OT: Coronavirus (COVID-19): Part VI (NO RIOT/PROTEST DISCUSSION)
- Thread starter Fugazy
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Of course. In Sweden there is a saying that there are degrees in hell, not sure if it translates. You can’t say that staying open did no good for the economy. Not if you look at GDP. Not if you look at costs for keeping companies alive that goes on the national debt. Not if you look at unemployment numbers etc etc etc.
But still record bad — sure.
eco's bones
Registered User
There are plenty of things to save. We've put some money into the local foodbank and meals on wheels. You don't want your local business to die either. I'd put them ahead of big box stores and chain restaurants for sure. But really no one can do it all---you just do what you can. I imagine we're going to be doing more for the foodbank in the coming month as well because the need will be there. It's like the Rangers in a way right after their letter--the team was shit and down and it's going to take some time to come back and it's the same with the economy probably. For the rest of the world the dollar is the currency of choice and economies are global and so much of any suffering is going to be shared and it doesn't appear to me that the Chinese are in any hurry for the Yuan to be the currency of choice--maybe because of the fear that they'd have to open up not only their own economy but loosen some of the restrictions in their society---so IMO the rest of the world has some interest in our economy surviving even if they don't like our current head of state.
Anyway again the virus is a serious argument for M4A. The response to the virus in our country has been catastrophic on a multiplicity of levels. For shit like this you need a coordinated national response and you can't have people running around uninsured and afraid of walking in the door of a hospital if they're in need. The entire corporate and industrial profit dynamic that we've become use to here in our health care system is counterproductive to the needs of the population. We're going to look really stupid if we have to go through another pandemic 5 or 10 years from now if we get pretty much the same shit response all over again.
I no idea that you were ill, glad you made it through alright.
Respect to the both of you for donating.
I don't see how a pandemic has anything to do with M4A. Who has been denied medical care? The problem is that there aren't enough medical resources to deal with a pandemic and when there are no treatments for it medical insurance doesn't do a whole lot. The disproportionate impact on minorities is not about lack of coverage but other factors that are only partly explained by economics. Certain minorities are more likely to be susceptible to the virus by being more likely to having one or more risk factors. M4A doesn't magically make this go away.
Disparities in the Population at Risk of Severe Illness From COVID-19 by Race/Ethnicity and Income
More than 40 million Americans (18%) had two or more risk factors. Among those aged <65 years, 11% of black and 18% of American Indian people had multiple risk factors relative to 8% of white people.
effen
Registered User
- Jun 27, 2003
- 12,743
- 10,950
There are a ridiculous amount of people who won't go to the hospital until they are literally at death's door for a variety of reasons, cost/insurance or lack thereof being a significant factor overall.
That goes poorly with a pandemic when they keep grinding out the days but still needing to function in society until they are no longer able to.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
It was a while back. End of March/early April. Wasn't fun. Thankfully, not bad enough to have to go to the hospital (but still bad)
Should be decently accessible to people, depending on your area, I think. We went to a Northwell Health Urgent Care Center and did a online/telephone interview and then went in. Phlebotomist left a big bruise on both of our arms though. Yikes.
This has nothing to do with the pandemic. No one was admitted to a hospital initially unless they couldn't breathe whether or not they had insurance. I haven't seen evidence that any uninsured were turned away. The CARES act provided $175 billion to hospitals who admitted covid-19 patients, including $50 billion to reimburse for low income and uninsured patients. I'm not exactly sure of the numbers, though.
effen
Registered User
- Jun 27, 2003
- 12,743
- 10,950
You are focused on nonexistent people not being turned away for some reason.
Actual people will NOT go to the hospital pre-emptively because they can't afford it as a matter of course. A very large part of that is having no insurance or bad insurance or having no idea how to navigate insurance so someone "not in your network" wont bill you for $6800 2 months from now that you cannot even recall saw you. This is a problem that is intractable with our current system. That is what was being referenced, as best I can tell.
This will initially seem like a post about politics, but it isn't lol, so please bare with me a bit. It is interesting, in the grand scheme of things, to note that the pandemic didn't even the slightest change the politicization of public debate and action. If you can make politics of something and score points at the cost of the other side, no opportunity is passed over no matter what effect it can have on the handling of the pandemic and people's lives. Both sides are of course on par with each other here, hands down.
I have for a long time been pissed of/upset with this. But, I think it now just is so obvious that it is a fact that must be handled. The best way to do that would be to build around the problem. I think the way the Fed is run is a perfect example. More instituations like it should be set up, for example to handle pandemics. I also think it will. With the current structure, there is just too much power granted to a few selected experts that the politicians can handpick and lean on.
I have for a long time been pissed of/upset with this. But, I think it now just is so obvious that it is a fact that must be handled. The best way to do that would be to build around the problem. I think the way the Fed is run is a perfect example. More instituations like it should be set up, for example to handle pandemics. I also think it will. With the current structure, there is just too much power granted to a few selected experts that the politicians can handpick and lean on.
eco's bones
Registered User
I would add that there are people's whose only thought is avoidance because they can't afford. They've kind of trained themselves to never go. My best friend tells me he hasn't been to a dentist in over 30 years. He hadn't been to a doctor in about 20 before he had a heart attack. Now he goes. My one year older brother hadn't been to a doctor in about 30-35 years before a blood clot issue arose about a year and a half ago....and apart from the clot issue turned out he's in need of spinal surgery too which still is on hold. The hospital wouldn't release him either until he found himself a doctor--so he spent an extra day and a half there while his wife scrambled around arranging that. I run into these stories by the way all the time. People who can't afford don't go. My daughter hasn't been to a dentist in years either.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I just got a bill from when I had a 5 minute video conference call to try and get tested back in March. Had some chest tightness and was concerned about my wife going to work at a hospital and potentially spreading it to already at risk people. Didn't meet the guidelines so was told I couldn't get the test and was just told to call back if things get worse. We actually have good insurance through my wife's job.
Insurance denied, $188. For a 5 minute video conference call which didn't help at all (not my Dr's fault, but still.) I had assumed my call would have been covered or I might not have made that call. I definitely wouldn't have if my wife didn't work at a hospital. I definitely wouldn't have if we weren't in a position to afford $188.
Insurance denied, $188. For a 5 minute video conference call which didn't help at all (not my Dr's fault, but still.) I had assumed my call would have been covered or I might not have made that call. I definitely wouldn't have if my wife didn't work at a hospital. I definitely wouldn't have if we weren't in a position to afford $188.
Last edited by a moderator:
The most important factor for sure to watch right now is if hard hit places will be helped by acquired immunity when they open up or not. The math just don't add up if they aren't, and we will see hard set-backs and several waves just as bad as the ones we have had. If they are -- its not even sure that we will get any significant second wave at all.
Fauci/the CDC, Michael Ryan of the WHO and a few others firmly believe that no help is in sight. That the serology tests showing 5-10% of the population having antibodies in the hardest hit places show the complete picture and that you need to get north of 50-60% to get any substantial help.
On the other side, we have Sunetra Gupta from University of Oxford, Michael Levitt, Johan Gisecke and co who strongly argues that it cannot be a coincidence that the curves all over the globe showing the same pattern and going down without a change in mobility patterns etc. And many legitimate studies on areas that can explain why immunity would be a big factor earlier.
This is a study from a huge group of international epidemiologists on how variation in susceptibility or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 lowers the herd immunity threshold, and puts it on a qualified guess level at 10-20%. That would more or less be a game changer for a place like NYC easily 10x the possibility of a successful reopening.
(Individual variation in susceptibility or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 lowers the herd immunity threshold)
This study on Pre-existing and de novo humoral immunity could further explain this:
Pre-existing and de novo humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in humans
It shows unexposed persons have Covid-19 antibodies against other corona based flus.
Fauci/the CDC, Michael Ryan of the WHO and a few others firmly believe that no help is in sight. That the serology tests showing 5-10% of the population having antibodies in the hardest hit places show the complete picture and that you need to get north of 50-60% to get any substantial help.
On the other side, we have Sunetra Gupta from University of Oxford, Michael Levitt, Johan Gisecke and co who strongly argues that it cannot be a coincidence that the curves all over the globe showing the same pattern and going down without a change in mobility patterns etc. And many legitimate studies on areas that can explain why immunity would be a big factor earlier.
This is a study from a huge group of international epidemiologists on how variation in susceptibility or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 lowers the herd immunity threshold, and puts it on a qualified guess level at 10-20%. That would more or less be a game changer for a place like NYC easily 10x the possibility of a successful reopening.
(Individual variation in susceptibility or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 lowers the herd immunity threshold)
This study on Pre-existing and de novo humoral immunity could further explain this:
Pre-existing and de novo humoral immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in humans
It shows unexposed persons have Covid-19 antibodies against other corona based flus.
Nothing you wrote has anything to do with how M4A would work with a virus that has no treatment. It's one thing to say the uninsured don't go to the doctor because they can't afford it (which I agree with) and another to say they won't go to the emergency room when they have trouble breathing, which is untrue. Studies show exactly this, that uninsured don't use outpatient care as frequently as the insured but do use the ER as frequently as the insured. There is no outpatient treatment for covid-19 at all so the only medical intervention that is useful is admission to the hospital and as I said the uninsured are not turned away hence the provision in the CARES act.
Let's look at the impact of the pandemic on some countries with some form of M4A:
UK - CFR of 14% with 35k deaths (about 20% of US population)
Canada - CFR of 7.5% with 6k deaths (about 11% of US population)
France - CFR of 15.7% with 28k deaths (about 20% of US population)
Italy - CFR of 14.2% with 32k deaths (about 18% of US population)
In fact France+UK+Italy have the same number of deaths as the US despite having less than 60% of the US population. I see zero evidence that socialized medicine has helped at all with the pandemic.
BTW your arguments happens to be one of my pet peeves against the ACA. The law basically spelled the end of full indemnity insurance plans so most people now have high deductible plans and a high deductible is a barrier for people to see a doctor as @eco's bones noted.
sbjnyc- In the end, its definitely possible that the impact of this pandemic will more or less look identical all over the globe. We will see.
There is a lot of talk about age being the biggest "risk factor" for Covid-19. But that is in fact not true. Population density has a much bigger impact.
In population density:
GB ranks 33th (222 persons per km2)
Italy ranks 44th
France ranks 80th
USA ranks 145th (33 persons per km2)
As mentioned, the second biggest risk factor is "age". In terms of highest median age;
Italy ranks 4th (45.5 y/o)
France ranks 40th
UK 50th
USA ranks 61st (38.1 y/o)
So taking these facts into consideration, the US should be nowhere near France, UK or Italy in mortality rates per 100k.
OTOH, I think the US has a population with a larger portion of risk factors. Don't think its a matter of access to health care.
I think having higher quality nursing homes would help more, but which country has that now? Sweden is as communist as a country gets and they don't have it.
There is a lot of talk about age being the biggest "risk factor" for Covid-19. But that is in fact not true. Population density has a much bigger impact.
In population density:
GB ranks 33th (222 persons per km2)
Italy ranks 44th
France ranks 80th
USA ranks 145th (33 persons per km2)
As mentioned, the second biggest risk factor is "age". In terms of highest median age;
Italy ranks 4th (45.5 y/o)
France ranks 40th
UK 50th
USA ranks 61st (38.1 y/o)
So taking these facts into consideration, the US should be nowhere near France, UK or Italy in mortality rates per 100k.
OTOH, I think the US has a population with a larger portion of risk factors. Don't think its a matter of access to health care.
I think having higher quality nursing homes would help more, but which country has that now? Sweden is as communist as a country gets and they don't have it.
Brooklyn Rangers Fan
Change is good.
Spent the last 3+ days pretty sick. Principal symptoms were fever, aches, and inability to focus – so, neither of the "classic" symptoms of difficulty breathing and/or loss of sense of smell, but still worse than I've felt in a couple of years, and concerning because I'm isolating with my parents who are both in their 70s, and one of whom had pneumonia this past winter. Started to feel somewhat normal when I woke up this AM. As I type, still slightly fevered (about 1 degree above normal) and concentration not great but other than that, mostly normal-ish.
Had to wait to get tested until today because the local scheduling office was closed Sunday + Memorial Day. Went to a drive-through site in the Hudson Valley, and it was pretty well run, I have to say.
The test itself, however... yeargh. 2/10, would not recommend.*
*Unless you need it, then definitely go get it.
Had to wait to get tested until today because the local scheduling office was closed Sunday + Memorial Day. Went to a drive-through site in the Hudson Valley, and it was pretty well run, I have to say.
The test itself, however... yeargh. 2/10, would not recommend.*
*Unless you need it, then definitely go get it.
Yeah, I agree for sure. I think countries like especially GB have it worse, but the US have the super high density areas.
What irks me in this is Japan and South Korea. They are doing so much better than they should be doing. Some are saying that it’s the masks. I don’t know if that is enough. Could be immunity from some recent corona based cold wave.
If it’s the masks — many epidemiologist around the world made some baaaad calls lol.
Interesting! I heard one expert claim that he was almost certain that race has nothing to do with deaths, that is not something they’ve seen before with any similar virus. When it comes to response to medicine and some other illnesses race can play a part, but not with a virus flu.
I think the reason for higher mortality rate among these groups are the exact same as the median age in them are lower too, socioeconomical factors. Average life expectancy in Sweden is almost 15 years lower in the very north of Sweden compared to central Stockholm. Hard living cost years, that is just how it is.
https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/BFI_WP_202062-1.pdf
This is a university of Chicago study showing that 2/3 of those receiving unemployment benefits are receiving more in benefits than they were being paid at their jobs.
This is a university of Chicago study showing that 2/3 of those receiving unemployment benefits are receiving more in benefits than they were being paid at their jobs.
Synergy27
F-A-C-G-C-E
And this will be attacked from both ends of the spectrum. The left will use this as damning evidence for the inadequacy of wages. The right will scream about perverse incentives.
By the way, is anyone dealing with insanely invasive pop ups on this site? I’ve been redirected mid post to a completely separate page multiple times over the last few days.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Speaks more to how underpaid people are in the lower/middle class than the dumb arguments politicians make about how unemployment benefits shouldn't be extended b/c some people make more than their regular jobs while on unemployment+CARES and it desensitizes them from working.
If 2/3 of the population makes more during their unemployment in this pandemic than they do working their jobs normally, then something is truly messed up in this country.
I am hearing more and more about how the weak 19/20 flu season is causing high death numbers from Covid. Have you guys heard anything about that?
These tables does catch your eye:
Places with more deaths from the 19/20 flu season — that was fairly mild — supposedly has lower CFR while places with low 19/20 death toll from the flu are having more fatalities now.
It’s hard to know who is right, but someone like Nobel Prize winner and Stanford Professor Michael Levitt is getting more and more convinced that the politicians just blew the whole thing:
These tables does catch your eye:
Places with more deaths from the 19/20 flu season — that was fairly mild — supposedly has lower CFR while places with low 19/20 death toll from the flu are having more fatalities now.
It’s hard to know who is right, but someone like Nobel Prize winner and Stanford Professor Michael Levitt is getting more and more convinced that the politicians just blew the whole thing:
In case you missed it, the paper's Introduction starts with "The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) Act substantially expanded Unemployment Insurance (UI) in order to help workers losing jobs as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. One provision of the act creates an additional $600 weekly benefit known as the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation. The size of the payment—$600—is designed to replace 100 percent of the mean U.S. wage when combined with mean state UI benets."
The issue is that yes it is true that lower income folks are hardest hit (no surprise) but that the legislation does have create some odd incentives. Some people who are able to go back to work haven't because they get more money this way but also there is fear of the consequences of returning. Here's a story from an NPR article on the subject:
Edit: It's an article - not sure why it embedded as audio:
www.npr.org/2020/05/26/861906616/when-returning-to-your-job-means-a-cut-in-pay
Rachel Davis runs a consignment shop in Warrensburg, Mo. Since reopening this month, she's been buying hand sanitizer by the gallon.
"Disinfectant is my new fragrance," she jokes. She's limiting traffic in the store to three customers at a time. And everyone who comes in must wear a mask.
"Customers have thanked us for that," Davis says. "And my sales are actually up since we reopened."
Davis also gave her part-time employees a modest pay raise. But the $10 to $11 an hour they make is significantly less than they were collecting on unemployment. One of Davis' four workers has not come back.
"I know I shouldn't take it personally," Davis says. "She's doing what she feels [is] in her best interest. But as an employer, it actually kind of hurts."
- Status
