• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is too exciting for adults to discuss (CLOSED)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
sparcboxbuck said:
Thanks for the levity, Mr. Reaper. LOL.

I’m not qualified to speak to our reaction or lack thereof. But, I’d like to see what you’re basing your statements on. I’m not, in any way, disputing you... you could be completely right and I’ve just not seen the same evidence.

That said, I’m not sure that I’m seeing reliable method of reporting such that your numbers can be supported. The (back) reporting of gross numbers without context absolutely is showing growth, but I’m not certain that they are “new cases” in so much as they are “newly reported cases.” Consider the numbers for Ohio that, on a gross number metric, jumped through the roof. Those numbers were entirely driven by the release of cases in Marion and Pickaway counties... and the penitentiaries therein. They were not new cases per se, they were just added to the gross tally and poorly attributed to the day of reporting.

Again, not saying that you’re wrong, but I’ve yet to see decent statistics on percent positive tests, nor have I seen good numbers on net new cases over time. Either of those metrics would be of value to the insight needed to speak to how this is spreading. I just don’t see those numbers being shared by anyone.
Click to expand...
Part of the problem is it takes so goddamn long in many areas to get the results. It may have been a new case when the test was run...but by the time the results come back, it’s a lagging metric. What we really need is data that show positives over time retroactive to when the case was presented and the test was ordered. Only then will we know if more people really came to the hospital sick yesterday, or if the hospital had more results come back positive yesterday from a week ago.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
Look, I understand that you want to get back to work, but to pretend this is a common cold is just flat out fucking ignorant. Yes, the common cold and COVID19 are both a coronavirus, but that's where the similarity ends.

5e98cd7173d0c818b1055a52


And here's a comparison of the difference in contagiousness between it and a common flu strain:
https://dynaimage.cdn.cnn.com/cnn/a...091647-fluvscoronavirus-sidebyside2-nobar.mp4
Click to expand...

Good news! Covid deaths have just dropped by 23k according to the CDC.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
 
Upvote 0
Bucklion said:
Part of the problem is it takes so goddamn long in many areas to get the results. It may have been a new case when the test was run...but by the time the results come back, it’s a lagging metric. What we really need is data that show positives over time retroactive to when the case was presented and the test was ordered. Only then will we know if more people really came to the hospital sick yesterday, or if the hospital had more results come back positive yesterday from a week ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It’s fascinating how such an important piece of the puzzle seems to go ignored or at least wasn’t collected from the beginning. I honestly don’t get it... Oversight? That’s a pretty big whoops all things considered.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27 said:
I didn't want this to get lost. Why are we just willing to let people die as the answer? Why are people protesting to get stores open instead of protesting for what they really need. You don't need to sacrifice grandpa so you can earn a living. Protest for the relief that money would bring without having to go back to work and risk people getting sick. These protests are for the betterment of corporations, not for the people protesting.
Click to expand...

When is the risk to grandpa over?
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
I don’t think that anyone really wants to just let people die. But from the very beginning of all of this, even from the medical establishment, the point was just that... regrettably, people are going to die from this virus. The shelter in place orders were designed to not overrun the capacity of the health care system. I don’t think that I’ve read anyone in a position of authority state that goals were, are, or should be to prevent mortality. Merely, the goals were designed to give the greatest opportunity to the masses as a whole.

It will be very interesting, from a management perspective, to watch how this unfolds. That is, the grand reopening...

In Ohio alone, which has been wildly successful on multiple metrics, I see a risk of opening things back up too quickly. God forbid that they (royal intended) open back up and (real) counts spike. The horse may be let out of the barn with no stopping at that point. Note the distinction between raw counts and real counts. As others have cited, the reporting of contractions and fatalities has been sporadic at best... so real counts would have to be based on percentages of those testing positive as opposed to the wild fluctuations we see in raw counts.

Aside from the obvious hope for a miracle cure, what I hope for more than anything is a metered reopening that relies on non-sensational metrics so that neither grandpa has to die and those who are out of work due to the economic retraction can put food back on their tables. Regrettably, I fear that both groups may still suffer losses... but I hope losses on both sides can be minimized with bipartisan leadership that considers all who are suffering and a populous who is willing to do their parts (see discussion related to wearing a mask in public).
Click to expand...

What happened to "fifteen days to flatten the curve?" I'm on day 35, and now Sisolak is saying the end of May at the earliest. Two weeks has already turned into ten, with no end in sight.
 
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye said:
What happened to "fifteen days to flatten the curve?" I'm on day 35, and now Sisolak is saying the end of May at the earliest. Two weeks has already turned into ten, with no end in sight.
Click to expand...

I’ve never heard 15-days to flatten the curve, personally. I think that once flattened, given an incubation period of 15-days, you need that two weeks to make sure it’s trending correctly.

But, yeah I hear ya. To quote the great MoC, ‘this shit’s been too long.’
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
Exactly. It’s fascinating how such an important piece of the puzzle seems to go ignored or at least wasn’t collected from the beginning. I honestly don’t get it... Oversight? That’s a pretty big whoops all things considered.
Click to expand...
Well, I don’t think it’s a “whoops” per se, I think the problem is testing has been so sparse and uneven across regions, and the time to get a result is so highly variable. We have some of the best modelers in the world where I am, and even they have a hard time because of the variabilities in the available data. If it took, say, 48 hours to get a result, I think everything from reporting to modeling would be a million times better. Unfortunately, it takes anywhere from 8 hours to 14 days to get a result, and there is no centralized database to log and extract everything.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top