There is a petition going around for BC Hydro to reduce it's rates, or at least it's step 2 rate, since so many BC residents are staying home / stuck indoors.
COVID-19
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
You all should find this interesting.
Something happened in Canada on Tuesday, March 24 that has never happened before and hopefully will never happen again.
Not surprising. The mincing pimp is corrupt as hell.
Posted by: Stuminator
There is a petition going around for BC Hydro to reduce it's rates, or at least it's step 2 rate, since so many BC residents are staying home / stuck indoors.
How the fuck will BC Hydro pay for Smart Meters, Site C and IPPs then?
While the Haitian government is officially promoting confinement and social distancing, the stark reality is that most of the population are likely heading toward collective “herd immunity,” where many must choose to get infected in the street rather than die by hunger at home.
On Sunday, March 29, local medical experts interviewed on Radio Kiskeya, one of the country’s most important radio stations, suggested that up to 800,000 Haitians could perish from the virus. Large-scale foreign investment and monumental local efforts would need to be undertaken to avert such a catastrophe.
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/03/30/haiti-disaster-coronavirus-us/
I think the same type of thing will happen in India. A lot of folks there survive on what they make each day. If they stay home, they don't eat.
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
No one knows that. All these 'models' that you see are just that.
There are theories that it will mutate into a less deadly virus if left to run naturally.
We simply don't know and to claim anything other than that is simply speculation.
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
Especially if the medical infrastructure is subpar.
Posted by: Kieran
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
No one knows that. All these 'models' that you see are just that.
There are theories that it will mutate into a less deadly virus if left to run naturally.
We simply don't know and to claim anything other than that is simply speculation.
People need to have more faith in models. Models are just that, but "that" is our very best estimate considering all the data available. We can never know the future 100%, so why would we look outside of models, our best guess based on known facts? They may be wrong sometimes, but they represent the best we have. In the case of a virus, they can be very good because their spread is totally mathematical. We don't need to know the virus intimately to see the patterns in the spread. Anyone that suggests they know how it will mutate is the one speculating.
What we do know is that the virus spreads quickly and can overwhelm the health care system. I can't imagine a scenario where it would be better to stay home than go to the hospital for treatment with a severe case.
Posted by: chupacabra
Posted by: Kieran
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
No one knows that. All these 'models' that you see are just that.
There are theories that it will mutate into a less deadly virus if left to run naturally.
We simply don't know and to claim anything other than that is simply speculation.
People need to have more faith in models. Models are just that, but "that" is our very best estimate considering all the data available. We can never know the future 100%, so why would we look outside of models, our best guess based on known facts? They may be wrong sometimes, but they represent the best we have. In the case of a virus, they can be very good because their spread is totally mathematical. We don't need to know the virus intimately to see the patterns in the spread. Anyone that suggests they know how it will mutate is the one speculating.
What we do know is that the virus spreads quickly and can overwhelm the health care system. I can't imagine a scenario where it would be better to stay home than go to the hospital for treatment with a severe case.
I'm not saying one point is more valid than the other. But the realility is these models are based on such a tiny percentage of the world's population. More data is coming in everyday which can change the outcome.
There are also many variables at play (demographic, blood types, dna, health, wealth etc) that possibly we might see some very interesting outcomes once this is finished.
And who knows we might see that the West didn't actually manage the situation the best.
Posted by: Kieran
Posted by: chupacabra
Posted by: Kieran
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: Kieran
Its going to be interesting to see how the 3rd world countries fair in relation to the West. Will herd immunity prove actually better in the long run?
I've seen arguments for that they might actually get it over and done more quickly with less deaths.
Allowing it to spread 'naturally' will certainly get it over with more quickly, but it absolutely will not result in fewer deaths.
No one knows that. All these 'models' that you see are just that.
There are theories that it will mutate into a less deadly virus if left to run naturally.
We simply don't know and to claim anything other than that is simply speculation.
People need to have more faith in models. Models are just that, but "that" is our very best estimate considering all the data available. We can never know the future 100%, so why would we look outside of models, our best guess based on known facts? They may be wrong sometimes, but they represent the best we have. In the case of a virus, they can be very good because their spread is totally mathematical. We don't need to know the virus intimately to see the patterns in the spread. Anyone that suggests they know how it will mutate is the one speculating.
What we do know is that the virus spreads quickly and can overwhelm the health care system. I can't imagine a scenario where it would be better to stay home than go to the hospital for treatment with a severe case.
I'm not saying one point is more valid than the other. But the realility is these models are based on such a tiny percentage of the world's population. More data is coming in everyday which can change the outcome.
There are also many variables at play (demographic, blood types, dna, health, wealth etc) that possibly we might see some very interesting outcomes once this is finished.
And who knows we might see that the West didn't actually manage the situation the best.
Fair enough. There could be a number of factors that change how this thing operates. I find it interesting that in Canada BC seems to be doing the best at flattening the curve so far and the same can be said about Washington in the US. Does climate play a role? Hard to say yet.
Yeah I've been wondering that also. Maybe all that fresh sea air has something to do with it.
I was looking at the numbers Californa vs NY. Bigger population in Cal than NY but less cases / deaths. But then someone pointed out that everyone drives in Cal, so less chance to virus to spread. But maybe just down to testing numbers?
Sweden is doing the herd immunity thing with social distancing. Bars / restuarants are still open. Will be interesting how that plays out.
I think what is clear though is that smoking doesn't do you any favours. Spain and Italy have big death numbers. If you have visited recently you'd see that so many people still smoke. I was in Madrid 5 years after the smoking indoor ban came in and people were still lighting up in bars. Same in Italy 2 years earlier.
Last edited by: Kieran on March 31, 2020, 10:29 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
So, sex, or no sex?
Covid-19 survives up to 24 hours and on plastics and stainless steel two to three days. However, the so-called infection dose of the virus is significantly reduced on all surfaces over these periods. According to Germany’s Health Ministry, a lubrication infection is possible. In general however, human coronaviruses are not particularly stable on dry surfaces. So far, there have been no cases in Germany in which people have been shown to have been infected by contact with contaminated objects.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/03/31/covid-19-in-germany-explaining-a-low-death-rate/
Last edited by: tungsten on March 31, 2020, 10:52 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Posted by: Kieran
Yeah I've been wondering that also. Maybe all that fresh sea air has something to do with it.
I was looking at the numbers Californa vs NY. Bigger population in Cal than NY but less cases / deaths. But then someone pointed out that everyone drives in Cal, so less chance to virus to spread. But maybe just down to testing numbers?
Sweden is doing the herd immunity thing with social distancing. Bars / restuarants are still open. Will be interesting how that plays out.
I think what is clear though is that smoking doesn't do you any favours. Spain and Italy have big death numbers. If you have visited recently you'd see that so many people still smoke. I was in Madrid 5 years after the smoking indoor ban came in and people were still lighting up in bars. Same in Italy 2 years earlier.
Italy has an older population, smokes as you say, live intergenerationally, and live in walkable communities. It sounds like the perfect storm.
Forum jump:
