MartialTalk and the COVID-19 Pandemic

[Bruce7]

Very interesting article Bruce. It talked about how Taiwan has a plan and sticks to the plan but I did not see where it talked about the plan specifically. The exception being in regards to travel.
It is worth noting that Taiwan is about 3 times smaller than New York. Each US state has or should have plans of some sort in place and there are federal mandates in place so it is always confusing to me when people think there are no plans in place here in the US.
Why are our numbers higher? I cannot say but it clearly tracks with areas where the population is heavily congested.

Is Taiwan one of the countries where people have regularly worn masks for years?

Taiwan 23.78 million (2018) New York State 19.45 million (2019)
Taiwan (13,976 sq mi) New York State 54,555 sq mi

Taiwan population density is 4 times New York State.

I have lost the article with Taiwan's plan, when I find it I will post it.
Best I remember and my memory is not the best they tested and quarantine everyone coming in to the country.
Tested everyone in the country and did contact tracing.
Everyone wore mask from day one.
Schools did not close, but they put up clear plastic cubicles on the desk.
Students had to eat at their desk.
They improved the ventilation of the buildings.
Had large stock piles of PPE
They did more things I can not remember off the top of my head.

I read the article sometime in the summer.

My understanding is they started developing the plan 10 years ago.
They activated the program as soon as they learn China had a virus.
They have not had a death in over 200 days.

 

[Steve]

Taiwan 23.78 million (2018) New York State 19.45 million (2019)
Taiwan (13,976 sq mi) New York State 54,555 sq mi

Taiwan population density is 4 times New York State.

I have lost the article with Taiwan's plan, when I find it I will post it.
Best I remember and my memory is not the best they tested and quarantine everyone coming in to the country.
Tested everyone in the country and did contact tracing.
Everyone wore mask from day one.
Schools did not close, but they put up clear plastic cubicles on the desk.
Students had to eat at their desk.
They improved the ventilation of the buildings.
Had large stock piles of PPE
They did more things I can not remember off the top of my head.

I read the article sometime in the summer.

My understanding is they started developing the plan 10 years ago.
They activated the program as soon as they learn China had a virus.
They have not had a death in over 200 days.

Current results speak for themselves:

Checking quickly this morning, Taiwan has an infection rate of about .002% and a mortality rate of about 1.1%. That's based on my quick math with rounded numbers, so please feel free to double check my numbers. Similarly, New York State has an infection rate of close to 3% and a mortality rate of almost 6%. So, far less population density, yet three times the infection rate per capita, and six times the morbidity. That's alarming.

South Dakota has a population of about 885,000 people, living on 77k sq. miles. That's 11.3 square miles per person. Here's what they look like this morning:

That's an infection rate of about 7.8%. Their morbidity is surprisingly low. I'm not sure if that's good news or not (hopefully it is). I'm not sure they will be able to sustain those low death rates. It doesn't appear so, considering they reported 30 deaths just yesterday.

 

[jobo]

In a poker game, that's not much. Doesn't sound like much... such a small number. However, these percentages, and even fractions of percentages, are exceedingly important when they represent actual lives.

In the USA, we have somewhere in the area of 11.5 million cases with 250k deaths. That's a death rate of just north of 2%, not even considering the number of people who are admitted to the ICU who experience serious symptoms and survive. We're hitting about 170k new cases reported every day, with ICUs filling to capacity, and are approaching 2k deaths per day.

We have a total population of about 330 million people. That leaves, one, two, add a few... over 315 million remaining who could become infected, and as the rate of infection is exponential, we could get there pretty quickly. 2% of 315 million is 6,300,000 people who could die if infected. If a vaccination could reduce the infection rate by 95%, we're talking potential risk for about 285,000,000 people mitigated and reducing the pool of people who could become infected to a literal fraction of the population. And that's how herd immunity comes into play safely.

And for what it's worth, the difference between 1% and .1% in a population as large as in the USA represents a lot of people. I mean .1% of 330 million people is still 3.3 million people.

well no, as said the global tarketc for vacination,os 3% in the medium term, so its not goibg to have that effect at all. vacines only work when you have almost blanket coverage, some time in 2025 perhaps

80% of people are immune it seems,, one % of those who catch it will probebly die, , who knows how many that is, but it doesnt work out at 3.3 milkion dead

yes its a sjame people have to die, but thete is nothing that can stop it, unless we all live in sealed bubbles

 

[Steve]

well no, as said the global tarketc for vacination,os 3% in the medium term, so its not goibg to have that effect at all. vacines only work when you have almost blanket coverage, some time in 2025 perhaps

80% of people are immune it seems,, one % of those who catch it will probebly die, , who knows how many that is, but it doesnt work out at 3.3 milkion dead

yes its a sjame people have to die, but thete is nothing that can stop it, unless we all live in sealed bubbles

80% are immune? Cool. Can you share a link to some credible sources that say that?

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

so its decreased by a 20th of 1 % , wow

*decreased to a 20th of 1%. Big difference between the two sentences.

 

[JowGaWolf]

why did you not have the good sense to clarify your line of thinking?

It's not me. It's you. Your first response is to think someone is a LIBERAL and from there everything that follows is based on that concept of what you think LIBERAL means who you think fits it. When you don't agree with something you automatically reduce someone to a POLITICAL DEFINITION of LIBERAL.

This is you "
"So yes, me and others are going to perceive your 'freedom' rhetoric to disclude jails and actions without recourse.
Again; substance to show you line of freedom thinking is rather embellished and liberal. You are on the lunatic fringe with this"

This is me

A society with absolute freedom has no laws. Laws determine what your freedoms are and what they aren't.

But you don't read this. You just go straight political and define someone as LIBERAL
And this is point I'm making. You even proved my point by your statement when you bring this statement. "No recourse when someone wrongs"

Spend less time trying put people in to Political Drama character boxes.

 

[jobo]

80% are immune? Cool. Can you share a link to some credible sources that say that?

i got it from here, one of the lock down fanboys posted a link to a study

80% are asymptomatic, thay are immune to sympoms like dieing,

 

[Steve]

i got it from here, one of the lock down fanboys posted a link to a study

80% are asymptomatic, thay are immune to sympoms like dieing,

Asymptomatic isn't immune, though. Or to say it more clearly, people who are asymptomatic are still included in the number of people who are considered as having contracted the virus. So, when we talk about the number of cases vs the number of people who died, it includes those folks who had minimal issues.

I'm still interested in that link... even if you could post a link to the fanboy who posted the link. You aren't the most credible person here. I mean, aren't you the guy who suggested Oxford did a study saying masks don't work?

 

[Steve]

It's not me. It's you. Your first response is to think someone is a LIBERAL and from there everything that follows is based on that concept of what you think LIBERAL means who you think fits it. When you don't agree with something you automatically reduce someone to a POLITICAL DEFINITION of LIBERAL.

This is you "
"So yes, me and others are going to perceive your 'freedom' rhetoric to disclude jails and actions without recourse.
Again; substance to show you line of freedom thinking is rather embellished and liberal. You are on the lunatic fringe with this"

This is me

But you don't read this. You just go straight political and define someone as LIBERAL
And this is point I'm making. You even proved my point by your statement when you bring this statement. "No recourse when someone wrongs"

Spend less time trying put people in to Political Drama character boxes.

"Disclude?" That's a made up word. Who said that?

 

[jobo]

Asymptomatic isn't immune, though. Or to say it more clearly, people who are asymptomatic are still included in the number of people who are considered as having contracted the virus. So, when we talk about the number of cases vs the number of people who died, it includes those folks who had minimal issues.

I'm still interested in that link... even if you could post a link to the fanboy who posted the link. You aren't the most credible person here. I mean, aren't you the guy who suggested Oxford did a study saying masks don't work?

ive just had a quick google there a mulitude of different figures for those found to be asymptomatic, 20% 40% 60% 80% and it seems to vary accross age range or mire acuratly the youbger healthyer your are the more chance of you beibg asymtomatic, the actual link is list somewhere in the mulitude of closed threads

that aside if your asymptomatic you wont have any ill effects, clue is in the name you are therefore immune from death by covid

just read a repirt today that 50% of the uk popukation had the virus back in june the vast majority didnt know, maybe they had a bit of a coulth maybe they didnt.

i do remmember feeling a bit off colour round about then

 

[Steve]

ive just had a quick google there a mulitude of different figures for those found to be asymptomatic, 20% 40% 60% 80% and it seems to vary accross age range or mire acuratly the youbger healthyer your are the more chance of you beibg asymtomatic, the actual link is list somewhere in the mulitude of closed threads

that aside if your asymptomatic you wont have any ill effects, clue is in the name you are therefore immune from death by covid

just read a repirt today that 50% of the uk popukation had the virus back in june the vast majority didnt know, maybe they had a bit of a coulth maybe they didnt

I think you're not understanding how that is already factored in, and I'm sorry, but today I don't have the time to try and explain it to you. Suffice to say that if 80, 90 or even 95% of people are asymptomatic, if they contracted the virus, that has nothing to do with infection rates or the actual death toll.

 

[jobo]

I think you're not understanding how that is already factored in, and I'm sorry, but today I don't have the time to try and explain it to you. Suffice to say that if 80, 90 or even 95% of people are asymptomatic, if they contracted the virus, that has nothing to do with infection rates or the actual death toll.

its got everything to do with the death toll, obs, if 95% of the population are asymtomatic then only 5% of the polulation has the slightest chance of dieing of it, and by slight i mean 1% of that 5%,, thats if then even catch it

 

[Steve]

its got everything to do with the death toll, obs, if 95% of the population are asymtomatic then only 5% of the polulation has the slightest chance of dieing of it, and by slight i mean 1% of that 5%,, thats if then even catch it

But... dude... 2% is less than 5%. Right? If the death toll, including folks who are asymptomatic, is somewhere between 1 and 2%, the number of folks who are asymptomatic is beside the point.

Though raising the percentage of folks who are asymptomatic will certainly help flatten the curve for hospitalizations. If folks who need an ICU bed can't get one, that will raise the mortality rate.

And the good news, is that if we can raise the percentage of folks who are seriously ill and also reduce the death rate or percentage of folks who are gravely ill, we can get around this thing. right now, that's not happening in the USA.

 

[jobo]

But... dude... 2% is less than 5%. Right? If the death toll, including folks who are asymptomatic, is somewhere between 1 and 2%, the number of folks who are asymptomatic is beside the point.

as dieing (asphyxiation)is a,symptom of covid, people who are asymtomatic dont by defintion die of covid, isnt that a clear and obvious truth ?

 

[Steve]

as dieing is a,symptom of covid, people who are asymtomatic dont by defintion die of covid, isnt that a clear and obvious truth ?

Yeah, my friend, you're just not getting it, and I don't think I can explain it so you can. Sorry.

 

[jobo]

Yeah, my friend, you're just not getting it, and I don't think I can explain it so you can. Sorry.

ive got it mate, its you who lacking in this instance.

its like you want it to be worse than it is

 

[JowGaWolf]

"Disclude?" That's a made up word. Who said that?

See Post #96

It's just going to be one of those weeks.

 

[Bruce7]

On a happy note Dolly Parton donated a million
dollars in April to help research for covid vaccine.
Researchers at Vanderbilt University were helped by her donation.
Dolly Parton 'honoured and proud' to help Covid-19 battle

 

[Steve]

See Post #96

It's just going to be one of those weeks.

Ah, got it. It's a function of the way the forum software handles certain things. I'm tracking now.

Still... "disclude" is a funny word.

 

[Steve]

On a happy note Dolly Parton donated a million
dollars in April to help research for covid vaccine.
Researchers at Vanderbilt University were helped by her donation.
Dolly Parton 'honoured and proud' to help Covid-19 battle

She's pretty amazing. Wonderful to hear her speak, too. She just oozes compassion and empathy. If you haven't seen it, she made Stephen Colbert teary eyed on the Late Show a few weeks ago.