Worrying there have been outbreaks in abbatoirs and meat packing plants in multiple countries, could add to the idea that the virus thrives in cold, damp temperatures and climates, in which case autumn /winter could be brutal. You'd like to think governments were frantically planning and preparing for this possibility (they have many months notice) but I suspect they aren't!
smackeddog wrote:Worrying there have been outbreaks in abbatoirs and meat packing plants in multiple countries, could add to the idea that the virus thrives in cold, damp temperatures and climates, in which case autumn /winter could be brutal. You'd like to think governments were frantically planning and preparing for this possibility (they have many months notice) but I suspect they aren't!
i also think the close high air conditioned environments cause quicker spread. it'a air flow imho. these hotter weather states now - most of these people are staying indoors with A/C's going. of course they aren't enforcing masks so if someone gets contaminated, i could see it spreading alot quicker indoors with air conditioning on.
djsunyc wrote:smackeddog wrote:Worrying there have been outbreaks in abbatoirs and meat packing plants in multiple countries, could add to the idea that the virus thrives in cold, damp temperatures and climates, in which case autumn /winter could be brutal. You'd like to think governments were frantically planning and preparing for this possibility (they have many months notice) but I suspect they aren't!
i also think the close high air conditioned environments cause quicker spread. it'a air flow imho. these hotter weather states now - most of these people are staying indoors with A/C's going. of course they aren't enforcing masks so if someone gets contaminated, i could see it spreading alot quicker indoors with air conditioning on.
Sounds right. Have to hope countries that actually are extensively testing AND doing contact tracing are accumulating very useful data, that will help us understand better where and the kinds of conditions the biggest spreads are happening so we can target those and make the next round of lockdowns more targeted (who am I kidding, there likely won't be any more lockdowns no matter how bad it gets).
Texas Loves Trump!!! Should do a rally there next!
talk to republicans and discuss masks, They made it political. Dumbest thing I have ever seen.
Talked to a friend today about Masks and he replied "Fauchi is changing his message all the time"........
Unreal how phuching dumb people are.
Nalod wrote:Texas Loves Trump!!! Should do a rally there next!
talk to republicans and discuss masks, They made it political. Dumbest thing I have ever seen.
Talked to a friend today about Masks and he replied "Fauchi is changing his message all the time"........
Unreal how phuching dumb people are.
From what I remember, Hillary wasn’t far off from taking Texas. Maybe with the virus taking over Texas, Trump can lose that country, I mean state. 
does anyone have a link that gives the hospitalization and death rates for each state?
more infections is bad but may not be an awful thing is hospitalizations/death rates aren't going up. my guess is that more younger people are getting infected which is why we haven't seen massive death rates so far.
Nalod wrote:Texas Loves Trump!!! Should do a rally there next!
talk to republicans and discuss masks, They made it political. Dumbest thing I have ever seen.
Talked to a friend today about Masks and he replied "Fauchi is changing his message all the time"........
Unreal how phuching dumb people are.
i will be a one trick pony again. trump, his administration, fox news and his gop cronies have killed tens of thousands of people with their handling of this.
djsunyc wrote:does anyone have a link that gives the hospitalization and death rates for each state?more infections is bad but may not be an awful thing is hospitalizations/death rates aren't going up. my guess is that more younger people are getting infected which is why we haven't seen massive death rates so far.
I think the one thing with death rates not going up is better treatment plans being developed - I think there was a news item about the one blood thinner helping prevent complications. NY & NYC didn't have that luxury, and hence looking at their death rates vs the idiots in TX might not be something you can argue with validly.
franco12 wrote:djsunyc wrote:does anyone have a link that gives the hospitalization and death rates for each state?more infections is bad but may not be an awful thing is hospitalizations/death rates aren't going up. my guess is that more younger people are getting infected which is why we haven't seen massive death rates so far.
I think the one thing with death rates not going up is better treatment plans being developed - I think there was a news item about the one blood thinner helping prevent complications. NY & NYC didn't have that luxury, and hence looking at their death rates vs the idiots in TX might not be something you can argue with validly.
median age going down means lower death rate as they should theoretically be healthier.
martin wrote:
Good news. Wonder the info he's leaving out, but he's confident.
BigDaddyG wrote:martin wrote:
Good news. Wonder the info he's leaving out, but he's confident.
Right, vaccine ready at end of year/beginning of next. Next obvious question: When can 200m+ get it?
Also, we see that normal Flu mutates from year to year and that's why we need yearly shots... same for COVID? If so, do we need to keep wearing masks and live under same precautions etc. going forward?
Does this mean... if you are positive for corona virus and then have the antibodies and they only last a certain amount of time, you can get the virus again? Is that what this is suggesting?
martin wrote:Does this mean... if you are positive for corona virus and then have the antibodies and they only last a certain amount of time, you can get the virus again? Is that what this is suggesting?
Unfortunately, yes it is. That would be the doomsday scenario, and would make going for 'herd immunity' absolutely crazy (because it could never be achieved). It might also explain why the rates of people who have had the virus are lower according to antibody testing, than anticipated (because by the time these tests are conducted, the initial wave of people had already lost their immunity)
If true, then you need either a vaccine (is a vaccine actually possible if natural immunity is lost so quickly?) or more effective treatment, and need to play for time until then.
States are already hemorrhaging their budgets
smackeddog wrote:martin wrote:Does this mean... if you are positive for corona virus and then have the antibodies and they only last a certain amount of time, you can get the virus again? Is that what this is suggesting?
Unfortunately, yes it is. That would be the doomsday scenario, and would make going for 'herd immunity' absolutely crazy (because it could never be achieved). It might also explain why the rates of people who have had the virus are lower according to antibody testing, than anticipated (because by the time these tests are conducted, the initial wave of people had already lost their immunity)
If true, then you need either a vaccine (is a vaccine actually possible if natural immunity is lost so quickly?) or more effective treatment, and need to play for time until then.
I'm thinking that gene vaccinations are the only option at this point. But do you really want to cut corners for testing if that's the case? And, as Martin mentioned above, how long would it to roll output an adequate supply?
