’re very ill, you are admitted to a hospital, if not you go home. The only reason more testing would help is to know which people need to stay in quarantine. If the testing were rapid like the flu, that would be the best thing. All testing samples get sent to the cdc as most hospitals don’t have the capability for testing yet. So whether you test 100 or 1000 people, the cdc can only run so many tests per day. Until hospitals have the ability to do the testing, it will be very limited.
UCSF is developing its own testing. Hospitals that can should do the same.
So is Duke.
Testing is important because people can carry COVID-19 without feeling any symptoms. They can be spreading the virus without knowing they should be self-isolating.
Speed in finding and isolating patients was key to slowing the spread in China. Plentiful ventilators and ECMO machines in Chinese health care was key to saving lives. The USA is behind China on both its response speed and availability of respiratory life support. It's going to get bad here and our woeful testing response is a huge part of it. (Note: China just offered an aid package to Italy that includes 1,000 ventilators, 100,000 respirators, 50,000 test kits, and more)
The US decided to not accept WHO test kits... and someday we will know who made that terrible decision.
Yes, and this is why the official infection counts and death rate statistics are completely unreliable. There are only some tens of thousands of test kits in the entire country. We have about 1,000 confirmed cases, which means the actual number is probably closer to ... what? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000?
I’m not entirely sure I agree with this. The virus has proven dangerous for the elderly with pre-existing health conditions. From what I understand it is basically a moderate cold for people with healthy immune systems. I error on the cautious side with basically everything, but even I think these quarantines and closures are problematic precedent. We are all freaking each other out. Wait until mandatory quarantines of seemingly healthy individuals begin. I don’t think we will be applauding that when it happens, or maybe we will, strange times.
Even if it is just a cold to young people, those young people have an obligation to try to prevent the spread to the elderly because it is potentially lethal to them.
Not at the expense of a vibrant functioning society and economy. People need to wash their hands and go about their business. The virus is here and it’s part of our society now. Life needs to go on now. This is getting nuts. People pointing to China as an example of our society needs to react to this issue. China should certainly not be our role model. Shutting down New York subways? GTFO out of here.
"GTFO out of here" -- so should I get out or does two outs mean I'm back in?
Underrated comment...
March 10th, 2020 at 10:35 AM ^
I watched news clips of subway workers disinfecting every inch of every train for what? The next carload of travelers with a few people who have a cough?
So should we disinfect the trains every hour, end of day, once a week. Wash your hands, Don’t rub your eyes or put your fingers in your mouth.
This is a serious health issue but I don’t think we can hide from it.
March 10th, 2020 at 11:41 AM ^
Yeah, why wash your hands, if you'll just have to wash them again later?
March 10th, 2020 at 10:17 PM ^
It’s a lot easier for everyone to wash their hands as much as they can and practice good habits. When it comes to transit I would focus on where people make contact.
Of course we should all take precautions and a mild level of concern is normal and healthy.
That said this is The Latest Big New Thing + De-Centralized Wild, Wild West 24-Hour Media + Every Fucking Human on Social Media + Extreme Heightened Political Climate = Ridiculously Overstated Global Panic To Get Clicks, Score Political Points, and Manipulate the Stock Market.
There is a difference in appropriateness between "young people who are sick" taking dramatic action to prevent infecting others versus "all young people, regardless of health status" taking the exact same action.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:04 PM ^
Not sure when Ohio State's spring break is, but that could be one reason for the timing. Students are about to go home with whatever diseases they have and potentially infect (likely older) family members.
Agree. The panic and hysteria over coronavirus will end up causing far more harm than the actual virus when it's all said and done.
I mean, when something like 10 people die in one health care facility in Washington, you would think that would throw up some red flags. People keep saying, "Ah, you pussies, it's just another flu." When's the last flu you heard of that killed 10 people in one building within a few days of each other?
I'm not really a panicky person, but I have parents and grandparents and older people that I care about that I don't want to die. Maybe you don't, but please stay away from the people I care about.
The more I read it seems weirder and weirder. I don't mind being fact checked but I thought I read literally no deaths have occurred in people under 10 and the death rate is virtually zero for people under 20.
To your point...the death rate seems quite high...literally hundreds of times higher than the flu, for people over 70.
I'm a weirdo...we have food, water and enough ammo to protect it for at least 6 months. Although now that I think about it I don't think I have enough dog food for 6 months...
In either case I think both points are valid. We don't need to get on top of our roofs with .50 cals to start sniping off people coming for our food but we should probably take extra measures that may be a bit over the top to protect people, especially the elderly.
The vast majority of deaths have come from older people with underlying health issues. I know this is hyperbolic, but how many 70+ year olds are in perfect health? I have a diabetic grandparent, a parent with heart issues, etc. They eat healthy and exercise and get around great for their age. And maybe that part would prevent their cases from getting too bad, but most deaths are coming from 70+ year olds with "underlying health issues like diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, etc." Well, controlled diabetes is still an underlying health issue. Heart disease in a seemingly healthy person who exercises and eats healthily is still an underlying health issue.
Of course, all of this ignores the strain on health systems, the dwindling supply of respirators, the potential scarcity of hospital beds, etc.
I'm not hiding under my bed. I'm still going to the store, going to the gym, going to work, etc., but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that this could get very, very bad for many people.
March 10th, 2020 at 10:10 PM ^
People with heart disease and compromised lungs should be self quarantined and should have 8-10 weeks of supplies. They are at serious risk.
March 11th, 2020 at 11:21 AM ^
Right. And yet it's just so difficult to expect a 75-year-old with heart disease to literally never leave his/her house for 2 or 3 months.
.50 cal on the roof? 5.56 or 7.62 will do the job.
Right? Talk about over reaction!
March 10th, 2020 at 10:03 AM ^
"I prefer to fend off humans asking for food with a hunting rifle"
March 10th, 2020 at 10:16 AM ^
I have RPGs ready to go baby. WOOOOO!!!! LIGHT EM UP MUTHAFUCKA!!!!!!!
March 10th, 2020 at 10:42 AM ^
Part of the problem is that is a novel virus and we just don't know much about it. The death rates are probably just not accurate right now. Initially, especially, they were just testing people who were the most ill. Which means your only confirming cases in those at the highest risk of death. What you tested everyone who got a cough? You would probably find that there are a lot more cases than you expected, but the death rate would be much lower since they do know that it's a mild respiratory illness in about 80% of those infected so far. Obviously you can't/shouldn't do that kind testing with a scarce and costly resource such as the test kits, so we're in a state where we just don't know a lot.
But yes, from what is known, it does appear that older people especially with underlying illness are especially suseptable. In the early data in China, it was older men that were dying the most and one of the theories is that older men in China smoke at a higher rate than other demographics.
From a statistical standpoint, you're right.
But from a practical standpoint, it doesn't matter. I could have it right now. So could you, I guess. Even if it's only killing 1% of the infected, there are enough infections that it's killing 10 people in one facility. And it's causing hospitals in China and Italy to be overwhelmed.
Yep, the risk is coming no matter where you live. I'm not worried personally because of my age, but I am worried about spreading it to people that are susceptible to it.
And a big point: slowing the spread down so that it doesn't infect all at once will save a lot of lives. Hospitals don't have enough beds to treat everyone with serious symptoms all at once, but over the course of a few months they do.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:03 PM ^
literally hundreds of times higher than the flu, for people over 70.
Not literally. It probably is higher than that of the flu, but the current data is skewed by sampling issues - we're only testing the sickest people, and almost certainly missing tons of mild cases.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:28 PM ^
The best data I have seen is that for people over 80 the mortality rate of 14.8%. This is data coming from China, so part of that can likely be chalked up to the healthcare system being overwhelmed, but it does imply a mortality rate for that group of more than 100x the overall mortality rate of a typical seasonal flu (0.1%).
That said, it's not an apples to apples comparison. The 0.1% is total mortality across all age groups, while the 14.8% is limited to those over 80. While I couldn't find flu mortality rates for those over 80, for those 65 and over the mortality rate of a typical flu appears to be less than 1%.
So while it's not accurate to say the mortality rate is "hundreds" of times greater than the flu for those over 70, it is a gross understatement to say that the mortality rate is "probably higher than that of the flu". The 19 deaths out of 31 positive tests (so far) at the nursing home in Washington demonstrates just how dangerous this disease is for the elderly.
March 10th, 2020 at 12:33 PM ^
It's certainly elevated for the elderly, but again there are sampling issues. We can't assume that every sick person with COVID-19 in China was actually tracked down. Flu mortality rates are based on decades of research while COVID-19 rates are based only on the confirmed cases we've found in the last three months. We don't know how many other carriers of this virus are out there.
I am not claiming the numbers are highly accurate, but they are the best number we currently have. However just because we can't cite highly accurate numbers does not mean we can't make broad statements about how dangerous the disease is for certain groups. To wit, when the flu rolls through nursing homes (which it does every year), you don't generally see double digit deaths, even in bad years (excluding pandemic flu years). I don't want to say you never see such rates in any nursing home, as given the number of nursing homes in the country you expect statistical outliers, but when the first nursing home in the country identified with the disease has 19 deaths the likelihood of it being a statistical outlier is very low. Given what we know, stating that we're dealing with a disease that is something like an order of magnitude more deadly than a typical flu is not hyperbole.
Side note, even flu mortality rates are a "best guess" because flu rates are extrapolated from the people who are swabbed: generally, those who seek medical care for flu-like symptoms. It's not that much different from coronavirus in that regard, though there are admittedly more years of data from which to extrapolate, along with other types of information (Google searches for flu symptoms being a common example).
What we really need to get a good handle or mortality, though it will only be backwards looking, is antibody testing on a statistically significant sampling of the general population. That will give us a good sense for how many people were exposed, and from that we can come up with very accurate mortality rates. I'd actually like to see sampling started now (even if testing the samples must wait until later) and performed at regular intervals, as that would allow for temporal modeling of the spread of the disease. That data would be fascinating, and, I suspect, hugely useful from a public health standpoint.
THIS! People's lack of empathy sometimes astounds me.