4 ms·

Im 34 so I'll be fine, and I probably won't lose any friends. But I may lose a parent and I'll definitely have a friend who loses a parent. And that seems pre

Im 34 so I'll be fine, and I probably won't lose any friends. But I may lose a parent and I'll definitely have a friend who loses a parent. And that seems pretty awful especially considering how preventable this all was.

jamesrcole 7y ago
> so I’ll be fine I hope so, but - it will kill some number of younger people, even healthy ones. - it’s also worth considering that we don’t (AFAIK) have a clear picture about potential long-term complications (eg lung damage). We should not simply assume there won’t be these. I’m saying this to emphasize the seriousness of the situation.
gambiting 7y ago
>>Im 34 so I'll be fine I'm sorry, but that's a stupid assumption to make. I'm "only" 29 and last year I managed to catch a parvovirus B19 from someone - it's a virus that's relatively common in children, but has very mild symptoms - it's almost unheard of in adults, mostly because you either already have immunity, or there are no symptoms/the symptoms are no worse than a mild cold/flu. Well, except that in about 10% of adults it causes severe response with a high fever that last weeks, with arthretic swelling of joints - and in 10% of those the joint issues don't go away for years. Well, it's been nearly a year now and my knees and other joints are still fucked from the virus, I'm constantly on steroids just to control the inflammation. So no, this has changed my "I'm young so I'll be fine" outlook on this - the chances are not always in your favour.
- krageon 7y ago
  You're being overly dramatic. While in general you might be correct, in this specific case you are not and your fear mongering isn't helping anyone.
- brigandish 7y ago
  Sorry to hear that. I wish the insight you have could spread further (what a sorrowful irony) but it seems wisdom is rarely won without painful experience, the blasé attitude of some is not helping right now. I hope you get better soon.
Udik 7y ago
Italy's patient 1 is 38 and was in excellent health before catching the virus (he ran two half marathons in a week just before getting sick). Then he spent 20 days in an ICU attached to a ventilator.
- rafa1981 7y ago
  If he ran two marathons in one week then he was weakened/unrecovered IMO.
  - flyinghamster 7y ago
    Uggh, that reminds me that I better take it easy when the weather breaks. I like to take LONG bike rides (typically 80-100 km) when the weather is nice. Yes, exercise is good for me, but inadvertently overtaxing myself would not be good.
thombat 7y ago
But you'll need to hope that you don't need a hospital for anything at all for a while - so avoid accidents, keep living with that little surgical problem, etc. You may be relatively safe from COVID-19 but it's in addition to all of the other medical conditions that trouble our species, and you may need to just cope with them.
sokoloff 7y ago
I'm not so sure that this was "preventable" in a meaningful way. We may well find out (and I suspect) that there was no obvious, sensible moment for radical containment measures to be enacted that wouldn't have been far worse than the outbreak. Note that assumes that such containment measures would have been enacted many more times over the last decade, incurring inconveniences [which you can model as "life energy and time lost", even if few lives are lost from them] if the containment criteria were tight enough to stop the initial outbreak of a virus that has relatively high transmissibility, many infected who feel relatively mild symptoms, those symptoms mimic other common diseases, and a week or more incubation period before serious symptoms show up.
- paulmd 7y ago
  The problem, from a non-medical expert layman, is that the "sensible" measures only appear so in hindsight. It would have been sensible to close our borders and halt international travel 8-12 weeks ago, and begin widespread screening of suspect individuals. But at the time everyone said that was nuts, you want to tank our economy over some virus that's barely even outside Wuhan!? Right now we could still contain it with radical isolation measures like Italy is doing. Nobody leaves their house without a good reason, everything comes to a halt, we perform mass testing on everybody and if you're infected you get an even stronger quarantine. But you want to shut down our economy over just a few hundred "isolated cases"!? By the time people are dying en masse and hospitals are overwhelmed, it's too late. There's nothing you can really do at that point. The basic problem is that people don't understand quadratic or exponential curves. If you have a pond that starts with one lily pad and they double in number each day, and it takes one month to fill the pond completely, then when is the pond 50% full? The answer is the day before. And the lesson is - exponential growth requires extrapolating from "who cares, it's just a few cases" to what could happen if it's allowed to grow unchecked. Which humans are incredibly bad at doing. http://jonathanbecher.com/2016/01/31/lily-pads-and-exponential-thinking/ http://jonathanbecher.com/2016/01/31/lily-pads-and-exponenti...
  - sokoloff 7y ago
    > It would have been sensible to close our borders and halt international travel 8-12 weeks ago, and begin widespread screening of suspect individuals. Types easy; is hard. 11 weeks ago was Christmas. How many Americans were overseas on holidays for Christmas? How many Americans with Chinese relatives were in China? How many Chinese students of American universities were home on break? Is flying Boston to Seattle meaningfully different than flying Boston to Toronto? If you halt international travel and close the borders, where do the stranded travelers now live? For how long? Who pays for it? Do they lose their jobs/have to quit college? On average, nearly half of international travelers are on their way home, not out. These are real people. > But at the time everyone said that was nuts, you want to tank our economy over some virus that's barely even outside Wuhan!? If you set the system parameters tightly enough to prevent the virus from leaving Wuhan, I think you're basically closing travel all the time. How many people get sick and die of random, novel things? How many of those have the theoretical potential to be silently but exponentially transmissible? How can you set a system tight enough to prevent all of them while having travel and commerce? It seems quite possible that such a tight system would be a cure that's worse than the disease. I'm not suggesting that we're doing all that we can or that we shouldn't have taken some of today's steps last week, but I am saying that I think it's completely unrealistic to think we could prevent this entirely in any sane way.
chrisdhal 7y ago
Minnesota just reported its third case, a man in his 30s who is now in critical condition. So you may not be as safe as you think. https://www.fox9.com/news/minnesota-confirms-3rd-coronavirus-case-person-in-their-30s-in-critical-condition https://www.fox9.com/news/minnesota-confirms-3rd-coronavirus...

jamesrcole 7y ago

> so I’ll be fine I hope so, but - it will kill some number of younger people, even healthy ones. - it’s also worth considering that we don’t (AFAIK) have a clear picture about potential long-term complications (eg lung damage). We should not simply assume there won’t be these. I’m saying this to emphasize the seriousness of the situation.

gambiting 7y ago

>>Im 34 so I'll be fine I'm sorry, but that's a stupid assumption to make. I'm "only" 29 and last year I managed to catch a parvovirus B19 from someone - it's a virus that's relatively common in children, but has very mild symptoms - it's almost unheard of in adults, mostly because you either already have immunity, or there are no symptoms/the symptoms are no worse than a mild cold/flu. Well, except that in about 10% of adults it causes severe response with a high fever that last weeks, with arthretic swelling of joints - and in 10% of those the joint issues don't go away for years. Well, it's been nearly a year now and my knees and other joints are still fucked from the virus, I'm constantly on steroids just to control the inflammation. So no, this has changed my "I'm young so I'll be fine" outlook on this - the chances are not always in your favour.

krageon 7y ago
You're being overly dramatic. While in general you might be correct, in this specific case you are not and your fear mongering isn't helping anyone.
brigandish 7y ago
Sorry to hear that. I wish the insight you have could spread further (what a sorrowful irony) but it seems wisdom is rarely won without painful experience, the blasé attitude of some is not helping right now. I hope you get better soon.

Udik 7y ago

Italy's patient 1 is 38 and was in excellent health before catching the virus (he ran two half marathons in a week just before getting sick). Then he spent 20 days in an ICU attached to a ventilator.

rafa1981 7y ago
If he ran two marathons in one week then he was weakened/unrecovered IMO.
- flyinghamster 7y ago
  Uggh, that reminds me that I better take it easy when the weather breaks. I like to take LONG bike rides (typically 80-100 km) when the weather is nice. Yes, exercise is good for me, but inadvertently overtaxing myself would not be good.

thombat 7y ago

But you'll need to hope that you don't need a hospital for anything at all for a while - so avoid accidents, keep living with that little surgical problem, etc. You may be relatively safe from COVID-19 but it's in addition to all of the other medical conditions that trouble our species, and you may need to just cope with them.

sokoloff 7y ago

I'm not so sure that this was "preventable" in a meaningful way. We may well find out (and I suspect) that there was no obvious, sensible moment for radical containment measures to be enacted that wouldn't have been far worse than the outbreak. Note that assumes that such containment measures would have been enacted many more times over the last decade, incurring inconveniences [which you can model as "life energy and time lost", even if few lives are lost from them] if the containment criteria were tight enough to stop the initial outbreak of a virus that has relatively high transmissibility, many infected who feel relatively mild symptoms, those symptoms mimic other common diseases, and a week or more incubation period before serious symptoms show up.

paulmd 7y ago
The problem, from a non-medical expert layman, is that the "sensible" measures only appear so in hindsight. It would have been sensible to close our borders and halt international travel 8-12 weeks ago, and begin widespread screening of suspect individuals. But at the time everyone said that was nuts, you want to tank our economy over some virus that's barely even outside Wuhan!? Right now we could still contain it with radical isolation measures like Italy is doing. Nobody leaves their house without a good reason, everything comes to a halt, we perform mass testing on everybody and if you're infected you get an even stronger quarantine. But you want to shut down our economy over just a few hundred "isolated cases"!? By the time people are dying en masse and hospitals are overwhelmed, it's too late. There's nothing you can really do at that point. The basic problem is that people don't understand quadratic or exponential curves. If you have a pond that starts with one lily pad and they double in number each day, and it takes one month to fill the pond completely, then when is the pond 50% full? The answer is the day before. And the lesson is - exponential growth requires extrapolating from "who cares, it's just a few cases" to what could happen if it's allowed to grow unchecked. Which humans are incredibly bad at doing. http://jonathanbecher.com/2016/01/31/lily-pads-and-exponential-thinking/ http://jonathanbecher.com/2016/01/31/lily-pads-and-exponenti...
- sokoloff 7y ago
  > It would have been sensible to close our borders and halt international travel 8-12 weeks ago, and begin widespread screening of suspect individuals. Types easy; is hard. 11 weeks ago was Christmas. How many Americans were overseas on holidays for Christmas? How many Americans with Chinese relatives were in China? How many Chinese students of American universities were home on break? Is flying Boston to Seattle meaningfully different than flying Boston to Toronto? If you halt international travel and close the borders, where do the stranded travelers now live? For how long? Who pays for it? Do they lose their jobs/have to quit college? On average, nearly half of international travelers are on their way home, not out. These are real people. > But at the time everyone said that was nuts, you want to tank our economy over some virus that's barely even outside Wuhan!? If you set the system parameters tightly enough to prevent the virus from leaving Wuhan, I think you're basically closing travel all the time. How many people get sick and die of random, novel things? How many of those have the theoretical potential to be silently but exponentially transmissible? How can you set a system tight enough to prevent all of them while having travel and commerce? It seems quite possible that such a tight system would be a cure that's worse than the disease. I'm not suggesting that we're doing all that we can or that we shouldn't have taken some of today's steps last week, but I am saying that I think it's completely unrealistic to think we could prevent this entirely in any sane way.

chrisdhal 7y ago

Minnesota just reported its third case, a man in his 30s who is now in critical condition. So you may not be as safe as you think. https://www.fox9.com/news/minnesota-confirms-3rd-coronavirus-case-person-in-their-30s-in-critical-condition https://www.fox9.com/news/minnesota-confirms-3rd-coronavirus...