Coronavirus is at my job

[Klorox]

I’m a healthcare worker at a hospital in NJ.

We just had a confirmed case here.

I’m scared. I have kids at home. My parents were supposed to visit this weekend. I didn’t have any direct contact with this patient but I know I walked past their room without being told.

My father is immune-compromised and I’ve cancelled my parents visit this weekend.

I know I’m probably safe (I’m 49, in decent health), but it’s the older people and kids I’m most worried about.

[Aedilred]

While some allowance must be made for the unreliability of data at this stage, the Wuhan evidence suggests that children are much less vulnerable to the disease than adults. There have been no deaths of children under the age of 9 and the mortality rate for ages 10-19 is 0.2%.

So I wouldn't worry too much about your kids with regard to this: the elderly and yourself seem to be more vulnerable. That said, presumably kids can still act as reservoirs and it's obviously a good idea for them to practise good hygiene anyway.

[Klorox]

While some allowance must be made for the unreliability of data at this stage, the Wuhan evidence suggests that children are much less vulnerable to the disease than adults. There have been no deaths of children under the age of 9 and the mortality rate for ages 10-19 is 0.2%.

So I wouldn't worry too much about your kids with regard to this: the elderly and yourself seem to be more vulnerable. That said, presumably kids can still act as reservoirs and it's obviously a good idea for them to practise good hygiene anyway.

Wouldn’t you worry though?

Also, I didn’t place this in my above post, but one of my kids is asthmatic (more susceptible) and my wife diabetic (more susceptible).

I’m scared. I know people are blowing this off, but it really needs to be taken seriously.

[Tarnesh]

Hi Klorox,

Writing as I am from Italy, I think I can relate; it looks like this virus will be with us for a while.
Fear won't help, obviously, but it's certainly a very human reaction, and better than pretending nothing is wrong. We acted like everything was peachy at the beginning, and look how well it turned out for us.
I think you have done well to cancel the visit to your parents; better safe than sorry.

As Aedilred wrote, at the moment kids look to be relatively safe, so there is this one bright point in all this mess.
That said... if your family can stay at home for a while, now it would probably be a good time to do so.
Individually, avoiding uneccessary contacts and disinfecting often seems to be the only measures that reduce the spreading of the virus.

The next few weeks might be very intense for all of you healtcare workers, so remember to take some time for yourself to unwind, both online and in real life.

Stay strong!

[Astral Avenger]

Best of luck at your work and keeping your family healthy.

I teach an assortment of outdoor classes in Minnesota (USA), and the climbing wall that I teach at is shut down for the month of March. Hopefully we're taking enough preventative measures here to manage the spread of CORVID-19, but it still sucks to loose the shifts. The outdoor educator/enthusiast side of me hates that we aren't teaching people how to climb, but the statistics major that did a bit of my studies on public health and population network sampling (related to disease transmission) side of me hates that our stores are open at all.

Public Service Announcement:

Masks keep your germs in
Don't repel outside ones
Leave them for medics

[Melayl]

Klorox,

I can understand being concerned about your family, particularly your parents. Being a nurse,and dealing with contagious patients, I can relate. However, I would like to try to assuage some of those concerns.

Merely walking by the room of a diseased patient is not going to expose you to the virus. Coronavirus patients would be on Droplet Precautions, so you would need to be within 3-5 feet of a coughing patient to be exposed, or in physical contact with something that they had contaminated (without it being cleaned), and then touch your face or mucus membranes without first washing or sanitizing your hands in order to risk infection. In other words, if you aren't working directly with them, your infection risk is next to zero.

[Wrong information] Furthermore, the death rate for the coronavirus is very small, much less than that of influenza. [/wrong information] I'm sorry, that was completely incorrect information, and entirely my fault!

The news has been making a big deal out of the virus, too much of a deal, honestly.

I would recommend you go to the the CDC website (www.cdc.gov) for further information.

In the immortal words of Douglas Adams, Don't Panic. :smallwink:

[factotum]

Furthermore, the death rate for the coronavirus is very small, much less than that of influenza. The news has been making a big deal out of the virus, too much of a deal, honestly.


Sorry, that's plain wrong? The death rate from coronavirus is around 3% of infected people, while 'flu is maybe 0.1%. The only reason there are more deaths from 'flu than coronavirus so far is because there are a lot more cases of it.

[Maelstrom]

Furthermore, the death rate for the coronavirus is very small, much less than that of influenza. The news has been making a big deal out of the virus, too much of a deal, honestly.



If you consider 25 - 40 times more as 'very small, much less', then yes, you are in a world of your own (from your listed location).

[Aedilred]

Wouldn’t you worry though?

Also, I didn’t place this in my above post, but one of my kids is asthmatic (more susceptible) and my wife diabetic (more susceptible).

I’m scared. I know people are blowing this off, but it really needs to be taken seriously.
I’m not a parent, so the part of the brain that automatically worries about one’s children remains inactive in my case. But I can understand concern for their wellbeing, especially if some of them are immunocompromised.

Nevertheless I think one has to try to be rational. There are a lot of dangers in the world of which this is just one. To put it in perspective, and again based on current data which may not be reliable, the risk to under-10s from Covid-19 is considerably lower than, say, the risk of being struck by lightning. There are bigger threats to worry about in day-to-day life, like getting run over, or falling down the stairs.

It does need to be taken seriously, but it is more of a macroscopic problem than an individual one. A disease which kills 1% of the population is a massive problem for governments and for society: it will tank the economy and cause strain on public health services, supply chains, etc. and that will in turn cause death and suffering.

But at an individual level, even if you do catch it, which is not guaranteed, you're overwhelmingly likely to make a full recovery, and so is everyone you know and care about. For the elderly and immunocompromised the risk is obviously higher, but the odds are still very much in their favour especially if they're able to get medical attention.

It seems to me there is a very real risk here of panic and overreaction doing more damage than the disease itself. See for instance, at a relatively minor level, the rush buying of face masks, which unless you're infected or in very close contact with someone who is, have negligible effect on spread of the disease, but which led to a shortage for areas which need it for legitimate purposes (healthcare etc.)

It is entirely possible I am underreacting, but I do feel like the best thing we can do is maintain good hygiene practices and otherwise go about our lives as normal until we're told to do otherwise.


Sorry, that's plain wrong? The death rate from coronavirus is around 3% of infected people, while 'flu is maybe 0.1%. The only reason there are more deaths from 'flu than coronavirus so far is because there are a lot more cases of it.

The latest figures I've heard are closer to 1%, but that's still a lot higher than seasonal flu, indeed. Compare, however, with SARS, which had a mortality rate of about 10%.

[darkrose50]

I think that this is my first pandemic (evidently it is my second, there was one in 1977). I am in Chicago, but we (the rest of the USA) may be a week away from where Italy is. I was hoping for 3-5 weeks from where Seattle is.

On the way to work I often stop at Target and pick up breakfast and lunch. Today there were about twelve times as many folks in the store, and people were buying toilet paper like crazy.

I bought the important stuff this morning … sixteen bars of Cadbury chocolate.

I also picked up:
1 case of toilet paper (I am up to two cases)
1 case of Kleenex (I am up to three 6-packs)
2 boxes of instant rice
2 large jars of peanut butter
2 cases of Ensure (12-packs)
1-pound of flour (my 12-year-old daughter has taken to making noodles, so it might be fun to have something to do that you can eat)
1 Lego set (Harry Potter train) … I am hoping that it will be fun to build with my 10-year and 12-year old if we get cooped-up.

Last week I bought a few of those squeezable jelly containers, and two boxes of gluten-free waffles (for peanut butter and jelly).

Mostly normal stuff for me (though I don't eat that much rice), but we might be held up in the house for 2-weeks.

I should pick up some more gluten-free waffles (peanut butter and jelly eatin' waffles), and some more ensure (the 48-cases from Costco … but, going there would be a nightmare).

My wife will likely pick up some stuff on the way home from work. I will likely pick up some perishables foods as well (things that should not be sitting in my car while I am at work).

-----

I understand that this is 10x as deadly as the flue.

Most likely we will just be told to stay home for a few weeks.

If this was killing children, then there would be a much MUCH higher level of panic.

-----

My work is starting up a work-from-home option for most (?) of the company.

One of the questions that my company asked in the survey was "How far from your modem/router is your workstation at home?" I was like bi*ch please I will be 1-foot from my modem/router with a wire connected directly from the computer to the modem/router. I ain't no laptop-usin' wireless video game playin' gamer. I use me some speeeed wire! I also somewhat grognard out over having a "proper" computer.

-----

Well they just closed an office building ~1-mile away from my work office for the corona virus (downtown Chicago). The individual fell ill on the 5th, and tested positive recently. That was about a week ago.

[Klorox]

https://www.upworthy.com/coronavirus-doctor-hospital-italy

[Chen]

Sorry, that's plain wrong? The death rate from coronavirus is around 3% of infected people, while 'flu is maybe 0.1%. The only reason there are more deaths from 'flu than coronavirus so far is because there are a lot more cases of it.

3% of confirmed infected people. Considering you can be asymptomatic and still be infected means that the actual death rate is likely far lower. It was somewhere around 0.7% (IIRC) on that cruise ship that was initially quarantined and that's a pretty broad spectrum of people to be tested (though even there you have a bit of a bias towards older people which would make the death rate worse).

[Grey_Wolf_c]

3% of confirmed infected people. Considering you can be asymptomatic and still be infected means that the actual death rate is likely far lower.

All that is true for the flu as well. Not everyone that catches the flu any given year is accounted for. The death rate given for it is, I'd imagine, also based on confirmed cases.


It was somewhere around 0.7% (IIRC) on that cruise ship that was initially quarantined and that's a pretty broad spectrum of people to be tested (though even there you have a bit of a bias towards older people which would make the death rate worse).

If you mean the Diamond Princess, they are up to 7 deaths out of 696 patients (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/), with 364 still not recovered & 32 in critical condition, and thus might still go up, but is past 1% already.

Grey Wolf

[Strigon]

All that is true for the flu as well. Not everyone that catches the flu any given year is accounted for. The death rate given for it is, I'd imagine, also based on confirmed cases.


Technically true, but the flu has been around much longer, with much more reliable data. I'd guess the mortality rate for the flu is much more well-defined than the novel coronavirus.

In any case, Klorox, as a health care professional, you're sort of on the front lines for the current battle. It makes sense for you to be on heightened alert. Having said that, you should also know that there isn't currently any significant risk to you or your family. Both patients and coworkers are going to rely on you to continue working throughout the crisis, and it's going to be a big problem if you're worried about even walking past someone's room who had the disease.

What I'd reccomend for you is a "one step further" approach. You know the virus is within the hospital, so act as though it's one step further along - spreading to a small number of staff/patients. Wash your hands, don't touch your face, keep distance between yourself and others as much as possible. If it begins to actually spread, act as though it has spread one step further. Perhaps after that, act as though you did have the virus, and work to keep your family somewhat isolated. If you proceed along that plan, you have the relief of knowing that you're not only responding to what the virus has done, but you're proactively responding to what it could do next. Don't worry yourself by waiting until it begins to spread before taking further action - stay one step ahead. But only one step. Any further and you're giving in to panic for little additional protection.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Technically true, but the flu has been around much longer, with much more reliable data. I'd guess the mortality rate for the flu is much more well-defined than the novel coronavirus.

Possibly, but I doubt anyone in this thread is an actual expert, so when I read the ECDC say that the coronavirus is 20-30 times more deadly than the flu (https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/novel-coronavirus-china/questions-answers), I believe them over the assertions of a random poster.

Grey Wolf

[mjasghar]

Different populations though
In China it was a city mainly full of younger adults - meanwhile in Europe its a population with a much higher population of elderly people
Add in general wealth leading to higher proportions of those elderly having health conditions like heart conditions
And then add in that in western countries many elderly people end up living in care homes with others of their age and the prospects are the mortality rate will be much higher
Unfortunately people were too greedy for Chinese tourist spending to do what should have been done back around Chinese New Year and stop flights from China

[Scarlet Knight]

Wouldn’t you worry though?

Also, I didn’t place this in my above post, but one of my kids is asthmatic (more susceptible) and my wife diabetic (more susceptible).

I’m scared. I know people are blowing this off, but it really needs to be taken seriously.

I'm not sure if this will help, but if you work in a hospital, you're already trained better than most at keeping your family safe.

Everyday when you go to work you face some really nasty organisms on every/any surface there. You have already been trained how to protect yourself and the people around you.

Remember the same principles you use to keep from cross infecting other patients, keep your wits, and you'll do fine.

And if things get real bad, you'll remember why medicine is considered such a noble profession.

[McSkrag]

@Klorox - I feel you. My mom is in her 70's and has asthma and my niece is immunocompromised due to a kidney transplant. I'm worried.

Right now we just don't know how bad it is going to get. But there is still room for hope. Other countries have shown that testing, quarantines, and social distancing do work to slow and limit the spread - the "flatten the curve" concept. We can see this effect in China and South Korea. This is important because mortality rates are much lower with proper healthcare.

This is a great article on the subject:
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

I hope you and your family will be okay.

[snowblizz]

Unfortunately people were too greedy for Chinese tourist spending to do what should have been done back around Chinese New Year and stop flights from China

That's not right. It's not Chinese tourists spreading it, it is more people who visited China to do business there. Basically you could flip the entire statement and say people were too greedy for that shiny Chinese money and should not have gone there back around Chinese New Year and we should have stopped flights *to* China then.

It is ignorant and useless to blame one group people for the spread of the virus when the entire human population is effectively migratory in this day and age. We are effectively all to blame for the spread.

I know of more cases of people who caught covid-19 form being in the USA than of Chinese tourists spreading it here.

[Maelstrom]

That's not right. It's not Chinese tourists spreading it, it is more people who visited China to do business there. Basically you could flip the entire statement and say people were too greedy for that shiny Chinese money and should not have gone there back around Chinese New Year and we should have stopped flights *to* China then.

It is ignorant and useless to blame one group people for the spread of the virus when the entire human population is effectively migratory in this day and age. We are effectively all to blame for the spread.

I know of more cases of people who caught covid-19 form being in the USA than of Chinese tourists spreading it here.

Well said :thumbs up:

[snowblizz]

Oh, and one thing that has bothered me from the OP I'm not sure I seen adressed.


Klorox works at a hospital, surely that workplace is the *first* place to ask for advice and opinions? Doesn't said hospital have some kind of information scheme? Shouldn't staff be briefed about covid-19, what is know, what isn't, what not to worry about etc. etc. Most of us here can only give muggle opinions after all.

[Mordar]

Oh, and one thing that has bothered me from the OP I'm not sure I seen adressed.


Klorox works at a hospital, surely that workplace is the *first* place to ask for advice and opinions? Doesn't said hospital have some kind of information scheme? Shouldn't staff be briefed about covid-19, what is know, what isn't, what not to worry about etc. etc. Most of us here can only give muggle opinions after all.

Understandable to think so, but not necessarily. If in the US, your local and state health departments are a better and more authoritative source. As mentioned, the CDC also provides primary guidance and is the standard of reference for those LHDs.

We (yes, I am at an LHD) urge sensible precautions and attentiveness to information from HHS, CDC and state/local HDs. The three absolute guidelines are (1) wash hands frequently, (2) avoid touching your face, (3) if sick, stay home. We are strongly urging medically fragile individuals (including the elderly) to avoid unnecessary contact with virtually everyone, and recommend all of our residents avoid unnecessary contact (no handshakes!!!).

The unknowns in the denominator are making any estimates extremely difficult, but we're seeing likely projections of 3x-10x flu mortality rate for COVID-19. Similarly, likely projections are up to 80% will be asymptomatic or very mildly symptomatic.

It will be bumpy for at least the next 6 weeks here. Buckle up, be reasonably smart, follow the three darn rules above (not just now, but always!!), and take care of each other!

- M

[Telonius]

My daughter's school just announced it's closing for the next four weeks. (Two weeks at the governor's orders, week 4 was already scheduled for Spring Break, and I guess they figured there would be approximately zero learning happening if they opened for week 3). Apparently they're going to be doing distance learning for the duration.

My elderly mother-in-law lives with us, so I'm actually pretty happy to have a good excuse to work from home for the next three weeks. I use public transit regularly (the subway I take services an international airport); so I've already been taking precautions not to touch anything on the way in.

Wishing good Fortitude saves for everybody!

[Melayl]

Sorry, that's plain wrong? The death rate from coronavirus is around 3% of infected people, while 'flu is maybe 0.1%. The only reason there are more deaths from 'flu than coronavirus so far is because there are a lot more cases of it.


If you consider 25 - 40 times more as 'very small, much less', then yes, you are in a world of your own (from your listed location).

You are both correct, and my apologies for posting misinformation!!!
That information came from my misremembering an interview with a former CDC employee who now works for Harvard. I watched it at he end on my 3rd 12 hour Night shift, and obviously did not hear what I thought I heard. My fault entirely.
Thank you both very much for calling me out on that! I absolutely hate incorrect and incomplete medical information. I hate it even more when I'm the one who screws up!

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Aedilred
But at an individual level, even if you do catch it, which is not guaranteed, you're overwhelmingly likely to make a full recovery, and so is everyone you know and care about.

I think this is the key point. Of course the situation should be taken seriously, but the media’s breathless fearmongering doesn’t help anyone.

I was in the post office earlier today and overheard the employees talking about people in my area sending huge boxes of toilet paper to relatives in New York, which is apparently experiencing shortages. Panic buying of toilet paper doesn’t help anyone either.

In my state the entire K-12 system has just been shut down for the next two weeks. Hardly anyone is wearing breath masks, but the coveted N95s are selling out as soon as they arrive, never mind that health workers need them more.

Also, yesterday someone tried to give me a “leg shake,” which is apparently supposed to be like a handshake but involving shin contact. I just waved.

[Peelee]

I think this is the key point. Of course the situation should be taken seriously, but the media’s breathless fearmongering doesn’t help anyone.

Can you give me an example of such fearmongering?

[Tarmor]

Can you give me an example of such fearmongering?

I feel that the internet in general is full of fearmongering, less so actual TV and radio stations, etc. Only a week ago there were heaps of unverified videos of of doors in China being welded shut, supposedly with Covid-19 sufferers within. Where else but media is most of the fear and panic generated by?
Both WHO and the CDC have whole web-pages about "sharing facts, not fear" and "myth busting" regarding the virus. This in in direct response to bad reporting, false reporting , and fearmongering. I'm sure a quick search of Twitter and Facebook would find heaps.

Here's a Daily Mail Aust article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7973915/Coronavirus-China-Police-lock-patient-home-vigilantes-beat-sufferer.html (7th Feb) that I consider full of unverified information and inaccurate statistics. Focusing on unconfirmed video and news of police locking people in, or being attacked with cleavers, or people beating up possible sufferers is not constructive reporting of news. If its not confirmed or verified, you are just adding to the panic, and fear of the disease.
The article gives what appear to be accurate figures for confirmed cases, and deaths. When they jump halfway through from 565 to 4500 deaths without noting that the later part of the article has to have been added at a much later date, then this is bad reporting. When reporting symptoms of Covid-19 they fail to mention breathing problems and make it sound like if you have cold/flu symptoms then you have Covid-19. Also bad reporting, which encourages fear and panic.

[Peelee]

I feel that the internet in general is full of fearmongering, less so actual TV and radio stations, etc. [snip]Where else but media is most of the fear and panic generated by?

Access to the world wide web generally means access to numerous ways to quickly and easily assess whether a website is sensationalist or not. Classifying the entirety of the internet as "the media" is casting so broad of a net that any virtually assertion about the media can be made with some basis of support, regardless of how true said assertion may be.

[Xyril]

Access to the world wide web generally means access to numerous ways to quickly and easily assess whether a website is sensationalist or not. Classifying the entirety of the internet as "the media" is casting so broad of a net that any virtually assertion about the media can be made with some basis of support, regardless of how true said assertion may be.

Also, it's a borderline misleading use of the term. While the word "media" certainly is a broad term, pretty much anybody who frequently speaks English in the United States uses--or at the very least is aware of the commonplace use--of the term "the media" to refer specifically to certain entities with enough power and influence to produce or curate what reaches a wide audience. When it comes to content-producers on the internet, we probably won't ever reach a consensus on where to draw that line, but we mostly agree that there is some line somewhere. To pretend otherwise in order to use tabloids or minor blogs as "evidence" to support some assertion about national news networks is... misguided at best, and more likely disingenuous.

[Aedilred]

The example Tarmor gave is from the Daily Mail - and if that's not an example of "the media" then what is?

[dehro]

I am not a scientist or particularly knowledgeable in the medical field. I did write something on facebook.
I am going to post it here in spoilers, on account of it being a wall of text.

map tracking the spread of the virus in real time with the official updates (https://infographics.channelnewsasia.com/covid-19/map.html?fbclid=IwAR2IpPDNT3Bs3bxlrfEbORHimrdKU_Y6 DymNbww9eSNrm2pkbph6NkvBNSA)

Considerations that are mostly for my international friends, who, I believe, do not fully grasp the situation that is going to hit them.

Currently the Italian government has taken the stance that it has closed all non-essential state-run services, keeping public transportation,
mail services and little else beyond the national health system running at a reduced capacity.
All B2C business concerns are closed by decree, and financial support is being set in place for the people in those sectors (horeca,
leisure industry and so on). Most shops are mandatorily closed as well, with exceptions made for stores that sell food and other
goods that are of absolute necessity, such as pharmacies).
This measure is however not applied for B2B companies, the industrial sector and all areas of production of goods and services.
What this means is that it is up to the owners of those companies to take the step to voluntarily close shop and send their workforce
home for a few weeks. Most companies choose not to do this, because there is no expectation of financial relief for those companies.
So, business as usual as long as possible, with the spectre of recession looming and encouraging to keep going.
One more reason for this appears to be that, should Italy actually put the entire country on hold and halt all production activity, the
country would go into automatic economic default. I Unless some form of assistance or break can be negotiated between Italy and it's
EU partners, it is very unlikely that the government will ever put pen to paper and force the country in a real total freeze.
The example of Wuhan seems to indicate that this is not enough; that keeping at least part of the population working and on the
streets, will counter all measures taken to defeat the spread of the virus.
Also in Italy a case could be made that this is true, because we have seen that in the original red zone villages, where everything
and everyone were asked to stay home and not go to work, 2 weeks later, no new notifications of COVID19 cases are appearing.
My personal expectation is that Italy will not see the decline that Wuhan is now experiencing, at least not at the same descent rate,
and this will negatively impact the economy for a longer time than would be strictly necessary.

The reasons for me writing about Italy instead of France, the market I work with, or the Netherlands where I currently live, aside
from the obvious personal connection (EDIT: I am half Italian and most of my immediate family lives there), is that everything seems to
indicate that the rest of the world is not following the example of Wuhan, just like Italy is still not committed, at least not fully… and they
are also not learning from observing what is happening in Italy.
Initial studies indicate that this lack of action is replicating the spread of the virus at virtually identical rates in every country affected. The
distinction being a matter of time and available medical facilities (specifically ICU units and assisted breathing equipment).
The numbers are the same, if one allows for a couple of weeks delay.

The stunning fact that governments other than that of Italy are still reacting very slowly to the situation, refusing to take draconian action
in a preventive manner, is the result of a sense of being removed from the situation, and of the misguided notion that “we will cope better,
our infrastructure is better” and that the damage on the economy would far outweigh the loss of life and medical emergency that might, or might not, occur.
The numbers say that it will occur. That hospitals will have to go from being prepared to survival mode and choose who to help by triage.
It is only a matter of time. This time would give other countries the opportunity to enact strict rules to counter as much as possible the speed
at which the contagion spreads. This would allow to, at least partially, slow the rate of infection to such a speed as could be more manageable
and would allow the hospitals to cope with the numbers.
Why this is not being done is a matter of political expediency and an attempt to avoid panicked reactions to a large scale.
However, the situation is confusing and the issue of personal responsibility arises. How much can one let this situation affect the daily course of
life and business? Where lies the balance between “I’m feeling ok, I might already have the virus but hey… I’m not in danger and I am being considerate” and
“if I go outside there is a good chance that I will interact with someone who might get the virus from me, someone who in turn might get in touch
with someone who has a compromised immune system and who might suffer long term damage or even die because of it.”
Where does our responsibility stop?
From Italy, the answer is becoming clearer by the day. The #Istayhome tag is what rules the debate and everybody is starting to realise that all
non-essential activities and contact with others is costing lives every day, maybe not ours, but someone’s, most likely not even that far removed from us.
I hear many people talk about natural selection, about the virus affecting those who are already of compromised health. This is not true. The triage
numbers are now such that they are taking in otherwise healthy patients in their forties. Anybody older than that gets turned away.
I would invite you to consider that Coronavirus is not the only issue. When hospitals are at full capacity and they have to select and treat the patient
with more chances of survival, those who do not make the cut die, whether it is from Coronavirus or something else that they could handily survive if
they were to receive the proper treatment. They die.
That is the crude reality of it. Furthermore, consider this: Coronavirus is not a clean death. People do not enter a coma and waste away painlessly,
assisted by painkillers. Instead they are lucid and die coughing and wheezing, knowing that the breaths they are counting are going to be their last
ones. Knowing their bodies will be buried hastily, that the best they can do to say their goodbyes is a quick videochat.
Do not justify going for a pint, to the gym, going running in crowded streets, or not wanting to disturb your routine or put up with your smelly housemates,
by saying that it is natural selection at work. Please.
If you can, make the choice to stay home. Do your bit to stave the spreading of the virus, whether by not catching it or by not spreading it should
you be infected but asymptomatic. You will never know for certain, but you might just save a life.
You will never know, because only serious cases are being tested and will be tested, whether that cough you had/have was just a cough or the
virus. Your government will most likely not tell you to stay home until the time comes when they have run out of room in the morgues (this is
currently happening in Italy, where hospitals are being improvised in public spaces such as trade centers). Your government will not help your
big or small business stay afloat, and it will not tell you to close for a few days, or weeks. If your country is not yet overrun by the situation,
consider what you can do as your government drags it's feet.
It is up to you.
Can you work from home? Then do that. Can you afford to miss out on a few weeks of work? Or classes? Then do that.
Can you refrain from going to visit your elderly parents for a while? DEFINITELY do that!
Can you do without going to the pub for a few weeks? Please do.
No, keeping the schools closed is to stop the spreading of the virus, not to give your children an opportunity for sleepovers, private parties and
other forms of group activity.
And when this all blows over, maybe consider spending some of your holiday money in Italy. It's a nice place to visit, and it can use the help.

Finally, maybe consider not to use half a roll of toilet paper every time you go for a wee… those empty shelves in the supermarket are just a ridiculous sight.

Despite everything, stay positive, keep smiling and stay safe.
A.
https://images2.corriereobjects.it/methode_image/2020/03/10/Salute/Foto%20Salute%20-%20Trattate/confronto-kVeB-U31701164488601yFI-1084x816@Corriere-Web-Sezioni.jpg?v=202003101733
https://images2.corriereobjects.it/methode_image/2020/03/10/Salute/Foto%20Salute%20-%20Trattate/germania%[email protected]?v=202003101733
According to the official data, Germany was in line with the mathematical model, yesterday.

P.S., my SO, who lives in what is now the epicenter region of Italy, just informed me that requests are being made for people to bring tablets with simcards to the main hospitals,
so people can say goodbye to their loved ones..

[Peelee]

The example Tarmor gave is from the Daily Mail - and if that's not an example of "the media" then what is?

I'm not British, but it's my understanding that the Daily Mail is a tabloid, roughly on par with The Sun over there, or Weekly World News or National Enquirer over here. None of which I view as "the media," as tabloids are inherently (and arguably be design) unreliable and sensationalistic.

[Aedilred]

I'm not British, but it's my understanding that the Daily Mail is a tabloid, roughly on par with The Sun over there, or Weekly World News or National Enquirer over here. None of which I view as "the media," as tabloids are inherently (and arguably be design) unreliable and sensationalistic.

The tabloid/broadsheet distinction is no longer particularly useful in the UK, as only two daily newspapers still come in broadsheet format and one of them is the FT.

The Mail is widely disliked, but that is largely by way of reaction to its influence: it's website is the most-visited English-language news site worldwide. It presents itself as a serious paper and frequently wins newspaper awards. It still does proper journalism, even if people criticise its editorial angle. Wikipedia categorises it as "middle market", and it's not really comparable to the true red-top tabloids like the Sun/Enquirer etc.

When identifying the "traditional/mainstrem print media" in this country it would probably be the first title on the list, now that the Times is no longer widely taken as the paper of record.

[Xyril]

The example Tarmor gave is from the Daily Mail - and if that's not an example of "the media" then what is?

Context matters.

Quote from Tarmor, emphasis mine:


I feel that the internet in general is full of fearmongering, less so actual TV and radio stations, etc. Only a week ago there were heaps of unverified videos of of doors in China being welded shut, supposedly with Covid-19 sufferers within. Where else but media is most of the fear and panic generated by?

He then linked a Daily Mail article--a typical representative of a lot of online articles--that cover the reaction to videos that started circulating before the article was published. It acknowledged that the videos were unverified, but they've also already been spread around so much that the reaction to them is very real. The fear and panic was caused by those videos, and even without--and at this point, let's just stipulate to your generous categorization of the Daily Mail as "the media"--a legitimate media outlet covering it, those videos were already widely disseminated through other outlets.

Is this sort of thing news? Personally, I think if it relates to something important enough and has a big enough impact, unverified videos and pictures spread online might be legitimately newsworthy. However, even if you assume that this fits into that category, I find that the way the DM covered this was somewhat irresponsible. They didn't emphasize the unverified nature of those videos and contextualize what it means in an obvious way. Normally I don't feel like it should be media's job to dumb down reporting with the sole purpose of making sure that the laziest and the dumbest of us don't miss any important points--despite their best efforts to do so. However, in situations where those uncritical readers are likely to create a strong ripple effect in the public response, it would be responsible to take them into account.

[Peelee]

The Mail is widely disliked, but that is largely by way of reaction to its influence: it's website is the most-visited English-language news site worldwide.

I tried to verify this and couldn't one way or the other, but suffice it to say that I would be flabbergasted to find out that it's more visited than BBC News or Fox News (which I would otherwise assume are the biggest news organizations in the UK and US, respectively, let alone worldwide). Like, if you said it was more visited than The Guardian, I'd be surprised but not overly so, but against the media juggernauts?

Granted, I could be surprised by BBC News, and you did specify the website only, but still. Imean, at this point I'm prepared to be flabbergasted... but I'd still be flabbergasted.

[Aedilred]

Context matters.

Quote from Tarmor, emphasis mine:


He then linked a Daily Mail article--a typical representative of a lot of online articles--that cover the reaction to videos that started circulating before the article was published. It acknowledged that the videos were unverified, but they've also already been spread around so much that the reaction to them is very real. The fear and panic was caused by those videos, and even without--and at this point, let's just stipulate to your generous categorization of the Daily Mail as "the media"--a legitimate media outlet covering it, those videos were already widely disseminated through other outlets.

Is this sort of thing news? Personally, I think if it relates to something important enough and has a big enough impact, unverified videos and pictures spread online might be legitimately newsworthy. However, even if you assume that this fits into that category, I find that the way the DM covered this was somewhat irresponsible. They didn't emphasize the unverified nature of those videos and contextualize what it means in an obvious way. Normally I don't feel like it should be media's job to dumb down reporting with the sole purpose of making sure that the laziest and the dumbest of us don't miss any important points--despite their best efforts to do so. However, in situations where those uncritical readers are likely to create a strong ripple effect in the public response, it would be responsible to take them into account.
I think we're in agreement here?


I tried to verify this and couldn't one way or the other, but suffice it to say that I would be flabbergasted to find out that it's more visited than BBC News or Fox News (which I would otherwise assume are the biggest news organizations in the UK and US, respectively, let alone worldwide). Like, if you said it was more visited than The Guardian, I'd be surprised but not overly so, but against the media juggernauts?

Granted, I could be surprised by BBC News, and you did specify the website only, but still. Imean, at this point I'm prepared to be flabbergasted... but I'd still be flabbergasted.
The articles I can find on the subject are on the old side (take this one (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16746785), for instance) but SimilarWeb lists the Mail Online as #9 as of this February for visits. Three of the top eight are foreign language sites and the remainder are news aggregators from non-news organisations (like MSN or Yahoo) that principally act as gateways and collations ofnews from other sources and don't do original journalism or comment.

The BBC website is #10, CNN #11 and Fox #19.

I suspect that the BBC news page used to be more popular but in the UK at least there were some changes made about ten years ago, some of them partly in response to complaints about competition, which I suspect have made the site less attractive.

[Xyril]

I think we're in agreement here?


Umm, no, not really, but I don't disagree with you strongly enough to spend much more time on it. I made a stipulation because I acknowledge that exactly where the line between legitimate media and tabloid is pretty subjective, and I am ambiguous enough about the Daily Mail that I didn't particularly feel like advocating either way. However, it's precisely because I think it's in such a grey area that I find it a bit disingenuous to hold it up as representative of the mainstream media.

And like I said, even if we pretend what the DM does is any sort of fair reflection on how entities like the BBC does business, I don't think it would be fair to say that they are the "source" of all the fear and panic. People are already spreading those rumors and videos on social media and through other networks without any sort of gate keeper. I've said that I thought the Daily Mail did a terrible job walking that fine line of reporting on all of the reaction to that news while not implicitly endorsing the credibility of that news. However, refusing to acknowledge those videos and rumors, their widespread dissemination, and the major response to that news isn't necessarily a great option either, and could in its own way stoke panic.

[dehro]

{scrubbed}

[Aedilred]

{scrub the post, scrub the quote}

When you say "both", which two of Tarmor, Palanan, me, Peelee and Xyril are you addressing?

[Bonecrusher Doc]

I think there's plenty of information out there for anyone who wants the information.
And plenty of uncertainty which leads to debates... and anxiety.

As per the title of the thread, I also could use some support for the coronavirus being at my job.

I was asked to guard the building and screen everyone coming in for possible symptoms.
One employee, looking sick, coughs near me in the hallway and then asks which way to Employee Health. I tell him and offer him a mask, but he declines and walks off. I contact his supervisor to let her know that she has a sick person in her area and she says "I can't believe he came to work! He said he had a fever yesterday!" I say I won't let him back in.

The employee comes back, I tell him he can't come in because his supervisor said he had a fever, and he walks past me anyway. I call security on him. Now he has filed a complaint against me and my actions will be subject to a fact-finding investigation.

I'm not really worried about the outcome of the investigation; my boss already says he's got my back, but the whole situation makes me upset. We actually have a nursing home on our campus - different building, but still - if anybody should be taking things seriously, it should be my coworkers. I hope this guy isn't at work when I get back tomorrow :smallfurious:

[Sermil]

As per the title of the thread, I also could use some support for the coronavirus being at my job.

I was asked to guard the building and screen everyone coming in for possible symptoms.
One employee, looking sick, coughs near me in the hallway and then asks which way to Employee Health. I tell him and offer him a mask, but he declines and walks off. I contact his supervisor to let her know that she has a sick person in her area and she says "I can't believe he came to work! He said he had a fever yesterday!" I say I won't let him back in.

The employee comes back, I tell him he can't come in because his supervisor said he had a fever, and he walks past me anyway. I call security on him. Now he has filed a complaint against me and my actions will be subject to a fact-finding investigation.

I'm not really worried about the outcome of the investigation; my boss already says he's got my back, but the whole situation makes me upset. We actually have a nursing home on our campus - different building, but still - if anybody should be taking things seriously, it should be my coworkers. I hope this guy isn't at work when I get back tomorrow :smallfurious:

Ugh, sounds like a major jerk. Hope you don't get anything from him. Good luck!

[Xyril]

I'm not really worried about the outcome of the investigation; my boss already says he's got my back, but the whole situation makes me upset. We actually have a nursing home on our campus - different building, but still - if anybody should be taking things seriously, it should be my coworkers. I hope this guy isn't at work when I get back tomorrow :smallfurious:

Make sure you document the incident in all of the ways your company policy requires or recommends, and if at all possible, make sure to e-mail his supervisor, your supervisor, and anyone else you interacted with when deciding what to do... just something like "I just wanted to confirm, as per our discussion on the phone yesterday morning, that you said jerkface reported feeling unwell previously and was instructed not to return to work yesterday." etc.

Basically, make sure there's a paper trail to fall back on that proves that somebody in authority gave you information that justified every action you took. You don't absolutely don't want to prematurely out this individual, since that could run afoul of some company policy or rules, but you should make sure that when his complaint is investigated, the main outcome is that even more people find out that he violated orders and endangered everyone else in the company.

[Eldan]

Our university has delayed the semester start, for now students have to stay home. For us, there's no difference except we don't have to teach.

Bigger problem... I'm stranded on the wrong side of the border and can't see my family for the foreseeable future.

[ben-zayb]

I’m a healthcare worker at a hospital in NJ.

We just had a confirmed case here.

I’m scared. I have kids at home. My parents were supposed to visit this weekend. I didn’t have any direct contact with this patient but I know I walked past their room without being told.

My father is immune-compromised and I’ve cancelled my parents visit this weekend.

I know I’m probably safe (I’m 49, in decent health), but it’s the older people and kids I’m most worried about.I have nothing but utmost respect for the dedication of people who are at the forefront of this crisis.

I'm sending all positive vibes from half the world away, and hoping for the best for all of us.

The national CFR here sits at a terrible ~8.4%, so I sure as heck am taking it seriously

[Clistenes]

This evening I heard health workers are running out of equipment in some parts of my country, and that they are starting to run triage on coronavirus patients... It has made me realize what a {scrubbed} up mess we are in...

There are only three confirmed cases in my town, and it has been a few days since lockdown started here, so I have hope that it won't get too bad around here... But if some of my elderly relatives gets it, they may be left to die in agony due to shortage of equipment... This sucks...

[Vizzerdrix]

Well. The sister in Florida has it, and my dad in Maine is such a high risk person that his doctor has quarantined him (71. Diabetic. Ex smoker. Lost 1/2 a lung to cancer). He lives out in the country so hopefully he will be okay.

I did a thing that may be stupid. I am getting over strep, and I brought him out 30 lbs of rice. I wiped everything down with clorox wipes, and told him to let the rice (in sealed buckets) sit on his porch for 4 days so anything on them can die. I heard that wu flu can survive outside a body for 3 days, so I told him not to touch it for 4.

I just started a new job, and I don't know if they will be closing down. I hope not. I can think of a few things I could get still. Im good on food for myself and the ferrets, and tp isn't an issue, but I could use some duct tape and a tent in case I have to go.

[Lemmy]

In my country, the Corona Virus hasn't been quite that severe, at least for now...

We have around 200 cases (most of which were in my city) and had our first death this week.

However, many companies (mine included) have either temporarily suspended activities or moved as moved as many employees as possible to home office. The government is advising self-isolation, but isn't forcing anything yet. Markets are still well-stocked. Luckily, panic and hysteria haven't spread.

Yesterday I left home for the first time in 3 days in order to buy cat litter. There are definitely fewer people on the streets, but things seem fine otherwise.

I'm more worried about my father and his wife, but they live in a small town and can stay home, so they are relatively safe. I planned to visit them, but had to postpone it for obvious reasons.

There has definitely been some hyperbolic alarmism from mainstream media, national and international. But so far, thing have been mostly under control.

At least here, in a huge city in an enormous third world country, things are serious but not world-ending. It seems to me that panic and misinformation might be more dangerous than the illness itself.

So... Take care, everyone.

Follow the CDC advice, avoid crowds, practice good hygiene and, if you feel the need to stock up goods, don't overdo it. Don't let fear make you leave your neighbors without food or TP (seriously, the TP scarcity going on in some regions is super dumb even by hysteria standards).

[2D8HP]

I first walked into the Dark Carnival bookstore in 1979 when it was on Telegraph Avenue across the street from my junior high school (the first book I bought there was A Princess of Mars), it's location has changed a couple of times since, and I've met Bruce Sterling, William Gibson, Larry Niven, Michael Moorcock, and a very frail Fritz Leiber there (and my 1970's paperback Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser collections insisted the Lankhmar's Street of Gods was based on Berkeley's Telegraph Avenue) and now it - and all bookstores in my area - is closed due to the "shelter in place" order, I already gave up alcohol for - a thing I do for a few weeks every year around this time of year where I make a sacrifice of some sort and go without something, and I have more books hoarded than I'll likely ever get to read, plus on Saturday when I heard that the public libraries were about to close for weeks I rushed out and quickly checked out seven books an hour before closing (some medieval and renaissance "living history" books, two Ursula LeGuin anthologies, and John Steinbeck's The Acts of King Arthur and His Noble Knights), but I'm already finding the knowledge that I can't get anymore books for who knows how long vexing.

Yesterday afternoon my boss called a meeting and told us that our apprentice is being furloughed for three weeks starting tomorrow, but the rest of us are “essential City and County of San... [Lankhmar] disaster service workers” and still have to work regular shifts or more, and to carry our city I.D. badges going to and from work now as cops may start enforcement of “shelter in place”.

I had already signed out a vacation hour to buy St. Paddy’s Day fixings for the crew tomorrow, and went to Safeway and stood in a very long line along with what seemes a third of [Lankhmar] as the shelves were stripped by folks preparing for siege.

The public libraries, my favorite gameshop, my favorite bookstore, bars, and the schools are now closed, restaurants will be "take out only".

So much change, so fast, plagues are lame!

[Clistenes]

So much change, so fast, plagues are lame!

Yeah, it feels like we are back to the Middle Ages, locked up at home waiting for the plague ti run its course... I am almost expecting Plague Doctors to make a comeback.

This year has been weird...

[Bonecrusher Doc]

All the management backed me up with my documented side of the story I posted a page back, so I should be good on that. My wife is really hoping I can work from home so that our whole family can be hermetically sealed off, but I don't see that happening soon.

I'm very lucky that I'm in no danger of losing my paycheck. I feel really bad for people who are not as lucky. What can somebody do if they lose their paycheck? It's too late to retrain for another job... Start delivering groceries?

[veti]

Similarly, likely projections are up to 80% will be asymptomatic or very mildly symptomatic.

I read that as "for 80% of people it will be no worse than a regular cold". Which can still be fairly unpleasant, but not scary.


I'm not British, but it's my understanding that the Daily Mail is a tabloid, roughly on par with The Sun over there, or Weekly World News or National Enquirer over here. None of which I view as "the media," as tabloids are inherently (and arguably be design) unreliable and sensationalistic.

Bits of that are true, but vastly oversimplified. I'm not personally familiar with the National Enquirer, beyond noting that its circulation is a tiny fraction of the Mail's, but the comparison with Weekly World News is way off.

Yes, it's a tabloid. By itself that doesn't actually say anything about the content, it simply refers to the format in which the paper is printed. Some tabloids are every bit as serious as any newspaper, others are simply about catching people's eyes and getting them talking.

The Mail has a foot in both camps. It has a very strong editorial bias, which often leads it to present poorly sourced stories with undue emphasis and sensationalism, and makes it widely loathed and reviled by people who don't agree with its politics. But it also has some very good journalists, and routinely comes up with stories that no-one else has got. Most of these are pretty much trash (at the time of writing this, for instance, it has an "exclusive" tag on "Meghan demands staff follow strict hygiene protocol" - yeah, I can imagine someone in 10 years asking me where I was when I first heard that bombshell), but nevertheless - someone researched and wrote it, that kind of thing is not as easy as it looks. And they do quite often include actual news.

But more importantly, over two million people read the Mail on a daily basis and - more or less, making appropriate allowances and caveats - believe what they read. It's definitely "media" by any reasonable definition.

As for "unreliable and sensationalistic" - yes, you can certainly make that case. But you can make a similar case against most media - which I think was kinda the GP's point. The Mail may be a bit more so than some, but the difference is definitely one of degree, not of kind.

[Peelee]

I will admit to only knowing three British publications - The Daily Mail, most comments I've heard regarding it as senationalistic unreliable; The Sun, most comments I've heard regarding it as sensationalistic and unreliable; and The Guardian, which I haven't really heard anyone talk about. All my experience with TDM and TS are third-hand accounts, TG I visit on occasion and think they do a great job but I'm unfamiliar with how it's seen over there - though I would expect its received positively, if my experience is any indication.

Then again, I apparently took the complaints about TDM as a bit more extreme than it really is, so who knows.

[Waraila]

The guardian is probably the least sensationalist of the three you mentioned, honestly... although it can get quite annoying with the wall to wall coverage of current events.

BBC is a little better in that regard, but honestly the media haven't really been helping much. You get better info from the NHS website than the media (NHS is the equivalent of your CDC I suppose although it's not really a great comparison given the health systems are a tad different)

There is one thing though on the NHS website that may set people's minds a tad bit at ease. They say it is highly unlikely that the virus can spread via packages or food items. So getting food to vulnerable family members shouldn't be a problem.

As for the sun and daily mail - well.... lets just say they are well known for being part of the murdoch press empire, and as such they make mountains out of molehills on a regular basis. They are also known as gossip machines... and have all the latest celeb gossip...

[Xyril]

As for the sun and daily mail - well.... lets just say they are well known for being part of the murdoch press empire, and as such they make mountains out of molehills on a regular basis. They are also known as gossip machines... and have all the latest celeb gossip...

You've gotta respect the Sun for doing something trashy enough that an entire city pretty much unanimously agrees that they're garbage. Drumming up that sort of (politically) bipartisan unity is pretty rare nowadays.

[Aedilred]

As for the sun and daily mail - well.... lets just say they are well known for being part of the murdoch press empire, and as such they make mountains out of molehills on a regular basis. They are also known as gossip machines... and have all the latest celeb gossip...

The Mail isn't Murdoch, although the Times is.


In the early 80s, there were four national daily broadsheet newspapers: The Times, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, and The Financial Times (which is largely irrelevant for our purposes). The Times was considered the "paper of record" while the Guardian and Telegraph were more heavily editorialised. These contrasted with the "red-top" tabloids, the Mirror, the Star and The Sun which were sensationalist, and often had topless women on page 3. In between were the Daily Mail and the Daily Express which had adopted tabloid format in the 70s but retained their broadsheet appearance and carried out proper journalism.

This is still pretty much the shape of things now but there have been shake-ups in the interim which mean that it's less clear than it used to be.

Following Murdoch's purchase of the Times in the 80s a new broadsheet was set up, the Independent, which considered that the other broadsheets had vacated the centre ground and moved to more politically extreme positions. A price war ensued with the Times trying to squeeze out the Indy but it managed to survive. During the 80s Murdoch also aggressively went to war with the Fleet Street unions and revolutionised the production of print media (for good or ill).

This remained the pattern of things for about another twenty years until the rise of internet news. Initially all the major papers made their content available free on their website but declining print circulations bit deep. The Times and Guardian adopted a compact format, akin to a tabloid, and the Times erected a paywall. The Telegraph held out for several years before doing the same. The Independent tried a number of measures before admitting defeat, abandoning print and sacking most of its staff. It still has a website but its readership is minimal. The Financial Times, unsurprisingly, also went behind a paywall.

This left - and leaves - the Guardian as the only remaining quality major newspaper which still makes its content freely available online, and has led to an uptick in readership. It does still however have a reputation - deserved in part, as reputations often are - for, firstly, questionable proofreading and subediting (leading to its Private Eye-derived nickname, The Grauniad (or The Graun for short)) and secondly for an editorial slant that means its commentary often tries exceedingly hard to be worthy and consequently has a tendency to eat itself or disappear up its own backside. It is viewed generally as a serious paper but not without a degree of eye-rolling.

The Times remains influential but its paywall limits its reach. The Telegraph is treated less seriously these days following some unpopular editorial decisions and a mass exodus of staff which have taken a toll on its readership, but on a good day it remains a "quality" paper.

The Daily Mail markets itself as a serious paper, does serious journalism and takes itself very seriously but outside its readership (which doesn't really overlap with the Graun's at all) has a reputation for an editorial slant in the opposite direction which makes it widely disliked. This reputation is however compensated by its enormously successful website, which attracts eyeballs through celebrity gossip and the "sidebar of shame". Of the two, it is probably more influential and reaches a wider readership.

The Express is actually pretty much identical to the Mail but less successful in terms of its circulation.

[Peelee]

A brief and only partly inaccurate generalised history of UK print media (mainly for Peelee's benefit)

Mucho appreciado!

[factotum]

You've gotta respect the Sun for doing something trashy enough that an entire city pretty much unanimously agrees that they're garbage. Drumming up that sort of (politically) bipartisan unity is pretty rare nowadays.

To the extent that, even 20 years later, a union representative could tear up a copy of the Sun at a conference saying, "In Liverpool we learned a long time ago what to do.".

[ben-zayb]

I'm very lucky that I'm in no danger of losing my paycheck. I feel really bad for people who are not as lucky. What can somebody do if they lose their paycheck? It's too late to retrain for another job... Start delivering groceries?No kidding. No work no pay policy, living space and population density that makes social distancing near impossible and living off meal to meal–these as a dangerous combination is the reality for millions of people. It is not unexpected for people who are under those circumstances to still report to work or roam to ply their trade.

Naturally, I'll leave it at that lest I type something that could get me in trouble. I firmly believe that panicking and overreacting will do no good, but for a lot of people there is a very real cause for concern, if not caution

[jayem]

The Mail isn't Murdoch, although the Times is.
...Paper summary


Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; The Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Oh and Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits.

(src from wikiquote, so ought to be ok)

rather than an well crafted description

[Xyril]

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; The Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Oh and Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits.

(src from wikiquote, so ought to be ok)


Well, I guess Queen Elizabeth now has a way to make the monarchy suddenly relevant again. (At least to Sun readers.)

[Clistenes]

Holy ****! If the virus can reach Angela ****ing Merkel, who is safe anymore? How can I feel safe buying groceries?

[Aedilred]

Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; The Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Oh and Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country as long as she's got big tits.

(src from wikiquote, so ought to be ok)

rather than an well crafted description

I did consider it. And bearing in mind that Yes, Prime Minister is over 30 years old, the above is still remarkably apt - albeit the Morning Star hasn't been seen in a while.

[Elkad]

Prediction.

When this is done, we'll look back at the death rate for the first half of 2020 and see that deaths due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are below average.

It looking to be less-deadly than the flu (just more contagious), and by actually washing our hands, we are preventing the spread of both.

All the other measures are just kabuki theater.

[Iruka]

Prediction.

When this is done, we'll look back at the death rate for the first half of 2020 and see that deaths due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are below average.

It looking to be less-deadly than the flu (just more contagious), and by actually washing our hands, we are preventing the spread of both.

All the other measures are just kabuki theater.

Tell that to Italy.

[factotum]

It looking to be less-deadly than the flu (just more contagious), and by actually washing our hands, we are preventing the spread of both.


Sorry, where are you getting this information from? The overall fatality rate for people infected with Covid-19 is around 3-4%. This is around 30 times higher than regular flu. The only reason we haven't had as many deaths from Covid-19 as yet is simply because the infection isn't yet as widespread, but without the drastic measures currently being taken that would soon not be the case.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Prediction.

When this is done, we'll look back at the death rate for the first half of 2020 and see that deaths due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are below average.

It looking to be less-deadly than the flu (just more contagious), and by actually washing our hands, we are preventing the spread of both.

All the other measures are just kabuki theater.

Prediction.

The above post will age really badly.

Grey Wolf

[Chen]

If there were infinite hospital resources the virus may have a lower fatality rate than the flu. But the fact theres no vaccine and it transmits easily means if it is left unchecked you end up with a much higher fatality rate because you don’t have the resources to handle all who need it and thus you get “preventable” deaths adding to your total.

[tyckspoon]

Sorry, where are you getting this information from? The overall fatality rate for people infected with Covid-19 is around 3-4%. This is around 30 times higher than regular flu. The only reason we haven't had as many deaths from Covid-19 as yet is simply because the infection isn't yet as widespread, but without the drastic measures currently being taken that would soon not be the case.

Depends on how many unidentified cases you think there are, doesn't it? I don't think anybody can honestly say that the known cases/deaths are an accurate reflection of the viruses' real spread; it could certainly turn out to be less lethal for the average case than the flu, while still having a vastly higher death count by dint of infecting an order of magnitude or two more people.

[Sermil]

Prediction.

The above post will age really badly.

Grey Wolf

Totally agree, but it is an interesting -- if morbid -- intellectual exercise to consider how the pandemic will affect all the other sources of death.

I actually wrote up a pretty long post here, listing different sources and speculating about whether they would be up or down... and then decided the whole thing was too depressing and deleted it. :frown:

[Chen]

Totally agree, but it is an interesting -- if morbid -- intellectual exercise to consider how the pandemic will affect all the other sources of death.

I actually wrote up a pretty long post here, listing different sources and speculating about whether they would be up or down... and then decided the whole thing was too depressing and deleted it. :frown:

The one to really wonder about is the yearly flu deaths. Is this going to out compete it? Or are all the social distancing going to reduce flu deaths this year?

[Sermil]

The one to really wonder about is the yearly flu deaths. Is this going to out compete it? Or are all the social distancing going to reduce flu deaths this year?

Yes, the various rules will decrease the number of people getting the flu a bit. But a greater % of people with the flu will probably die because hospitals are overloaded and health care workers are exhausted, stressed, and will make mistakes. (They're human. Tired, stressed, overworked humans make mistakes.)

In any case, the delta in flu deaths is going to be completely swamped by the delta in deaths from other side effects, both good and bad. (Good = lower traffic deaths, bad = overwhelmed medical systems that can't treat all the other illnesses. Plus all the effects of a recession, which are generally bad.) My guess is that even ignoring the direct deaths from COVID-19, the pandemic will cause a net higher # of deaths. But as I said, writing it all out just depressed me so I'm going to stop there.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

The one to really wonder about is the yearly flu deaths. Is this going to out compete it? Or are all the social distancing going to reduce flu deaths this year?

I'm not going to try to predict that - it is so not my area of expertise, and like Sermil says, it's both morbid and depressing - but there is one thing that we have to consider: many, many diseases are opportunistic, and the flu is at the top of the list. By which I mean, they are diseases that only have a decent chance to kill when the immune system of the individual is already lowered by a different disease.

You may have heard that different countries have different standards of when to consider a death one caused by covid-19. SOme are trying to make this into some grand conspiracy where this or that region is "hiding" covid-19 deaths by marking them as deaths by other causes. The reality is that it is not that simple. Someone that has covid-19 is not magically immune to everything else - quite the opposite: our immune systems are an army, and any army that is fighting a battle and gets ambushed by a second force is going to fare badly.

We can count deaths, but assigning blame for them? That is very tricky. Different protocols will assign cause of death for the same scenario differently, and I don't think one can be said to be more accurate than another.

That reminds me that I was once told by a medical student friend of mine that every cause of death is, ultimately, cardiovascular - i.e. what kills you is that your heart stops working. Because of that, in their particular country, death certificates had two separate causes of death - cardiovascular crisis, and whatever caused the cardiovascular crisis. With covid-19, it'll be something similar. I can imagine that a lot of cases, if tested, might show that the person had both covid and the flu and probably a half-dozen other things. Which one killed them in the end? Heck, probably all of them, ganging up on them. But the death certificate only has one spot, so one needs to be blamed. This year? Covid will probably be the one taking the headlines, I suspect. But which one "really" killed? All of them.

Grey Wolf

[veti]

Depends on how many unidentified cases you think there are, doesn't it? I don't think anybody can honestly say that the known cases/deaths are an accurate reflection of the viruses' real spread; it could certainly turn out to be less lethal for the average case than the flu, while still having a vastly higher death count by dint of infecting an order of magnitude or two more people.

If there were as many undiagnosed, presumably asymptomatic, cases as that hypothesis suggests, we would have noticed it by now simply from spot testing.

We had a case a couple of weeks ago where a school was shut down for 48 hours and every pupil tested. If the virus had been rife in the population then, it beggars belief that you could test several hundred kids and their teachers, and not find a single positive result.

[Chen]

If there were as many undiagnosed, presumably asymptomatic, cases as that hypothesis suggests, we would have noticed it by now simply from spot testing.

We had a case a couple of weeks ago where a school was shut down for 48 hours and every pupil tested. If the virus had been rife in the population then, it beggars belief that you could test several hundred kids and their teachers, and not find a single positive result.

How much spot testing is actually happening though? My understanding is that either lack of tests or testing capacity at the labs is limiting that. I know here in Quebec there are still relatively high criteria needed before you can be tested.

[Lemmy]

I'm here just to plea with you guys...

Please, support your local shops, small business and community.

Amazon, McDonald's, Wall-Mart and other giant corporations will survive the quarantine. Freelance workers and small businesses might not.

They really can't afford to stay so long without work. Many of them have no choice to keep going to work every day, whether or not they are in an at-risk group.

My sister told her cleaning lady not to come to work this week but still paid her. Which is nice and all, but not everyone is able to do it... My uncle is a small business owner, and he simply can't afford to pay his employees if he doesn't open shop. If this quarantine goes for much longer, he might not have any business at all by the end of it.

So, if possible... Buy stuff from local shops and businesses, rather than from industry giants.

[Chen]

Canadian government had promised a 75% wage subsidy for small and medium businesses. The workers at larger businesses are the ones who will likely be getting screwed here (the large businesses themselves will be fine for the most part I imagine).

[Frontispiece]

Thanks for being in the frontlines. Though we really can't do anything other than to stay home to at least decrease the rate of infections. I hope you have enough ppe to use.

[Ibrinar]

About the undiagnosed numbers and deadliness compared to flu, I think the Shincheonji of South Korea might be a decent indicator. 5066 (https://www.cdc.go.kr/board/board.es?mid=a30402000000&bid=0030&act=view&list_no=366633) cases in SK (more than half of all known SK cases), part of a 230000 member cult that is under close scrunity in SK. (Note link is data from the 24th because I couldn't be bothered to look for the equivalent for yesterday.) They don't say directly how many of the death were among the Shincheonji, but 4383 Shincheonji cases in Daegu alone making it the majority of cases in Daegu, and Daegu CFR matches the rest of the country so it probably isn't that the Shinchonji just have more of their cases known. Anyway with about 1.4% CFR (though SKs CFR has grown a bit more the last days) to get it down to flu deadliness (<0.1% I think?) would require there to be 14*5000=70000 in the cult of 230000, that would be a rather massive testing failure on SK's part. (Also the church isn't just in daegu so 4300 cases there change the numbers further. But I can't find data on how many of the cult are in Daegu.)

SK's data is a huge part of why I doubt the more extreme unknown case numbers/low IFR suggestions. We don't know the true rate yet but I doubt it will be flu level. (Honestly the best numbers will probably in a year or so when we compare this year to other years.)

[Ibrinar]

Though the iceland data on the other hand is reason to optimism for a low ICR, but it is still so early that I wouldn't calculate much from it and wait a week at least.

[Bonecrusher Doc]

My job campus is going to have one building full of people with COVID who are not so sick to be hospitalized, but are homeless and therefore have nowhere to self-quarantine. I also heard that employees will be able to stay in that building if they don't want to make their families sick at home.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Prediction.

When this is done, we'll look back at the death rate for the first half of 2020 and see that deaths due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are below average.

It looking to be less-deadly than the flu (just more contagious), and by actually washing our hands, we are preventing the spread of both.

All the other measures are just kabuki theater.


Prediction.

The above post will age really badly.

Follow up: here is a bunch of graphics by country (and NYC) comparing expected deaths, deaths associated to COVID and all others

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountr iesgraphicdetail

Suffice to say, it is patently obvious that the death rate for the first quarter of 2020 due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are not "below average".

And since that neatly dispenses with the suggestion that COVID deaths are hiding deaths by other causes, here is a graph showing that COVID is not "less-deadly than the flu".

https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-us-weekly-coronavirus-deaths-compared-heart-disease-cancer-flu-2020-4#covid-19-is-now-killing-more-americans-weekly-than-heart-disease-or-cancer-did-on-average-per-week-in-2018-1

Grey Wolf

[Klorox]

Just an update: our hospital in NJ was completely converted to a coronavirus hospital.

I work in a department that was totally not made for this. A department that has 10 patient bays, not rooms, no doors between people, no walls, only curtains.

There was no where else for these people to go. Basically, walking into my department was like walking into a patients room, all day.

We have N95 masks, sure, but the people sent from other departments to help had the full hazmat suits with internal air supplies.

We’re coding about an average of patient a day, and none came back.

I think it’s only a matter of time until much of my staff starts getting sick.

I haven’t seen my daughter for 6 weeks now.

The second wave will come, especially with these nuts wanting to go out and getting stir crazy.

[Sermil]

Just an update: our hospital in NJ was completely converted to a coronavirus hospital.

I work in a department that was totally not made for this. A department that has 10 patient bays, not rooms, no doors between people, no walls, only curtains.

There was no where else for these people to go. Basically, walking into my department was like walking into a patients room, all day.

We have N95 masks, sure, but the people sent from other departments to help had the full hazmat suits with internal air supplies.

We’re coding about an average of patient a day, and none came back.

I think it’s only a matter of time until much of my staff starts getting sick.

I haven’t seen my daughter for 6 weeks now.
:frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frown::frown:: frown:

Not much to say except... Wow, that sounds bad. Sympathy.



The second wave will come, especially with these nuts wanting to go out and getting stir crazy.

Ya.:smallfurious:

[Ibrinar]

Follow up: here is a bunch of graphics by country (and NYC) comparing expected deaths, deaths associated to COVID and all others

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/covid19datatrackingcovid19excessdeathsacrosscountr iesgraphicdetail

Suffice to say, it is patently obvious that the death rate for the first quarter of 2020 due to "old age" and/or "communicable disease" are not "below average".

And since that neatly dispenses with the suggestion that COVID deaths are hiding deaths by other causes, here is a graph showing that COVID is not "less-deadly than the flu".

https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-us-weekly-coronavirus-deaths-compared-heart-disease-cancer-flu-2020-4#covid-19-is-now-killing-more-americans-weekly-than-heart-disease-or-cancer-did-on-average-per-week-in-2018-1

Grey Wolf
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-deaths-likely-much-higher-than-official-tolls-ft-analysis-2020-4?r=DE&IR=T has a few extra excess death graph and helpfully annotates the excess sum and percent increase.

[Eldan]

I've noticed something new and highly annoying: when wearing a mask, I can't see my legs. Now I stumble all the time. Like, today, on my first day of enforced mask wearing, I stumbled going up the stairs twice and bashed my shins into three things so far.

[Tarmor]

Make sure that the mask completely covers your nose and mouth. It shouldn't cover your eyes!

[Chen]

I've noticed something new and highly annoying: when wearing a mask, I can't see my legs. Now I stumble all the time. Like, today, on my first day of enforced mask wearing, I stumbled going up the stairs twice and bashed my shins into three things so far.

How is the mask blocking your vision?

[Eldan]

The masks they gave us are pretty massive. Like, a centimeter or two in front of my nose and mouth, they block a lot more angle downwards than I thought.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I've noticed something new and highly annoying: when wearing a mask, I can't see my legs.

When I wear a mask, my breath is channeled upwards around my nose, completely fogging my glasses with every breath. Which means I can breathe, or I can see, but not both at the same time.

Fun times.

Grey Wolf

[Sermil]

When I wear a mask, my breath is channeled upwards around my nose, completely fogging my glasses with every breath. Which means I can breathe, or I can see, but not both at the same time.

Fun times.

Grey Wolf

Ya, I have the exact same problem. It got so bad on one walk that I just took off my glasses, and I have like 20/200 vision.

What I've read is that if your glasses are fogging "You're doing it wrong" -- the breath is supposed to be going through the mask, not around the mask, otherwise much of the point of the mask (filtering particles from your breath) is lost. I've never been able to reach that ideal, though.

[Chen]

The masks they gave us are pretty massive. Like, a centimeter or two in front of my nose and mouth, they block a lot more angle downwards than I thought.

Sounds like a mask that is way too large for you. These are supposed to be right up against your face...you know to block you breathing out around it.

[Eldan]

Nah, it fits tight, I checked that. It just seems to be made of pretty thick material.

[danzibr]

Just an update: our hospital in NJ was completely converted to a coronavirus hospital.

I work in a department that was totally not made for this. A department that has 10 patient bays, not rooms, no doors between people, no walls, only curtains.

There was no where else for these people to go. Basically, walking into my department was like walking into a patients room, all day.

We have N95 masks, sure, but the people sent from other departments to help had the full hazmat suits with internal air supplies.

We’re coding about an average of patient a day, and none came back.

I think it’s only a matter of time until much of my staff starts getting sick.

I haven’t seen my daughter for 6 weeks now.

The second wave will come, especially with these nuts wanting to go out and getting stir crazy.
Eek.

First, it's awesome your name is Klorox and you're in healthcare.

Second, any additional updates?

[snowblizz]

What I've read is that if your glasses are fogging "You're doing it wrong" -- the breath is supposed to be going through the mask, not around the mask, otherwise much of the point of the mask (filtering particles from your breath) is lost. I've never been able to reach that ideal, though.
I'm reminded of how at some point there were questions about everybody using masks, of some kind, (naturally at a point where there was a massive shortage) and the answer given back was "yes, but most ppl can't use them effectively anyway so we want to save them for the ones who really can use them ie medical personnel".

[Chen]

I'm reminded of how at some point there were questions about everybody using masks, of some kind, (naturally at a point where there was a massive shortage) and the answer given back was "yes, but most ppl can't use them effectively anyway so we want to save them for the ones who really can use them ie medical personnel".

Actual medical grade masks SHOULD be saved for medical personnel. General face coverings are what is being recommended for the more general public.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

What I've read is that if your glasses are fogging "You're doing it wrong" -- the breath is supposed to be going through the mask, not around the mask, otherwise much of the point of the mask (filtering particles from your breath) is lost. I've never been able to reach that ideal, though.

I've read that, in fact, that is a mistaken assumption. That what the mask does is redirect the breath away from the person you are speaking to. For a full filtering, it would need to be a fully hermetic mask, and that is not something that a folded cloth and a couple of rubber bands are going to accomplish against the power of the human lungs expelling air (a speed of about 1 m/s, google tells me).

Not sure what it the "correct" answer, mind you - it might be that I am doing it wrong, but if so, not sure how I could fix it. I cannot mold the cloth around my nose so that the air doesn't escape around it, short of super-gluing it in place.

Grey Wolf

[Klorox]

Actual medical grade masks SHOULD be saved for medical personnel. General face coverings are what is being recommended for the more general public.

Correct. We had a very scary time when we were dangerously low on proper PPE, but we seem to have caught up now.

[Klorox]

Eek.

First, it's awesome your name is Klorox and you're in healthcare.

Second, any additional updates?

LOL, thanks.

“Flattening the curve” seems to have helped. The hospital has plenty of cases, but we’re not overwhelmed anymore.

My unit is slowly going back to what it’s supposed to be like. We were housing Covid + patients for a while and My unit was not built for that. That being said, we didn’t have a choice. We were literally overrun with patients and the hospital had nowhere else to put them.

2 of my coworkers on my unit had tested positive, which made our work much harder for the two weeks they were gone.

Today is the first day in a long time that things really feel like they’re getting better. We have a less-than-usual patient load, but we’re here doing the type of work we’re supposed to. We have a full staff for the first time in almost a month.

Even better: this Friday should be the first time I see my daughter since early March. I miss her so much and can’t wait to spend the weekend with her.

[JeenLeen]

I know there's a corona virus thread about the science of it, but I wanted to start this as a "I'm scared/nervous" thread, where we could talk about how nerve-wrecking the direct or indirect effects of the pandemic or lockdown has/have been.

I've been relatively very fortunate. I still have my job, and I am able to work from home; it's stressful and harder than working in the office, but at least I don't have any major financial concerns, and I'm trying to appreciate the benefits of time with the family. Except very recently, nobody close to me has gotten the virus, and still nobody in my close family has it.

But, like, yesterday I went out to do a grocery run, and felt like crying afterwards from the fear of "what if I catch it". I'm not very afraid of dying from it, or even the direct discomfort of being really sick. BUT the idea of my kids suffering from getting sick, or being removed from me or my wife if we had to go to the hospital, or just being left alone if we died--that's terrifying.

Also, that riots are happening downtown sometimes is scary. I don't have to go downtown currently, and I live close but not in downtown, but it's something when I hear ambulances or police almost every night. (Most of that is likely there's a hospital nearby, but in light of riots having happened, it makes the sound a lot scarier.) That's not really related to the virus, but the idea of "if I have to go back to work, don't know if I'd feel safe traveling home at the end of the day" is an added stress.

So, anyway, I know I'm a lot better off than a lot of better in the present situation; I hope my mentioning my minor issues isn't offensive to anyone who is a lot worse off than I am. But I felt like it might be helpful to post something where folk can vent or just say something like "yeah, I feel that".

[el minster]

My personal cure for all worries is to live in the moment

[JadedDM]

I hear you. I'm an 'essential' worker, so I've been working nonstop since this whole thing started. And my anxiety has been through the roof. It's become 'normal' for me to have a panic attack a couple of times a week. Eventually, being under so much stress for so long, I just sort of became numb to it. It's weird how well we can acclimate to just about any kind of scenario if we have to deal with it long enough.

So far, I've been lucky. I try not to go out unless I have to, and when I do, I always wear a mask. I keep a safe distance from everyone. And I wash my hands regularly. But it's been quite nerve-wracking. My state has been hit hard and they recently mandated wearing a mask in public, so hopefully that will help.

[The Fury]

Getting an "essential worker" job is a big part of what's pulled me out of my own head and allowed me to be somewhat functional again.

Now I'm just watching other people stuck in a downward spiral. I want to help, but I don't know how. Especially since I can so rarely be there for someone in person.

[el minster]

send them a card

[2D8HP]

I know there's a corona virus thread about the science of it, but I wanted to start this as a "I'm scared/nervous" thread, where we could talk about how nerve-wrecking the direct or indirect effects of the pandemic or lockdown has/have been[...]


As I mentioned in another thread:
In a few hours I'm going in for my third Covid-19 test this year, my cough is less than it was but I still have the sore throat I've had since March 15th, an x-ray last month should that I had pneumonia, but the previous two Covid-19 tests came back negative.

It's weird, back in April my crew of City and County of [Lankhmar] workers were given the task of making sure the morgue abandoned a couple of years ago could be quickly used again in case the bodies piled up and overwhelmed the new one.

During the last decade I've had to do repairs in there (and a couple at the new one), which was never pleasant. Right now (if it comes to that) they're probably going to use refrigeration trucks (like New York has), but (thankfully!) so far it looks like we're being spared what Italy and New York have experienced.
Most days I go up to the Jail to do repairs, and now my temperature is read each time. I'm asked "Do you have any symptoms?", and I (truthfully) tell them "Since October" (since everyone else with experience repairing the jail fixtures is retired or on disability there really isn't anyone to replace me who actually knows how to do the usual repairs anyway).
In the last several weeks the jail has been emptied out, cells that used to hold a dozen men now hold one to four. Otherwise in [Lankhmar] the streets are nowhere as empty as they were in late March but masks are ubiquitous now, and finally last week bookstores have been reopening!


My third test came back negative, my cough is minor now (nowhere near as bad as my late March/April one, or the cough I had last October and November, my sore throat is still bad, no fevers though.

I worry about catching and bringing the disease home to my wife and her sons (most of my work has been in a jail that has had some positive tests of deputies and inmates), my Mom has long had poor lungs and I worry about her.

So far [Lankhmar] has faired comparatively well (we had "shelter-in-place" earlier than most) but there's massive flare ups in the nearest State Prison, and a big increase in cases down State in [Imrryr, Melniboné] and that's worrisome.