Coronavirus Thread: Worldwide Pandemic

[the cac mamba]

"permanent lung damage" is not "getting over it". it is surviving.

At least address that part of OP's post directly.

what part of the word "most" do you not understand no one is denying that there are deaths and negative effects

 

[choc_cardigan]

Stop feeding the trolls, seems to be the same trolls everytime

 

[Smoking With Cigarettes]

Not dying does not mean that you are "ok". That should be obvious, Lots of people "recover" from things like Cancer or don't die from HIV without being "ok". We are almost 6 months in and you still haven't reviewed the mechanics of Covid19 infection. It is a sliding scale before symptoms become apparent to the infected. Just because you don't feel pain / sick it doesn't mean you are "ok".

This is what I've been saying to everyone that downplays this. I'm not worried about me so much as I don't want to be a negligent a$$hole that kills someone's grandma because I wanted to hit the beach or some shyt. That and the fact scientists are finding out new shyt about this virus everyday. Who tf is tryna play a viral infection without the scouting report

 

[Ivan Swaggtacular]

They announced the main water park here in Denver one of the best in the country is closed for the summer season. First time in its 40 years history.

Yup....Waterworld being closed is wild. Personally, I don’t know what to make of the way Polis has handled this....seems very GOP in the way he pushed for businesses to open...

 

[the cac mamba]

This is what I've been saying to everyone that downplays this. I'm not worried about me so much as I don't want to be a negligent a$$hole that kills someone's grandma because I wanted to hit the beach or some shyt. That and the fact scientists are finding out new shyt about this virus everyday. Who tf is tryna play a viral infection without the scouting report

in two years, the expectation is that grandma is the one in lockdown not that every bar and restaurant in america that employ 20 percent of the country stay locked down, so that she might not get the virus in her nursing home

i know people prefer to have fantasy, feelgood conversations about this, but i dont know what to tell you

 

[the cac mamba]

Stop feeding the trolls, seems to be the same trolls everytime

at suggesting that the current situation is not sustainable for two years equalling trolling

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

Yup....Waterworld being closed is wild. Personally, I don’t know what to make of the way Polis has handled this....seems very GOP in the way he pushed for businesses to open...

I just don't know anymore. Elitches said they wanna open still. We bought a pool for the back yard. Gonna be a long hot ass summer. The longest.

 

[Ivan Swaggtacular]

I just don't know anymore. Elitches said they wanna open still. We bought a pool for the back yard. Gonna be a long hot ass summer. The longest.

My wife wants the pool for our kids....but I don’t want to mess up my grass...lmfao....haven’t bought one yet. Stay safe

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

My wife wants the pool for our kids....but I don’t want to mess up my grass...lmfao....haven’t bought one yet. Stay safe

Same to you. I have a concrete patio for it, I love my grass too lmao

 

[mastermind]

Whomever you all are debating with, I have on ignore.

 

[null]

what part of the word "most" do you not understand no one is denying that there are deaths and negative effects

There is most and there is most... 49.9% with long-term effects would not be a good result.

Given that it is fair to assume that you meant the vast majority.

The "vast majority" being "ok" is still an open question.

As for the article you linked yourself,

The title is "What’s the risk of COVID-19 for a healthy young person?" and within the article itself it focuses on the risk being death. That is mischaracterization.

-

There are also signs that younger people tend to develop fewer antibodies - which has consequences for natural immunity.
"
COVID-19: younger patients develop fewer neutralising antibodies, study finds
Analysis of blood samples from 175 patients with mild COVID-19 disease who were discharged from the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre as on February 26 revealed that about 30% of patients had unexpectedly low levels of antibodies against novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Ten patients had such low levels of neutralising antibodies that these could not be detected, while two patients showed very high levels.

The study threw up another surprise — the plasma of elderly and middle-age patients had significantly higher amount of neutralising antibodies and spike-binding antibodies than young patients. The median age of the patients was 50 years and the median length of hospital stay was 16 days and median disease duration was 21 days.
"
COVID-19: younger patients develop fewer neutralising antibodies, study finds

-

Now while most people survive the risks to survivors are potentially widespread and potentially long-lasting. It is possible that this becomes a major secondary problem. The US Army would not make that move unless this was a significant risk.

-

Overall my point is stop downplaying it. The risks to young people are still significant and are not fully expressed in the death rates quoted in articles like the one that you linked.

 

[the cac mamba]

There is most and there is most... 49.9% with long-term effects would not be a good result.

Given that it is fair to assume that you meant the vast majority.

The "vast majority" being "ok" is still an open question.

As for the article you linked yourself,

The title is "What’s the risk of COVID-19 for a healthy young person?" and within the article itself it focuses on the risk being death. That is mischaracterization.

-

There are also signs that younger people tend to develop fewer antibodies - which has consequences for natural immunity.
"
COVID-19: younger patients develop fewer neutralising antibodies, study finds
Analysis of blood samples from 175 patients with mild COVID-19 disease who were discharged from the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre as on February 26 revealed that about 30% of patients had unexpectedly low levels of antibodies against novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Ten patients had such low levels of neutralising antibodies that these could not be detected, while two patients showed very high levels.

The study threw up another surprise — the plasma of elderly and middle-age patients had significantly higher amount of neutralising antibodies and spike-binding antibodies than young patients. The median age of the patients was 50 years and the median length of hospital stay was 16 days and median disease duration was 21 days.
"
COVID-19: younger patients develop fewer neutralising antibodies, study finds

-

Now while most people survive the risks to survivors are potentially widespread and potentially long-lasting. It is possible that this becomes a major secondary problem. The US Army would not make that move unless this was a significant risk.

-

Overall my point is stop downplaying it. The risks to young people are still significant and are not fully expressed in the death rates quoted in articles like the one that you linked.

i'm not downplaying it, i'm telling you that we won't be doing "this" for two more years if you disagree, fine. i dont even see the path to do this for two more months. the democrats certainly dont, unless you want to name which ones have proposed this as long term viable.

 

[Smoking With Cigarettes]

in two years, the expectation is that grandma is the one in lockdown not that every bar and restaurant in america that employ 20 percent of the country stay locked down, so that she might not get the virus in her nursing home

i know people prefer to have fantasy, feelgood conversations about this, but i dont know what to tell you

Were you required to take biology when you were in high school? I'm assuming you're older than me but I know they had viruses going around back in your day. Have you been reading up on how infectious this virus is? Unless grandma is in isolation away from every outside agent until this blows over she is at risk

 

[the cac mamba]

Were you required to take biology when you were in high school? I'm assuming you're older than me but I know they had viruses going around back in your day. Have you been reading up on how infectious this virus is? Unless grandma is in isolation away from every outside agent until this blows over she is at risk

fine, then let her

are you suggesting that 20-50 year olds should be doing the current measures for the next 3 years?

you think grandma is gonna have it easier when this country looks like Mad Max with one half led by donald trump jr and one half led by AOC?

 

[ill]

We've been around this circle multiple times now.

The bottom line is that this virus has changed how we will act socially for the near future. That's a fact independent of whether we open everything back up tomorrow or in a couple months. So business owners are going to have to get innovative to keep their businesses, not by choice but out of necessity.

If I was a business owner, I'd stay closed until at least after I see the results of a potential second wave and attempt to get my profit and losses subsidized by the government as much as possible. I'm going to lose more than I profit but the idea is to actually still have a business of some sorts when we get to the other side of this.

Well, you should never run a business. The government isn't subsidizing all your losses. Most small businesses barely make it as is and now you're shutting them down for months if not years. Thats grossly unrealistic and you're basically giving these businesses a death wish. Most people that built up their own companies will gladly risk coronavirus if that means the survival of their business aka their livelihood.