Started By
Message
re: Alabama Board Coronavirus Thread
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:05 pm to bamameister
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:05 pm to bamameister
quote:
SI's @RossDellenger says a doctor advising conference commissioners told him COVID cases will have to plateau or fall nationally in order to have a college football season.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:24 pm to bamameister
I always wondered what it was like to vote in a state where your party always lost that state in a Presidential election.
Must suck to blame the President for mask wearing.
Must suck to blame the President for mask wearing.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:32 pm to Crimsonians
quote:
Must suck to blame the President for mask wearing
Did I do that? Or was it I who boldly stated I have a gameplan regardless of what this president gets figured out?
Reading may be fundamental, but comprehension is a gift.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:37 pm to bamameister
Doubling up. Nice
quote:
Even if the president can't figure out this whole, why should I wear a mask thing,
This post was edited on 7/13/20 at 5:39 pm
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:49 pm to Crimsonians
quote:
Doubling up. Nice
quote:
Even if the president can't figure out this whole, why should I wear a mask thing,
Dude, this should be a little clearer than a Colin Kaepernick kneel down for you. Sadly, it's not.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 5:56 pm to Crimsonians
quote:
I smell soy.
Good for you. Glad somethings working better than your comprehension.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 6:37 pm to bamameister
You need a shower in testosterone. Damn
Posted on 7/13/20 at 6:42 pm to TideSaint
Braves vs Braves on Fox SS
Posted on 7/13/20 at 6:43 pm to Crimsonians
quote:
You need a shower in testosterone. Damn
At this point, why worry so much about having the last word and just try for the last "thought"? Maybe something will come to you.
Posted on 7/13/20 at 7:54 pm to bamameister
quote:
bamameister
quote:
Crimsonians
We done here?
Posted on 7/13/20 at 10:50 pm to Cobrasize
This is ironic because HIV is dangerous and most don't know they have it until they get tested.
We're a weird country. I mean we hate intelligence, science, etc... but we sure do love using products of it (cell phones, internet, cars, AC, etc).
We're a weird country. I mean we hate intelligence, science, etc... but we sure do love using products of it (cell phones, internet, cars, AC, etc).
Posted on 7/14/20 at 5:23 am to bamameister
quote:
I guess it is a crash course in human nature
More of a crash course in a very fractured modern America. Human nature is all about survival first, but Americans have allowed politicians and political media to condition us to take sides and believe the other side is the enemy.
I guarantee you the Spanish Flu had a more true "human nature" than this shite show response
Posted on 7/14/20 at 7:59 am to stomp
quote:
I guarantee you the Spanish Flu had a more true "human nature" than this shite show response
After reading the John Barry book, you'd be surprised. Regional officials dealt with it in very different ways (St Louis vs Philadelphia being the most historically cited example), but unlike today there wasn't any sort of readily available medium for everyone in the world to both know about and then discuss and argue about the different responses. And, of course, this all occurred in the midst of the greatest conflict in human history raging in Europe and Asia.
However, the responses that we instituted today are very much based on studies of the Spanish Flu (even down to the person who fought for funding and oversaw those studies).
"Rapid Response was Crucial Containing 1918 Flu Pandemic" - NIH, April 2007
Keep in mind this article is 13 years old..........
quote:
One of the persistent riddles of the deadly 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic is why it struck different cities with varying severity. Why were some municipalities such as St. Louis spared the fate of the hard-hit cities like Philadelphia when both implemented similar public health measures? What made the difference, according to two independent studies funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), was not only how but also how rapidly different cities responded.
Cities where public health officials imposed multiple social containment measures within a few days after the first local cases were recorded cut peak weekly death rates by up to half compared with cities that waited just a few weeks to respond. Overall mortality was also lower in cities that implemented early interventions, but the effect was smaller. These conclusions — the results of systematic analyses of historical data to determine the effectiveness of public health measures in 1918 — are described in two articles published online this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
quote:
“These important papers suggest that a primary lesson of the 1918 influenza pandemic is that it is critical to intervene early,” says Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., director of NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which funded one of the studies. “While researchers are working very hard to develop pandemic influenza vaccines and increase the speed with which they can be made, nonpharmaceutical interventions may buy valuable time at the beginning of a pandemic while a targeted vaccine is being produced.”
quote:
The ideal way to contain a potential influenza pandemic would be to vaccinate large numbers of people before they were exposed to an influenza virus strain that is easily transmitted from person to person. Developing such a vaccine in advance, however, is difficult because an influenza virus mutates as it replicates, and over time these mutations can alter the virus enough that older vaccines are no longer effective. With current technologies, it would take months to develop a new vaccine after the first cases of pandemic influenza appear.
quote:
Schools, theaters, churches and dance halls in cities across the country were closed. Kansas City banned weddings and funerals if more than 20 people were to be in attendance. New York mandated staggered shifts at factories to reduce rush hour commuter traffic. Seattle’s mayor ordered his constituents to wear face masks. The first study found a clear correlation between the number of interventions applied and the resulting peak death rate seen. Perhaps more importantly, both studies showed that while interventions effectively mitigated the transmission of influenza virus in 1918, a critical factor in how much death rates were reduced was how soon the measures were put in place.
Officials in St. Louis introduced a broad series of public health measures to contain the flu within two days of the first reported cases. Philadelphia, New Orleans and Boston all used similar interventions, but they took longer to implement them, and as a result, peak mortality rates were higher. In the most extreme disparity, the peak mortality rate in St. Louis was only one-eighth that of Philadelphia, the worst-hit city in the survey. In contrast to St. Louis, Philadelphia imposed bans on public gatherings more than two weeks after the first infections were reported. City officials even allowed a city-wide parade to take place prior to imposing their bans.
If St. Louis had waited another week or two, they might have fared the same as Philadelphia, says the lead author on the first study, Richard Hatchett, M.D., an associate director for emergency preparedness at NIAID. Despite the fact that these cities had dramatically different outcomes early on, all the cities in the survey ultimately experienced significant epidemics because, in the absence of an effective vaccine, the virus continued to spread or recurred as cities relaxed their restrictions.
quote:
The second study also shows that the timing of when control measures were lifted played a major part. Cities that relaxed their restrictions after the peak of the pandemic passed often saw the re-emergence of infection and had to reintroduce restrictions, says Neil Ferguson, D.Phil., of Imperial College, London, the senior author on the second study. In their paper, Dr. Ferguson and his coauthor used mathematical models to reproduce the pattern of the 1918 pandemic in different cities. This allowed them to predict what would have happened if cities had changed the timing of interventions. In San Francisco, which they found to have the most effective measures, they estimate that deaths would have been 25 percent higher had city officials not implemented their interventions when they did. But had San Francisco left its controls in place continuously from September 1918 through May 1919, the analysis suggests, the city might have reduced deaths by more than 90 percent.
The fact that the early, nonpharmaceutical interventions were effective at the height of the pandemic can inform pandemic planners today, the authors of both studies say. In particular, the two studies lend weight to guidance that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently released on the use of nonpharmaceutical interventions during a pandemic (https://www.pandemicflu.gov/plan/community/mitigation.html(link is external)), which recommends precisely such a rapid early response.
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 8:02 am
Posted on 7/14/20 at 8:54 am to SummerOfGeorge
So you mean to tell me that the implementation of basic public health measures didn't wreck the world economy or permanently alter our "way of life"? Incredible.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 9:02 am to SummerOfGeorge
Anyone truly curious about pandemics in general and the Spanish Flu should read the John Barry book. It's fascinating - especially considering how little about the Spanish Flu is discussed or taught even in advanced college history studies, mainly because of the co-existing nature it had with World War I.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 9:02 am to Robot Santa
quote:
So you mean to tell me that the implementation of basic public health measures didn't wreck the world economy or permanently alter our "way of life"? Incredible.
Did that article say they completely shut the country down like we did?
Their measures paid off to the tune of 675,000 deaths in the United States. I wouldn't be doing a victory lap over this article.
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 9:22 am
Posted on 7/14/20 at 9:29 am to TideSaint
Biggest difference was the Spanish Flu mortality rates were higher for the very young, very old and strangely those between the ages of 25-35, whereas COVID19 only has that type of mortality rate for those > 65.
COVID19 is actually more deadly for older people than the Spanish Flu was. Of course, we have a lot more older people who are still living but have very feeble bodies than they did in 1918. Many of those who succumb to COVID19 today would have succumbed to something else already in 1918, and therefore weren't alive to die from the Spanish Flu. The 1928-29 influenza epidemic was much more similar to COVID19 in terms of age of deaths.
SPANISH FLU MORTALITY RATES
COVID19 is actually more deadly for older people than the Spanish Flu was. Of course, we have a lot more older people who are still living but have very feeble bodies than they did in 1918. Many of those who succumb to COVID19 today would have succumbed to something else already in 1918, and therefore weren't alive to die from the Spanish Flu. The 1928-29 influenza epidemic was much more similar to COVID19 in terms of age of deaths.
SPANISH FLU MORTALITY RATES
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 9:35 am
Posted on 7/14/20 at 9:45 am to TideSaint
quote:
Did that article say they completely shut the country down like we did?
We never completely shut the country down. Unless I missed something I was still able to go anywhere I needed to go that was necessary for me to sustain myself, plus a lot of other places that really weren't but managed to convince the government they were.
quote:
Schools, theaters, churches and dance halls in cities across the country were closed. Kansas City banned weddings and funerals if more than 20 people were to be in attendance. New York mandated staggered shifts at factories to reduce rush hour commuter traffic. Seattle’s mayor ordered his constituents to wear face masks.
This is as much or in some cases more than was done as a response to COVID. It didn't wreck the economy, it didn't permanently change anything about this country, and you can't pretend it did because history proves you wrong.
quote:
Their measures paid off to the tune of 675,000 deaths in the United States. I wouldn't be doing a victory lap over this article.
And it would have been significantly worse without those measures, which is clearly laid out in the article. No one is doing a victory lap. The point is that wearing a damn mask and not being able to go see a movie or go bowling isn't some unprecedented, tyrannical infringement on anyone's civil rights, nor does it pose some direct threat to life as we know it.
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 9:47 am
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News