Coronavirus Numbers

[Populist Fury]

So, I just looked @ official Covid-19 numbers, & the worldwide death count so far is 67,999. May sound like a lot, but it's actually almost nothing when we consider the fact that world population is over 7 billion & close to 150,000 people die each & every day on average. People need to chillax & not allow the media's fearmongering get to them... keeping them living in constant fear of death.

 

A national shutdown won't do much at this point other than keep people prisoner in their own homes. Herd immunity is the answer.

[Bucky]

There are 350 million people in this country... This is not that serious. I'm calling it like I see it, this is not a major issue. Cars pose a greater risk of death than the Wuhan Virus.

But for those chicken littles that want to go with the mass hysteria, be my guest. But don't be pissed if I call you out on your stupidity. Even the Dr I saw today for my physical can't believe how stupid some of you are. ?‍♂️

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

BTW where IS our brilliant, ingenious friend GregM who posted this a couple weeks ago.... Hasn't been seen around here since 3/20. Hmmmm.

[BgMstr4u]

So, I just looked @ official Covid-19 numbers, & the worldwide death count so far is 67,999. May sound like a lot, but it's actually almost nothing when we consider the fact that world population is over 7 billion & close to 150,000 people die each & every day on average.

 

A national shutdown won't do much at this point other than keep people prisoner in their own homes. Herd immunity is the answer.

As I understand it, the point of the shut-down, shelter-in-place, don't-go-out orders is to slow the spread of the virus. It won't stop it, but it will spread out the need to respond when it does come. And (to be grim about it) add some time to some people's lives. But life has to go on. Food needs to be raised, processed, distributed and bought and sold. So does everyting else life requires. More and more economic activity will need to gear up, and that means more people likely to be infected. There just is not any way around that. Both have to happen - economic activity to keep goods and services flowing, and distancing/avoidance for those most at risk. It is not either/or but a balance of necessities which do not line up neatly with each other. The balance is about maintaining a severe shut-down as long as it is truly effective, and then revving things up again. The discernment needed for those decisions puts leaders in a truly terrible position. There may not be any obviously right answers, but rather, responses are required that are made at the time with at best partial information and possibly conflicting expert advice.

 

Until there is a vaccine, we will all have to go on living with this in one way or another. If a vaccine is developed, then gradually most if not all people will be vaccinated. A small number will likely respond negatively to the vaccination. I think the model we are looking at here is that of a disease that that can't be eliminated but will have to be managed. It is likely going to be part of the human scene from now on.

Edited April 5, 2020 by BgMstr4u

[Populist Fury]

Lol @GregM always keeping it real ?

 

It's amazing to see how easily people are willing to give up their civil liberties/freedoms when in fear.

[Guest]

So, I just looked @ official Covid-19 numbers, & the worldwide death count so far is 67,999. May sound like a lot, but it's actually almost nothing when we consider the fact that world population is over 7 billion & close to 150,000 people die each & every day on average. People need to chillax & not allow the media's fearmongering get to them... keeping them living in constant fear of death.

 

A national shutdown won't do much at this point other than keep people prisoner in their own homes. Herd immunity is the answer.

Lol @GregM always keeping it real ?

 

It's amazing to see how easily people are willing to give up their civil liberties/freedoms when in fear.

 

The important point is that the healthcare system in general, and the ability to use ventilators, which are lifesaving for this infection in many people, is limited. With ventilators and access to critical care, the case fatality rate is about 2%. Without ventilators, the fatality rate would be closer to 6% (obviously very rough estimates, but needed for the demonstration). Having 4% excessive deaths due to a rapid, sharp peak, instead of a flattened peak, represents millions of excessive deaths in this country alone. One can argue whether the costs are worth the lives of the millions, but the truth of the matter is that there will be millions of preventable deaths if we don't flatten the curve. We're preventing more than just "fear," as you say. The massive number of excessive deaths would be an undeniable reality, not just a fear. You yourself may not be in a high-risk category, and maybe you don't even know or care for someone who is. That doesn't make the lives any less real (and some younger people have died).

Our hospital has developed guidelines for ventilator rationing if demand exceeds capacity. Everyone will gets points based on their other health problems and age. If people have the same number of points, names will be literally drawn out of a hat. You or someone you know could literally be someone who passes away needlessly due to the surge in ventilator demand. We've never had to do such a thing, and hope we don't have to.

[+ stevenkesslar]

I have given her a paid holiday for the duration, because I know she needs the income, but I don't want her possibly bringing the virus into my home.

 

First, good for you. That is smart, and kind.

 

Second, that's yet another problem with the idea that we should just work our way through a pandemic, and find ways to shelter the most vulnerable. Right now, the idea of putting people in nursing homes, or having young caregivers come in to their homes to take care of them while a pandemic rages outside, just doesn't make sense.

 

The only thing that makes sense for the younger and healthier people going to work and the older and less healthy people staying home is to keep the absolute number of cases as low as we can.

[+ stevenkesslar]

 

I thought that was an interesting graphic on the number of traffic fatalities in the US, both as an absolute number and as a function of all vehicle miles traveled.

 

People have said we don't ban cars because of car crashes, so why all this overreaction with COVID-19? Those numbers put the number of deaths in context.

 

First, there were about 38,000 traffic deaths a year in the US at last count. If that suddenly jumped to 100,000 to 240,000 deaths, the "realistic" estimate for a first wave of COVID-19 deaths, that would certainly get people's attention. The number of traffic deaths are actually comparable to the number of seasonal flu deaths in a worse than average year.

 

Second, 1 or 2 or 3 million deaths - meaning 25 % or 50 % or 100 % of Americans get infected and we have"only" a 1 % death rate - would be off the charts. If you assume all Americans get infected, or half of us do and we have a 2 % death rate (which is modest compared to what is happening in many countries) that is 3 million deaths, or about 100 times the number of annual traffic deaths in the US. Going for herd immunity that way, rather than a vaccine, is equivalent to driving a car into a brick wall at 100 miles an hour to see what happens.

 

 

It's amazing to see how easily people are willing to give up their civil liberties/freedoms when in fear.

Herd immunity is the answer.

 

Go ahead, Shill. Be my guest. It's a free country. Give it a try and get back to us on how well it worked out, okay?

 

Third, to say "well, we don't ban cars" because of car crashes would be equivalent to saying "well, we don't ban human relationships" because of COVID-19. Both those statements are true. Dying in a car crash does have something to do with driving a car. Dying from COVID-19 has something to do with being physically close to other human beings. Both are things people like to do. So the real issue isn't about banning anything. It's about regulating how we do things that they are safer.

 

Fourth, the amount of regulation and investment that went into achieving the constantly declining traffic mortality rate is huge. There are the obvious things - like having speed limits, traffic lights, driving tests, penalties, campaigns against drunk driving. Then there are the countless investments we don't even notice: paved roads, median lines, barriers in between traffic lanes, speed bumps, roundabouts.

 

 

The Economist ran an article several months ago about the huge number of unnecessary deaths in "middle income" countries like Thailand. Poor countries don't have cars and paved roads. Rich countries spend a huge amount on paved roads and physical things that improve traffic safety. The in between countries that have fast cars (and motorcycles) without the money to make things safe have as much as five times as much traffic deaths, relative to their population. As Bill Gates keeps saying, something similar is likely to happen due to COVID-19 in both middle income and poor countries, due to the fact that they have less money for medical and hospital care.

 

Fourth, part of the shock of COVID-19 is that we have to spend all the money we spent on traffic century over the course of a century all at once. That's an exaggeration, of course. Part of why the US and Italy are "better off" is that we have spent enormous amounts on a good hospital system many other countries don't have. That said, we have completely underinvested in preparing for a pandemic. It's understandable, because we do drive cars every day. We only have pandemics this deadly once or twice a century or so. But we are having to play catch up in a way we don't have to with traffic safety. That's a lesson moving forward. No one alive today will ever forget this one as long as they are alive. In the future, we'll invest in vaccines and prevention the same way we do in traffic safety.

 

The analogy I can think of to really equate traffic safety to COVID-19 would be something like this. Imagine that all cars is the US were driverless. And imagine somebody hacked the system so that instead of being very safe, cars just started constantly crashing into each other at 60 miles an hour. Imagine hospitals being filled to capacity with the dead and dying from car crashes. Imagine people suddenly being afraid to get into cars that used to be safe, but now seemed totally out of control.

 

It's not the best hypothetical. But it is in the ballpark of what is happening. People would pretty quickly decide to stop getting in cars until we figured out what we going on. And that would have a huge impact on our economy, too. But in a hypothetical like that, a similar reaction would happen. Not because people don't give a shit about their lives, and traffic safety. It would happen because people obviously do give a shit about their lives, and traffic safety. We've spent a fortune on making it much safer to drive (and fly in airplanes.) And, mostly, we have been very successful.

[+ stevenkesslar]

Until US enforces national shutdown, nothing will be accomplished.

 

 

The US numbers show that. There's no longer any question, as long as you base your thinking on facts.

 

We are already the national poster child for how to maximize death, maximize suffering, and maximize economic loss. So I've just accepted that. In the future, people all over the world will always look to the US as an example of how you just fuck this up super bad and kill as many of your own people as possible.

 

Our stock market plummeted three times lower than China's. So it is just locked and loaded that our stock market will be hurt more than China's will, for much longer than China's will. All because of people who insist that the best way to save the US stock market is to assume that life can pretty much stay normal during a pandemic.

 

And it seems like the idea now is that tens of thousands of new cases a day is insufficient. We probably need to have hundreds of thousands of new cases every day before people go, "Oh. Wow. Look at that. Lots more people are dying. Maybe we should try Plan B."

 

Daily New Cases in the United States

 

The US stands out for several reasons. First, the absolute number of new cases a day is off the charts. About 35,000 a day, and growing every day. There is no indication we are starting to plateau, like Italy or Spain, let alone decrease the daily growth in the number of people infected. China, at peak, had maybe 2000 or 3000 or 4000 new cases a day. That's because they did a coordinated and leak-free national shut down.

 

In the US, people are saying that individual liberty is more important. So why would you stop an American from exercising her God given right to spend a few months slowly dying in a hospital bed from an untreatable virus?

 

So we'll have hundreds of thousands of deaths, for sure. We'll drag this out longer than most other countries, for sure. At this point I've just resolved myself to the idea that we have to wait until more and more people notice how many Americans are sick and dying. We've already surpassed the death toll of every war American war fought in the 21st century. By the end of April, we should have beaten the death toll for every war going back to and including Vietnam. I'm guessing maybe that's what it will take for the light bulb to go off. At some point a critical mass of people will start to think, "Geez. Maybe this idea of trying to keep life normal during a pandemic just doesn't work out so well."

 

Daily New Cases in Australia

 

Daily New Cases in Austria

 

Compare the way lock downs have worked in Australia and Austria. Outside of the East Asian countries, they are the two "Western" nations that are doing the best. In both cases, they have dramatically reduced the number of new cases. Australia's population is about 25 % bigger than New York. Austria's population is comparable to New Jersey's.

 

I'm not 100 % sure what they did differently. But this is definitely a discussion Americans should be having. Unless you are super committed to the idea that 1 million dead Americans is way better than 100,000 dead Americans. Anyone who sees this as a really great opportunity to cull the herd should be very happy with the way things are going. Anybody else, maybe this is some good food for thought.

 

I think there are at least two things Austria and Australia did that have worked.

 

First, they acted immediately and urgently. As a very long and informative article @mike carey posted noted, Australia spent a little bit of time dithering with this, while people packed Bondi Beach. But then within a matter of a few days they moved to immediate and fierce nationwide lock down.

 

From what I can tell, the tone in Australia is very sober and realistic. They are saying that people should just forget about international tourism, forget about packed stadiums, forget about a lot of things that used to be normal .............. for six months, one year, two years. Deal with the new reality, because that's what it is going to take to start to work out how we can gradually and carefully reopen things.

 

Austria has done a similar thing, I think. If you go back a few weeks, the tone was very harsh. Thousands of people were being fined for violating very strict social distancing rules. The basic message, loud and clear, was STAY THE FUCK HOME. Auf Deutsch, of course. (Imagine Samuel L. Jackson's rant in German!)

 

Austria Opens the Door to Easing Lockdown After Containing Virus

Austria may be one of the first European countries to loosen restrictions aimed at slowing the spread of the coronavirus.

 

At the same time, Kurz urged Austrians to persevere with social-distancing measures and asked them to refrain from celebrating the Easter holiday with large gatherings of families and friends.

 

The 33-year-old leader, who wore a face mask before and after his speech, also warned against giving the all clear before virus statistics show a sustainable downward trajectory. Kurz has previously raised the prospects of easing restrictions after Easter on April 12 and then dashed those hopes by tightening aspects of the lockdown.

 

Bordering on a northern Italian virus hotspot and a spreader of its own through some of its ski resorts, Austria was one of the first European countries after Italy to close schools and stores, taking the step on March 16. Kurz’s government added measures like mandatory face masks in recent days.

 

The restrictions aimed at limiting contact between people managed to reduce the increase in new infections to less than 5% per day. The number of daily fatalities has fallen for four straight days this week, with 10 deaths on Friday taking the total to 168.

 

This has nothing to do with politics. At this point, it seems so obvious that I think it is fair to say it simply has to do with common sense. You have to really work hard not to see that the countries and states that moved the quickest and the harshest are the ones that will be able to gradually think about getting their economy slowly started again.

 

Bill Gates is dead right. And unfortunately, "dead" right means exactly that. If we ignore him, it just means deeper economic pain and more death.

Edited April 5, 2020 by stevenkesslar

[+ stevenkesslar]

Idaho’s Blaine County has more coronavirus cases per capita than Italy and New York City

 

Idaho is shaping up to be a sort of Death Capitol of rural America.

 

As that article explains, it is not quite rural. The characteristics that are leading to a high rate of infection are Sun Valley, lots of recreational tourism, and affluent people with second homes.

 

I think this is actually a perfect metaphor for all these arguments about health versus wealth. The best way to shred wealth with incredible speed is turning out to be ignoring the fact that you have a deadly pandemic. It has now absolutely guaranteed that Sun Valley is dead, dead, dead, dead, dead an an economic factor in the Idaho economy. People don't want to die. So they will just stay away from Sun Valley for a long time. That's just based on normal human behavior. People will just avoid it like the plague.

 

Granted, Sun Valley would have been fucked if it had gotten ahead of the curve and shut down in February. That could have cut the infection rate by 90 % or so, probably. If they has started in February and had really effective testing and tracing, they probably could be down to few or even no new cases by now. They have a population of a little over 20,000 people, and 400 COVID-19 cases. San Francisco has a population of close to 1 million, and 568 COVID-19 cases. The tourism industry in San Francisco and Sun Valley are both going to be crippled for a very long time. But I'm pretty sure that San Francisco will recover much more quickly.

 

Of course, SF has a much smaller percentage of their economy that is based on tourism. But even people who live in SF need to feel like they are safe to go outside and go to work. If anyone still thinks that the economy of Sun Valley would be better if they just stayed open and had 4000 or 10,000 or 15,000 cases, you might want to check in with the people who are actually going to have to live through this for a very long time.

[BSR]

So, I just looked @ official Covid-19 numbers, & the worldwide death count so far is 67,999. May sound like a lot, but it's actually almost nothing when we consider the fact that world population is over 7 billion & close to 150,000 people die each & every day on average. People need to chillax & not allow the media's fearmongering get to them... keeping them living in constant fear of death.

 

A national shutdown won't do much at this point other than keep people prisoner in their own homes. Herd immunity is the answer.

 

Accurate numbers for coronavirus deaths are impossible at this point. CT Gov. Ned Lamont is under fire for publicizing a case of a 6-week newborn dying of complications from COVID-19 when the state's medical examiner had yet to verify cause of death, suspected to be accidental suffocation. Italy is counting anyone with COVID-19 in their system as a coronavirus death even though they died of another cause. France until recently wasn't counting coronavirus deaths in nursing homes. China is almost certainly underreporting deaths, perhaps by an order of magnitude. What's the real number of deaths from (not with) COVID-19? Nobody knows.

[marylander1940]

y

Accurate numbers for coronavirus deaths are impossible at this point. CT Gov. Ned Lamont is under fire for publicizing a case of a 6-week newborn dying of complications from COVID-19 when the state's medical examiner had yet to verify cause of death, suspected to be accidental suffocation. Italy is counting anyone with COVID-19 in their system as a coronavirus death even though they died of another cause. France until recently wasn't counting coronavirus deaths in nursing. China is almost certainly underreporting deaths, perhaps by an order of magnitude. What's the real number of deaths from (not with) COVID-19? Nobody knows.

 

you're also forgetting about those who die because of the result of hospitals being overwhelmed by so many patients of Covid-19 and unable to provide the same life saving procedures they would have done in non pandemic times.

 

I just hope after all of this is over we assume a better lifestyle and avoid all the self inflicted wounds that have caused so many problems to our healthcare system.

[+ WilliamM]

So, I just looked @ official Covid-19 numbers, & the worldwide death count so far is 67,999. May sound like a lot, but it's actually almost nothing when we consider the fact that world population is over 7 billion & close to 150,000 people die each & every day on average. People need to chillax & not allow the media's fearmongering get to them... keeping them living in constant fear of death.

 

A national shutdown won't do much at this point other than keep people prisoner in their own homes. Herd immunity is the answer.

 

What happened to your outcries about the deaths in so-called regime change wars? Now you seem to be minimizing deaths from COVID-19. Somewhat inconsistent, right?

[+ stevenkesslar]

Accurate numbers for coronavirus deaths are impossible at this point. What's the real number of deaths from (not with) COVID-19? Nobody knows.

 

Coronavirus death toll: Americans are almost certainly dying of covid-19 but being left out of the official count

 

There is a counting problem. You describe it, accurately, both ways. In some cases, there is an overcount. In other cases, there is an undercount.

 

Most likely, the academic issue is that there is a large undercount. In order to die of COVID-19 in the US, you have to test positive. Once you test positive, you can have a debate about whether it was the heart condition or COVID-19 that killed you. The answer is probably, "Both". But many people who die with COVID-19 without being tested will be undercounted.

 

What is most amazing about this is the utter lack of pragmatism. A lot of the ways we are dealing with this does suggest that somehow ideology has infected people's brains. In this case, it is pragmatic to not be particularly concerned about knowing the exact cause of death. If you are dead, you are dead. The pragmatic thing, as people in that article above say, is to use test kits to diagnose people who are living, so that we can prevent death and prevent the spread of infection. That should be the priority, obviously.

 

It is inconceivable to me that over three months after the HHS Director and CDC Director had a private conversation (in early January) saying this was a "very big deal", we still have zero random testing in the US, as far as I can tell. Data that we do have, from South Korea and India, suggest that maybe 20 or 30 % of infections are diagnosed when they are asymptomatic. It would help to know if those numbers are in the ballpark of correct. And what kind of characteristics these asymptomatic people have. How many remain asymptomatic? How many become symptomatic a few days after they are tested?

 

In lieu of actual information, people are wisely guessing that the asymptomatics are probably likely to be the 20ish Spring Breaker types, or the college students who work in nursing homes. It isn't their fault that they are shedding a virus that they don't know they are infected by. But how is it possible, three months into a pandemic, that we still don't have very practical information like this?

 

Small Businesses Are Almost Out Of Time, And It Matters To All Of Us

 

A Goldman Sachs survey of 1,500 small businesses found that 96% of owners were already feeling the effects of COVID-19. More than half said their business would not be able to continue operating for more than three months because of the economic stresses caused by the pandemic.

 

We need rapid deployment of capital from local and national financial institutions supported by the SBA and “immediate need” one-click solutions analogous to PayPal’s business loans, for instant relief until the larger loans can be made.

 

If we lose 18 million small businesses to bankruptcy, there is no future bailout that turns them back on overnight. This could in turn reasonably lead to the worst economic scenario most Americans have seen in their lifetimes, greatly increase wealth inequality and social instability.

 

Here's another one that seems almost inconceivable to me, in a country that prides itself on boot strap pragmatism. How is it possible to think that small businesses thrive during pandemics? And that what really hurts small businesses is steps to prevent death and sickness during a pandemic? How is it possible that pragmatic people could actually think that way?

 

A few nights ago I got dinner from my favorite take out pizza place, where I usually order maybe once a month. I actually debated where it was safe to do that for an uncomfortably long time. I felt like a wuss for debating whether it was safe to go order a fucking pizza. This is a small take-out only place with no tables and maybe half a dozen chairs to wait. It is a non-branded, family-owned business. The husband and wife who own it are almost always the ones who work the register.

 

I had assumed their business would be booming. They are tailor made for people who need take out food during a pandemic. So I was surprised when the woman co-owner told me business is about 50 % of normal. She said that was an improvement. Because when the lock down order in California first happened, in mid-March, business was about 25 % of usual. So I have to assume that I am not unique, and most people are thinking like me: Is it really worth touching the cardboard box the pizza was put in? Is it really worth being in a small space with other people who make contact with lots of people every day? For whatever reason, business is down by 50 % to 75 %. And I have to believe it is because people are just scared of going out, even to simply buy and bring home a pizza.

 

The place I get my hair cut is across the street from the pizza joint, in a little strip mall. It is closed. But even before it closed, in early March, I debated whether to go get my hair cut. I just decided I wasn't going to. The woman who cuts my hair is a Mexican American immigrant who lives in my neighborhood. The owner is an Asian American immigrant. So pretty much everybody who works there is either first generation immigrant American, or a Gay man, as far as I can tell. So now they have no job-related income. But even if they were open (in Arizona hair salons are deemed "essential") business would still be down 50 % to 75 %, probably.

 

About a year ago, my hair stylist, Alicia, was clearly fighting a "thing" and coughing while she cut my hair. She said it was an allergy. I just consoled her, and hoped I didn't get sick a few days later. I didn't. But I would not take the risk of the same thing happening today with COVID-19. And the bitch of this disease is that she could be sick and shedding virus on me without even knowing it.

 

I live in Riverside County, California, which is the 4th largest county in my state. My county is one of the reasons that infections are going up in California. The urban areas that locked down first are where the infections now seem to be spreading at the slowest rate. In other parts of the state, which feel "safe", the infections are growing at a quicker rate. I haven't kept track, but I think a few weeks ago, when the lock downs started, there were about 50 COVID-19 cases in Riverside County. Now there are 665, which is more than in the City of San Francisco. Riverside County has more than double the population of San Francisco. So there is still a slightly lower infection rate per capita here. But it is still growing in both places, albeit at lower numbers and at a much slower rate than in many other places.

 

It just defies reason to think that if we had 250,000 COVID-19 cases in Riverside County (10 % of the county population), somehow the economy would be working much better. And somehow small businesses would be in better shape.

 

If people like me are choosing not to get their hair cut or go get a pizza when there are 50 or 500 cases, which is like 0.002 % of the county population, I doubt we'd be more likely to patronize a small business if there were 250,000 cases. And yet, if we let the pandemic run wild, we know for a fact that it would only take a month or so of exponential growth to get to that level. Do the math. Double 500 every three days, which is about the rate this virus grows at unchecked, and it take about 28 days to go from 500 cases to 250,000 cases.

 

If Riverside County is 1/20th as smart as South Korea, we ought to be able to get the number of cases back down to 50 a day. And we ought to be able to keep it that way through testing and contact tracing. South Korea has a population twenty times the size of Riverside County. Somehow, they are able to keep it down to 100 cases a day, and still have the majority of businesses and restaurants open. If the idea is to help most small businesses survive, something like that has to be the pragmatic goal.

 

What amazes me is the utter lack of pragmatism among people who really do seem to think that 250,000 sick people, maybe 50,000 of whom are in hospitals, is a good way to help small businesses and keep the economy going. Even if you assume not one of those small business owners or their employees will get sick, or require hospitalization, the idea just makes no sense.

 

I'd call it cowboy capitalism, but it is too kind to refer to this kind of behavior as "capitalism". I think a better word for it is cowboy craziness.

 

I think people in Japan and South Korea and Australia and Taiwan and Austria and Hong Kong probably do enjoy watching Westerns.

 

Fortunately for them, they don't seem to want to act like cowboys when it comes to actually containing a pandemic.

 

Americans seem to think if we just put on a mask and go to work, everything will be just fine.

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2020 by stevenkesslar

[Guest]

Accurate numbers for coronavirus deaths are impossible at this point. CT Gov. Ned Lamont is under fire for publicizing a case of a 6-week newborn dying of complications from COVID-19 when the state's medical examiner had yet to verify cause of death, suspected to be accidental suffocation. Italy is counting anyone with COVID-19 in their system as a coronavirus death even though they died of another cause. France until recently wasn't counting coronavirus deaths in nursing homes. China is almost certainly underreporting deaths, perhaps by an order of magnitude. What's the real number of deaths from (not with) COVID-19? Nobody knows.

Well, I agree that China is probably grossly under-reporting. But Covid19 is a 2-week infection and then it's out of your system. It's a pretty good bet that anyone who dies at that time has died because of the Covid19 infection, unless there's an obvious alternative explanation. Yes, someone could contract Covid-19 then get hit by a truck. But if they pass out and go under arrest during the infection, it's almost certainly due to the infection (or perhaps an over-agressive immune response of the body to the infection). If hydroxychloroquine ends up working, I suspect that the mechanism will be that it suppresses the excessive immune response, not due to some new antiviral effect.

[+ tassojunior]

I have given her a paid holiday for the duration, because I know she needs the income, but I don't want her possibly bringing the virus into my home.

 

I've doubled up times for my housekeeper because she disinfects heavily, changes sheets, etc. I leave her alone in the house and when she leaves I spray disinfectant. On balance she's more of a sanitary plus.

[+ tassojunior]

The US numbers show that. There's no longer any question, as long as you base your thinking on facts.

 

We are already the national poster child for how to maximize death, maximize suffering, and maximize economic loss. So I've just accepted that. In the future, people all over the world will always look to the US as an example of how you just fuck this up super bad and kill as many of your own people as possible.

 

Our stock market plummeted three times lower than China's. So it is just locked and loaded that our stock market will be hurt more than China's will, for much longer than China's will. All because of people who insist that the best way to save the US stock market is to assume that life can pretty much stay normal during a pandemic.

 

And it seems like the idea now is that tens of thousands of new cases a day is insufficient. We probably need to have hundreds of thousands of new cases every day before people go, "Oh. Wow. Look at that. Lots more people are dying. Maybe we should try Plan B."

 

Daily New Cases in the United States

 

The US stands out for several reasons. First, the absolute number of new cases a day is off the charts. About 35,000 a day, and growing every day. There is no indication we are starting to plateau, like Italy or Spain, let alone decrease the daily growth in the number of people infected. China, at peak, had maybe 2000 or 3000 or 4000 new cases a day. That's because they did a coordinated and leak-free national shut down.

 

In the US, people are saying that individual liberty is more important. So why would you stop an American from exercising her God given right to spend a few months slowly dying in a hospital bed from an untreatable virus?

 

So we'll have hundreds of thousands of deaths, for sure. We'll drag this out longer than most other countries, for sure. At this point I've just resolved myself to the idea that we have to wait until more and more people notice how many Americans are sick and dying. We've already surpassed the death toll of every war American war fought in the 21st century. By the end of April, we should have beaten the death toll for every war going back to and including Vietnam. I'm guessing maybe that's what it will take for the light bulb to go off. At some point a critical mass of people will start to think, "Geez. Maybe this idea of trying to keep life normal during a pandemic just doesn't work out so well."

 

Daily New Cases in Australia

 

Daily New Cases in Austria

 

Compare the way lock downs have worked in Australia and Austria. Outside of the East Asian countries, they are the two "Western" nations that are doing the best. In both cases, they have dramatically reduced the number of new cases. Australia's population is about 25 % bigger than New York. Austria's population is comparable to New Jersey's.

 

I'm not 100 % sure what they did differently. But this is definitely a discussion Americans should be having. Unless you are super committed to the idea that 1 million dead Americans is way better than 100,000 dead Americans. Anyone who sees this as a really great opportunity to cull the herd should be very happy with the way things are going. Anybody else, maybe this is some good food for thought.

 

I think there are at least two things Austria and Australia did that have worked.

 

First, they acted immediately and urgently. As a very long and informative article @mike carey posted noted, Australia spent a little bit of time dithering with this, while people packed Bondi Beach. But then within a matter of a few days they moved to immediate and fierce nationwide lock down.

 

From what I can tell, the tone in Australia is very sober and realistic. They are saying that people should just forget about international tourism, forget about packed stadiums, forget about a lot of things that used to be normal .............. for six months, one year, two years. Deal with the new reality, because that's what it is going to take to start to work out how we can gradually and carefully reopen things.

 

Austria has done a similar thing, I think. If you go back a few weeks, the tone was very harsh. Thousands of people were being fined for violating very strict social distancing rules. The basic message, loud and clear, was STAY THE FUCK HOME. Auf Deutsch, of course. (Imagine Samuel L. Jackson's rant in German!)

 

Austria Opens the Door to Easing Lockdown After Containing Virus

 

 

 

 

This has nothing to do with politics. At this point, it seems so obvious that I think it is fair to say it simply has to do with common sense. You have to really work hard not to see that the countries and states that moved the quickest and the harshest are the ones that will be able to gradually think about getting their economy slowly started again.

 

Bill Gates is dead right. And unfortunately, "dead" right means exactly that. If we ignore him, it just means deeper economic pain and more death.

 

DC hit 1000 cases today with it's 670,000 population. But it was a warm day and all the 20-somethings were parading in shorts and sandals with virtually no masks. Once the antibody test comes and tells many they are immune, there's going to be a revolt of the young. Hell hath no fury like young entitled yuppies in DC.

[+ stevenkesslar]

DC hit 1000 cases today with it's 670,000 population. But it was a warm day and all the 20-somethings were parading in shorts and sandals with virtually no masks. Once the antibody test comes and tells many they are immune, there's going to be a revolt of the young. Hell hath no fury like young entitled yuppies in DC.

 

Hell also hath no fury like a 25 year old yuppie on a ventilator.

 

I'm mostly doing this bitch in the politics forum. But the apolitical version of it is this: there is no testing - none - that confirms this notion that all these 20 year olds just skated through COVID-19 without knowing it.

 

The anecdotal evidence is the opposite. A number of 20-somethings say it is a bitch of a flu. They survive it. But it is a pain in the ass.

 

My best guess is about 20 % of everybody who gets this virus is completely asymptomatic. And they tend to be the young ones.

 

This notion that there are maybe millions or even tens of millions of 20-somethings with antibodies to COVID-19 because they just didn't even notice they were sick doesn't even begin to make any rational sense.

 

Cases, Hospitalizations and Deaths Rates by Age

 

Check out that age-based chart on case loads. You can toggle between number of cases per 100,000, number of hospitalizations, and number of deaths - based on age. I think that gives us a pretty good picture of COVID-19.

 

If there is some huge under-representation of infections, I suspect it is among children aged 17 or lower. There are few diagnosed cases. Maybe, for some reason, they can't catch COVID-19. More likely, they have very healthy immune systems that just wipe it out quicker. If they are able to shed virus, which is likely, we have a huge problem figuring out how they go to school without being huge pipelines for transmitting the virus exponentially in Fall 2020.

 

Once you get into adulthood, everybody is a potential victim. Granted, that graphic lumps 22 year olds in with 44 year olds. But basically that entire group is younger and healthier. So they may get diagnosed at half the rate of 75 year olds. As of today it 753 cases per 100,000 for under 35 adults, and 1262 per 100,000 for over 75 adults. So there are lots of Millennials who are sick enough to go get diagnosed, apparently.

 

When you toggle on to hospitalizations, the differences start to emerge. One CDC study in the US showed that 20 % or so of people hospitalized were under 45 years old. The NYC data suggests people in that age group that are diagnosed have maybe a 1 in 10 chance of ending up in a hospital bed. Even if you assume it is really more like 1 in 20, when you factor in young adults who get the virus and are not diagnosed, that is still a lot of people. It's not like 30 year old bodybuilders think that they have a 1 in 20 chance of landing in a hospital every time they drive their car to the gym, or every time they work out. But now they seemingly do have a 1 in 20 chance of being hospitalized from COVID-19, if they get the virus.

 

For 75 year olds, that NYC data suggests about half of people diagnosed end up in a hospital.

 

The good news for young adults is that your chances of being diagnosed with COVID-19 and actually dying are maybe about 1 in 200. So I suppose you could tell a 30 year old bodybuilder, "Hey. At least its not like AIDS was in the 1980's. You're probably not gonna die."

 

That said, 30 year old bodybuilders still have a problem. If they happen to know anybody 75 or older - like if they are a personal trainer, or a waiter, or work in a retail store, or a hospital - the 75 year old they infect has a 1 in 6 chance of dying. If I were an escort, still, I would factor in that death is never a good way to build a client base.

 

I am being a broken record on this, because I think this mythology is actually making life harder on everybody. And that's probably especially true for any small business that, in theory, could start to reopen in June - if we got our shit together, and acted like other countries who are taking the hit all at once, and beating the virus back much more effectively.

 

This notion that 20 somethings and 30 somethings can just breezily work their way through this is total bullshit. Even if you assume that they just have no fucking concern that they will kill Granny, or some 75 year old client if they are an escort, there are still big problems. If 5 or 10 % of them end up in hospital beds for a week or two, they are kind of fucked financially. And even if you assume only 1 in 3 get sick enough that they have to stay home in bed for a few weeks, that kind of has an impact on the workplace. And the worst part is that the other 2 in 3 who are not as sick are out getting everybody else sick.

 

Sorry, but you just can't have gyms open and restaurants thriving in that kind of environment. Even if some countries allowed it - which they pretty much don't - people would just hide in their houses. There is no history anywhere, anytime, of people just merrily working their way through a pandemic or plague.

 

I am not saying you are wrong that some 20 somethings have not gotten the memo yet. Seemingly, in countries like Australia and Austria, they did get the memo much quicker. If for no other reason than because they got a fine. So maybe we need to start doing that here. Or maybe everybody who is 25 or 35 needs to know somebody who spent a week in a hospital, and now has a $5000 or $10,000 bill just from co-pays and deductibles.

Edited April 6, 2020 by stevenkesslar

[+ tassojunior]

Hell also hath no fury like a 25 year old yuppie on a ventilator.

 

I'm mostly doing this bitch in the politics forum. But the apolitical version of it is this: there is no testing - none - that confirms this notion that all these 20 year olds just skated through COVID-19 without knowing it.

 

The anecdotal evidence is the opposite. A number of 20-somethings say it is a bitch of a flu. They survive it. But it is a pain in the ass.

 

enough to go get diagnosed, apparently.

 

When you toggle on to hospitalizations, the differences start to emerge. One CDC study in the US showed that 20 % or so of

 

.

 

This is probably the best extremely concise piece I've seen. This political correctness of changing facts on masks and age needs to stop as does other PC lies. Pleasant or not, truth and facts are absolutely necessary. Let's make a deal with the youth: free college for so many pints of their antibody hemoglobin to treat boomers:

 

 

 

The noble lie about masks and coronavirus should never have been told

 

Matthew Walther

The WeekApril 4, 2020, 6:40 AM EDT

 

 

Those of you of a certain age will doubtless remember a time when it was universally acknowledged that wearing masks would not protect you or anyone else from the coronavirus pandemic. By "certain age" here I mean all living Americans born on or

before April 1, 2020, which according to my notes is when it became possible to express a contrary position in polite society.

 

This was always nonsense. The White House is now suggesting that all of us should wear masks whenever we leave our houses. We are even stealing vast stockpiles of them from the Germans, who have been wearing them in public for around a month on the rather more numerous occasions when their leaders exempt them from house arrest. People who can't get proper masks (apparently the kind people wear when they spray for bugs) are being encouraged to make their own. If nothing else, this has given tedious DIY addicts something else to be self satisfied about. No one cares how quaint and interesting you think the piece of cloth meant to protect you from a disease is, okay?

 

Whether the journalists and other apparent experts who enthusiastically spread this apparent lie about masks knew it was false is very much an open question. Some of us found it odd that the same people were also saying that masks should be reserved for use by medical professionals. If masks don't do anything, why do doctors and nurses need them? Are they an ornamental part of a dress uniform? The mind reels.

 

Regardless of the personal honesty of those involved in it, this propaganda campaign should never have been conducted in the first place. It is one thing to debate what should be empirical questions, such as the efficacy of wearing protective equipment in an attempt to forestall the spread of viral infections; it is another for people to bang on about whatever the latest current corona wisdom is with the same tedious certainty that not long ago made us a nation of Logan Act scholars and experts on the non-existent criminal law implications of the emoluments clause. These manias do roughly as much for public health as those kids — there was at least one in every first-grade class — who relentlessly ssshh everyone else in line do to improve schoolyard behavior.

 

The 180-degree shift in acceptable public opinion about masks is in line with how the rest of this crisis has unfolded. Masks won't help. Everyone needs a mask. It's not worth shutting down travel to and from China over the virus, and Trump is just being a xenophobe here. Trump should have done more to prevent the virus from coming to these shores. It's less dangerous than the flu; calling it less dangerous than the flu is a right-wing meme, perhaps even (one shudders) "misinformation." Human beings can't even transmit the virus directly to one another; it originated with animals in Chinese open-air "wet" food markets. Talking about the wet markets is racist, except when Dr. Fauci does it.

 

Can we please stop talking this way? As I write this our paper of record is all but publicly rooting for the failure of anti-malarial drugs that appear to have been successful in treating some coronavirus patients. It is not against "science," whatever that may be, for the president or anyone else to observe that certain medicines or treatments have worked. It is not for science, either. It's just a fact that may or may not have limited application depending upon what happens over the next few months. A bit more epistemic humility would be welcome all around.

 

As would more of what I will bluntly call adult behavior. We must put an end to the idea that the best way to get through this crisis is to say things we know are not true in the hope of getting people to behave a certain way. This means not saying masks are useless when what you really mean is, "Masks are in short supply, please consider before you start hoarding them whether you really need them at present and if so how many."

 

Ditto the painfully relentless attempts to give young people the impression that they are horribly likely to die from the new virus. Even in Italy, the country with the worst measured fatality rate so far, around 86 percent of all the deceased have been aged 70 or older, and 50 percent were at least 80. We do not need to zero in on statistical anomalies or otherwise engage in scaremongering. It should be enough to say, "Even though you are very unlikely to die from coronavirus, remember that you could contract the disease and spread it to more vulnerable people without even experiencing symptoms, so please don't revel with 5000 strangers at the beach and then run home to give Grandma a hug."

 

This is how grown-ups talk to one another.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/noble-lie-masks-coronavirus-never-104001181.html

 

And in fact requiring everyone in public to wear a mask, as Germany and several countries do, would stop most transmission of the virus from unknowing carriers.

Edited April 6, 2020 by tassojunior

[+ stevenkesslar]

This political correctness of changing facts on masks and age needs to stop as does other PC lies. Pleasant or not, truth and facts are absolutely necessary.

 

Regardless of the personal honesty of those involved in it, this propaganda campaign should never have been conducted in the first place.

 

Ok. So let's have the truth.

 

I don't know what you read. But the journalism I've read is very clear.

 

1. Wear a mask if you are sick. Although, really, you should not be in public now if you are sick.

 

2. Wear a mask if you are a medical professional around COVID-19 patients, or anyone who happens to be around a COVID-19 patient.

 

I've never read anything saying that wearing a mask is a bad idea, or that it offers no protection. What I have read is very consistent with the overall tone that we are all in this together. Stay at home as much as possible. The very limited benefit of wearing a mask when you are unlikely to be exposed to COVID-19 is tiny compared to the imminent risk of a doctor or nurse who is treating a COVID-19 patient.

 

I don't see the message as changing that much. And I don't see this as having anything to do with propaganda. I still think we have an acute mask shortage, right?

 

Ditto the painfully relentless attempts to give young people the impression that they are horribly likely to die from the new virus. Even in Italy, the country with the worst measured fatality rate so far, around 86 percent of all the deceased have been aged 70 or older, and 50 percent were at least 80. We do not need to zero in on statistical anomalies or otherwise engage in scaremongering. It should be enough to say, "Even though you are very unlikely to die from coronavirus, remember that you could contract the disease and spread it to more vulnerable people without even experiencing symptoms, so please don't revel with 5000 strangers at the beach and then run home to give Grandma a hug."

 

I think that's at best an okay message.

 

I think there is a better one.

 

It goes like this: If you walk into that gym, there is a 1 in 10 chance you will end up in a hospital for a week if you happen to pick up COVID-19. You will be very sick for two weeks. You will lose tremendous amounts of muscle mass and feel like shit. And you will have some hefty hospital bills. Is that what you want?

 

Those NYC statistics suggest that statement is true. 10 % of young adults with COVID-19 end up hospitalized.

 

None of this is propaganda. It's a serious illness. Including for twenty-somethings. That is a fact.

[+ tassojunior]

Ok. So let's have the truth.

 

I don't know what you read. But the journalism I've read is very clear.

 

1. Wear a mask if you are sick. Although, really, you should not be in public now if you are sick.

 

2. Wear a mask if you are a medical professional around COVID-19 patients, or anyone who happens to be around a COVID-19 patient.

 

I've never read anything saying that wearing a mask is a bad idea, or that it offers no protection. What I have read is very consistent with the overall tone that we are all in this together. Stay at home as much as possible. The very limited benefit of wearing a mask when you are unlikely to be exposed to COVID-19 is tiny compared to the imminent risk of a doctor or nurse who is treating a COVID-19 patient.

 

I don't see the message as changing that much. And I don't see this as having anything to do with propaganda. I still think we have an acute mask shortage, right?

 

 

 

I think that's at best an okay message.

 

I think there is a better one.

 

It goes like this: If you walk into that gym, there is a 1 in 10 chance you will end up in a hospital for a week if you happen to pick up COVID-19. You will be very sick for two weeks. You will lose tremendous amounts of muscle mass and feel like shit. And you will have some hefty hospital bills. Is that what you want?

 

Those NYC statistics suggest that statement is true. 10 % of young adults with COVID-19 end up hospitalized.

 

None of this is propaganda. It's a serious illness. Including for twenty-somethings. That is a fact.

 

And I say that unless you know you do not have the virus, this one is deadly enough to where out of consideration for others you should always wear some sort of simple mask in public for a while. To do otherwise is endangering others' lives, no matter what your slim risks are. Everyone wearing a mask for a while would cut transmission down drastically. For your own sake I would always wear an N95 or KN95 into grocery stores or other enclosed places like transit.

[+ stevenkesslar]

And I say that unless you know you do not have the virus, this one is deadly enough to where out of consideration for others you should always wear some sort of simple mask in public for a while. To do otherwise is endangering others' lives, no matter what your slim risks are. Everyone wearing a mask for a while would cut transmission down drastically. For your own sake I would always wear an N95 or KN95 into grocery stores or other enclosed places like transit.

 

Is there not a shortage of masks anymore? I've not once seen toilet paper in my grocery store since this started. I would think it would be hard to get masks.

 

And didn't we just tell Canada to go fuck themselves because of something about mask shipments?

 

I don't disagree with your basic point. If and when we have the supply issue worked out, I think it would be good for everyone to wear a mask - if only as a symbol that we are all in this together. And for people who have to ride trains or planes and sit in enclosed spaces for an hour or several hours to get to work, the potential benefit probably goes way up.

 

All that said, this notion that people in some states can do whatever they want because this just is not their problem is about a 1000 % bigger impediment to achieving community protection. The more people that decide that this whole community spread thing just doesn't apply to them, the more sickness and death we will have. And the longer it will take to get to a point where we can all start to reopen. It's just that simple.

 

But I agree with your end goal. If we could get to the point where we have "only" 1000 new infections in the US per day, and we have enough masks for everyone to wear when they go out in public, we'd be in the same situation as maybe half a dozen other countries is the world that are able to start to crank their economies back up - not to 100 %, but to a lot better than the hibernation we are in now.

[+ tassojunior]

Is there not a shortage of masks anymore? I've not once seen toilet paper in my grocery store since this started. I would think it would be hard to get masks.

 

And didn't we just tell Canada to go fuck themselves because of something about mask shipments?

 

I don't disagree with your basic point. If and when we have the supply issue worked out, I think it would be good for everyone to wear a mask - if only as a symbol that we are all in this together. And for people who have to ride trains or planes and sit in enclosed spaces for an hour or several hours to get to work, the potential benefit probably goes way up.

 

All that said, this notion that people in some states can do whatever they want because this just is not their problem is about a 1000 % bigger impediment to achieving community protection. The more people that decide that this whole community spread thing just doesn't apply to them, the more sickness and death we will have. And the longer it will take to get to a point where we can all start to reopen. It's just that simple.

 

But I agree with your end goal. If we could get to the point where we have "only" 1000 new infections in the US per day, and we have enough masks for everyone to wear when they go out in public, we'd be in the same situation as maybe half a dozen other countries is the world that are able to start to crank their economies back up - not to 100 %, but to a lot better than the hibernation we are in now.

 

If everyone had to wear some sort of simple mask in public, non-surface transmission would be cut to almost zero. The N95s are what medicals need in hospitals. (also what victims need). There's a whole lot of those coming to the US. They used to be 85 cents and are meant to be disposable. amazon sells them to registered medicals for 85 cents even now. A civilian having a couple to reuse is not a big deal. Personally I like the Chinese version, the KN95 much better and on eBay or Amazon they are readily available. Here's 2 for $12 shipped in 3 days: https://www.ebay.com/itm/KN-95-Protective-Cover-2-Covers-Per-Package-Disposable/392750034306?hash=item5b71b9ed82:g:11UAAOSw-9leiJwO They're often much cheaper on Amazon in 10 packs. The simple surgical masks are dirt cheap. Yesterday I posted Amazon had them 50 for $5. Bicycle shops have charcoal masks for $5 and every other person seems to making cloth ones. Some sort of mask is no big burden. Germany and many other countries already require them.

 

And in China women's undies are the cool masks:

 

[Guest]

The mask won't really protect you from getting Covid19 if it's like other coronoviruses, although it may help limit the spread if you have it and are contagious. I think the encouragement to wear masks came when evidence popped up that asymptomatic people may be spreading it. To be protected yourself FROM Covid-19, you would really need full protective gear.

[mike carey]

There is a counting problem. You describe it, accurately, both ways. In some cases, there is an overcount. In other cases, there is an undercount.

As @BSR noted, even allowing for generalised issues with counting there is a disparity between countries on what is counted. Some, like France, are playing catchup with some groups that they have recognised they missed. Some countries, like China, appear to be deliberately obscuring the extent of the casualty rate they face. These disparities make comparison between countries problematic and a lot of the time running a league table of infection rates is not all that helpful. Despite this, the figures for individual countries are useful as long as the criteria that are used are consistent over time (or when changes to methodology are noted and trends are adjusted for them). They provide an indication of how the pandemic is progressing in each country individually, and that is important in evaluating the precautions that each is taking. It's all part of a wider understanding of statistics, that you need understand how they are derived and what they are and are not useful for. In the case of COVID-19 their greatest value is to explain trends not to make comparisons between countries.

[+ stevenkesslar]

DC hit 1000 cases today with it's 670,000 population. But it was a warm day and all the 20-somethings were parading in shorts and sandals with virtually no masks. Once the antibody test comes and tells many they are immune, there's going to be a revolt of the young. Hell hath no fury like young entitled yuppies in DC.

 

Hell also hath no fury like a 25 year old yuppie on a ventilator.

 

This is just an addendum to my numbers rant above.

 

NYC COVID-19 Hospitalizations

 

Those are really grim numbers. But look at the category of Millennials. Over 25,000 cases between 18 and 44. And you can say, yeah, that many people get the flu. So what? Except usually 2214 of them don't end up in hospital beds. That's 1 in 10.

 

Even if you look at death rates, as of yesterday it was 140 young adult deaths out of 2472.

 

There's nothing wrong with the argument that Millennials should be careful about killing Granny. But it misses the most important points. Millennials should also be worried about feeling like shit for a few weeks, or spending a few weeks in a hospital and maybe getting stuck with an unaffordable bill - even if they do have insurance.

 

This is also an issue for when we reopen. The idea that Millennials can all just get COVID-19 and it builds up herd immunity is just total bullshit. It is actually dangerous. It endangers a lot of Millennials, as well as everybody they are around.

 

The family of a 34-year-old father in a 2-week coma with COVID-19 says a 'bureaucratic glitch' has kept him from accessing potentially life-saving treatment

 

This is just one example. There are 140 dead young adults like him in New York City alone. And even if you start with the idea that it's all being blown up out of all proportion, 2214 Millennials in hospital beds in NYC is a big fucking deal.

 

I had a long talk with my escort buddy/tenant today. He has a friend who is part of this group online that is taking pictures of hospital parking lots of emergency room entrances to document that there is really no crisis. So this women he knows well went to local hospitals yesterday and took pictures to post online to "document" that this is all exaggerated bullshit. Then she invited my buddy over to her house to sit in the back yard and drink wine.

 

He told her he wasn't going to come over. And that it just wasn't going to be okay to talk about the weather, or how this is all made up bullshit. He is a New Yorker, so he has a lot of friends who are right in the middle of it.

 

Honestly, I wish these reality deniers would just have nice wine socials in their backyards. Odds are one of them is an asymptomatic carrier. Odds are in a few weeks one of them will end up in a hospital bed on a ventiliator. So that might be what it takes. Let them takes pictures of the youngish woman on the ventilator, or the refrigerated truck they will stack her dead body in. Let it get that bad. Let them post all the pictures they want online. And then maybe they will take it a bit more seriously.

 

I don't wish death on anyone. But if they want to play with death, I'm good with it. Let them do whatever they want. And if they die, that's their choice. I wish them a very happy and joyous death, which is what they seem to want.

 

I think a lot of them actually are going to have to die before they get the message that this is not just all bullshit.

 

I'll even throw in a case of wine. Although I will not hand it to them personally.

Edited April 6, 2020 by stevenkesslar