HeartString
-
Posts
928 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by HeartString
-
-
54 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:
s a sad day when states have to protect themselves from being robbed by the feds.
It’s not imminent domain, Princess Mommy, but the emergency laws that allow seizures.
Has anyone seen any reporting on what the feds are doing with it?
-
2 hours ago, Happymomof1 said:
So the difference between Georgia and Texas is there are more blacks with high blood pressure???? That doesn't jive for me.
The main difference is GA had the misfortune of having a super spreader event. It was just bad luck on Georgia’s part.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Frances said:
Are they actually loaded?
The pictures I’ve seen show the guns with magazines in so I would assume yes. I suppose they could have had empty magazines but that seems unlikely.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, wathe said:7 minutes ago, kdsuomi said:
So to push further, then how is a militia =/= rural white guy gang? "A group of thugs" could call themselves a militia and that would be legit?
You’re on to something there.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Carrying guns to a session of the state legislature, while the legislature is debating wether or not to open back up can only carry one message, from my point of view. The only possible message is “vote the way we want or else violence”. I can’t see for one second all of those guys, hyped up on adrenaline and testosterone, armed to the teeth just walking away had the legislature voted against them. I think it’s plain to silly to act like pissed off men, who are armed to the death is not suppose to be evocative of violence and perceived as a threat. They didn’t carry petunias for a reason.
They could have chosen to protest outside of the building, unarmed. They didn’t. For a reason.
-
14
-
4
-
-
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html
has anyone seen this study? It had a control group and showed that patients using hydroxychloroquine we’re no better off and actually were somewhat more likely to die.
In the study of 368 patients, 97 patients who took hydroxychloroquine had a 27.8% death rate. The 158 patients who did not take the drug had an 11.4% death rate
-
1
-
4
-
-
I’m sure it’s related to this conference. They seem to be laying the ground work for their argument.
-
9 minutes ago, StellaM said:
New Scientist had a good article on why contract tracing apps aren't the answer.
That brought up some good points that I hadn’t thought about.-
3
-
-
It looks like they are working on tests that won’t need the reagents that are in short supply. Using Crispr technology. This article says the tests could return results in under an hour.
-
4
-
-
9 minutes ago, Bootsie said:
This plan includes testing people in "large families"--I am not sure how that is defined--and all who are planning to reenter the workforce. So, if you have 8 people in your family (or whatever large is) will you be required to go get tested every day? every week? How are you going to know which workers have been tested? How often will they have to be tested?
There seems to be a huge gulf between "these are the people we would really like to know about on a continuous basis" and the ability to put that into practice; the implementation seems to go far beyond do we have enough tests do that.
Hm, I interpreted the “large family” as something more like Grandma and her 4 kids and 10 grandkids, plus Grandmas sister and all of her kids and grandkids who live separately but want to do Sunday dinner regularly type of thing more than just 8 kids.
Why yes, I do live in the rural south, why do you ask?
I completely agree with you on implementation. All of the experts in our country and abroad agree that testing and contact tracing is the key to dealing with this. I also have serious doubts about our country actually being able or willing to do it. And the implications of going against all of the experts to forge our own barely thought out path concern me.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Dotwithaperiod said:
I think this is the most sensible plan. He calls for moving the focus away from the sick and to people likely to spread it. Restaurant workers, grocery workers, healthcare providers. Those likely to come into contact with many people. If asymptotic a nurse could infect an entire ward, or a cashier could infect a hundred households.
Quote
Worse still, we are testing the wrong people. To safely reopen closed businesses and revive American social life, we need to perform many more tests—and focus them on the people most likely to spread COVID-19, not sick patients.
, the United States must adopt a new testing policy that prioritizes people who, although asymptomatic, may have the virus and infect many others.
-
4
-
1
-
-
53 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:
Sorry, Fox News isn’t sorta right when their hosts bitch that D’s only want hundreds of millions tested repeatedly before going back to work.That’s like saying R’s only want to go back to work without tests. Of course there are different plans being written about.
Demanding more tests, sure. Demanding the entire country, repeatedly? We’ve all known the US never had the capacity for that. But hey, it was the prez who said that anyone who wants a test can get one.
ETA- I suck it up and listen to Fox and Friends, Laura I, and that lady Jeannine who sounds drunk. So I can converse with my mom. I’ve heard the accusation on all of their shows the past month.
Edited 50 minutes ago by Dotwithaperiod
You’ll get no argument from me. I was only saying they had a kernel of truth in there. It feels important to acknowledge.
You are going above and beyond in your daughterly duty with that. Truly.
-
53 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:
I haven’t heard ANYONE say we need to test hundreds of millions of us, though I’ve heard some Fox hosts say that’s what “the other side” wants.
I HATE to give credence to Fox News, but in this case they are sort of right. I don’t know that “the other side” is taking it up and advocating for it, but there are a few plans floating around that do call for mass testing, something on the order of the whole country being tested every 14 days and cell phone tracing.
This is a pretty good look at the plans.
Over the past few days, I’ve been reading the major plans for what comes after social distancing. You can read them, too. There’s one from the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, the left-leaning Center for American Progress, Harvard University’s Safra Center for Ethics, and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Romer.
-
1
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Danae said:
It would look like symptomatic people going to their doctor and getting tested. If they’re positive they would be asked to list people who they’ve been in contact with and public places they’ve been in the last two weeks and those people would be contacted. There would be a public announcement that people who had been in x place on y day should be tested.
This is something public health workers have experience with. I don’t know why people want to imagine some kind of totalitarian nightmare.
What can be done about the asymptotic people? We’re seeing anywhere from 40-60% of those infected show no symptoms but can still spread it.-
3
-
3
-
-
I’d love to see a 5 minute saliva test and have testing done very regularly. Daily for work places and school. Maybe a 24 hour certification that could be used to enter stores and restaurants. I have no idea how that would work and I seriously doubt it’s even possible.
-
1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:
This piecemeal approach will put us at a MAJOR disadvantage as the rest of the world begins to resume normal operations (with robust testing and quarantine policies). We will not be able to travel outside the U.S
I’ve been concerned about this, especially when it comes to the long term. How will our relationship with the rest of the world be impacted by these decisions. It seems like almost every country closed sooner than us, stayed closed longer and they all seem to have more control over it. They all have better testing regiments, better tracing. It’s going to have an impact, I’m just not savvy enough to see what it will be.
-
6
-
-
I know Arkansas hotels are suppose to turn away people from out of state. I wouldn’t want to get caught out where I had to sleep at a rest area or something. A lot of public restrooms and rest areas are also closed, which also means more people at the ones that are open.
-
Just now, Sneezyone said:
I haven't seen anyone here advocating zero exposure. I HAVE seen people waiting for adequate testing and contact tracking capacity.
I don’t expect the lock down level of quarantine to extend until there is a vaccine. I don’t expect any semblance of normal to return until there’s a vaccine. I figure things will be different, modified to varying degrees, until people feel safe. You can open the the theater, or Disney, but you can’t compel people to go.
-
5
-
-
38 minutes ago, meena said:
Are most hospitalizations lasting 2-4 weeks? The only person I know locally who has tested positive was not hospitalized and recovered at home; the total time from feeling sick to recovery was about 14 days. From the way his wife described it, he was very ill but not in serious distress to warrant going to the hospital. She's a nurse and he's a doctor, so I trust their judgment and descriptions. I've heard that those in the hospital don't remain there for the entire recovery period. I know that recovery times differ depending on other underlying issues, so I'm wondering about people who don't have risk factors.
If testing becomes widely and easily available, I could see it being required randomly in hot spots/areas of higher risk to catch asymptomatic carriers until vaccines are in place. I think a lot will also depend on if there are spikes of infections when activities start to begin again.
I haven’t seen new reporting saying it’s been shortened. All of the reporting I have seen about hospitalization is that it’s needed I. somewhere between 10-20% of those who get it and that it’s a long disease.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-guidance-management-patients.html
Among patients who developed severe disease, the medium time to dyspnea ranged from 5 to 8 days, the median time to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) ranged from 8 to 12 days, and the median time to ICU admission ranged from 10 to 12 days.
Pardon the typos, typing on a phone is a pain.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, meena said:
I guess I see it differently. The idea of flattening the curve is built on the notion that people will still be exposed and potentially ill, just in a manner that doesn't overwhelm health care systems to the point of not being able to treat people properly. I do think that testing needs to be more available and consistent, so that there's less mystery about who is asymptomatic and so those who are take proper precautions. Once testing becomes standard, I think people will be more open to attending public gatherings.
I disagree that those types of events aren't necessary for education. I feel like a huge part of education is participation in the human experience, including social and cultural events. Beyond that, there are so many large group experiences that bring book learning to life, that turn facts into knowledge. Events like mock trials, robotics competitions, 4-H/FFA shows, hands-on/lab classes, etc. I can't imagine how to modify or eliminate every variety of group events like that for as long as it will take to establish a vaccine or herd immunity.
The rate of hospitalization from this virus scares me. As long as so many still need to be in the hospital for 2-4 weeks with a risk of long term damage after, we will be keeping social activities to a minimum. I won't be going to a movie theater, sitting in a restaurant, or anything else like that until it feels safe. Getting better care while spending 2-4 weeks in the hospital is not going to cut it. My son loves doing his 4H archery and I'm not sure what we'll do about that. Its inside a cramped area and distancing would be impossible. I'm iffy on doing co-op too. Those are the only 2 things I'm even considering and we don't have anyone high risk in our house. I do worry about my husband, he has chronic Vitamin D deficiencies and tends to get sick more often that I do.
We love all of those same group experiences that you mentioned, but we can take time off from them or figuring out to do them differently on a way that doesn't put us at risk. I'm not saying they shouldn't happen. but I wouldn't feel comfortable participating unless there is a major break through in treatments and testing, and I can't be the only one. Wide spread testing still won't catch the asymptomatic people, unless we expect people to just randomly get themselves checked, or require it to be done on a regular basis, neither of which I think is going to happen.
-
7
-
-
I know it doesn’t apply to everyone, but I just can’t see how if I’m already at Walmart, with my $300 cart of groceries that zigging over to grab a mouse or head phones is a problem. I’m not more at risk, the checker isn’t more at risk. The store would be open anyway. I would be there anyways because my fridge is small and going less than once every 7-9 days isn’t possible. I’m just walking 20 feet past the needed TP. Sure, someone might be waiting outside, but it’s only a few extra minutes.
I could order it online, but that isn’t neutral either. The amazon warehouse people. The fed ex guy, they are involved in that order, And it’s risking them unnecessarily because I was already at Walmart and could have gotten it there.
I’mALL for staying home. I go out once a week for groceries and no one else leaves my house. But if we start trying to make the suffering worse than it HAS to be, without clear benefit, you’re going to lose buy in, even from supporters.
And I’m MAD at all the people that are hanging out at Walmart all day because they are bored too. This is why we can’t have nice things!
-
8
-
-
My point with the HIV comparison was not that we dint have treatments, it was that a vaccine is not guaranteed even if we pour money and world wide effort into it. Most of the plans that I’m hearing just assume we’ll for sure have a vaccine in the next few years, but that might not happen.
I’m sure we’ll develop some sort of treatment for Covid. Although we do have treatments for influenza, but they don’t work great. Tamiflu just makes it slightly less bad and shortens it by a day or so. I hope Covid treatments work better. Viruses are just hard to deal with.-
3
-
-
I find it discouraging that our hopes are all pinned on a vaccine, but they’ve never succeeded in a vaccine for a Corona virus before. Lots of time and money will be poured into developing one yes, but not everything can be vaccinated against. Completely different, but the same principle, we don’t have an HIV vaccine yet and time and money have been poured into that for 40 years.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, SKL said:22 hours ago, Mainer said:
When this is over, we can compare how the NHSs in developed countries fared - what worked and what didn't and what didn't make a difference. Many of the worst hit countries have NHS.
I’m curious how it will effect the economy once this over. I anticipate that here in the US we’ll see bankruptcies spike from the medical bills families are incurring. A lot of people are losing their job, which means no insurance. Even with good insurance a 2-3 week hospital stay could easily bankrupt a family, especially if it comes after a prolonged job loss. Before settling on bankruptcy most families will struggle to pay those bills, which will mean less money going into the economy.
The staggering medical bills at the end of this will be a uniquely American phenomenon.
ETA: I’m not making a political point one way or the other. I just think it will be a natural experiment that will give economists something to write papers about for a long time.
-
8
-
Wading through info that conflicts... COVID related..
in The Chat Board
Posted
This came across my Facebook feed and it seemed relevant to this thread.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/pandemic-confusing-uncertainty/610819/
“A lack of expertise becomes problematic when it’s combined with extreme overconfidence, and with society’s tendency to reward projected confidence over humility. “When scientists offer caveats instead of absolutes,” Gralinski says, “that uncertainty we’re trained to acknowledge makes it sound like no one knows what’s going on, and creates opportunities for people who present as skeptics.”
In a pandemic, the strongest attractor of trust shouldn’t be confidence, but the recognition of one’s limits, the tendency to point at expertise beyond one’s own, and the willingness to work as part of a whole. “One signature a lot of these armchair epidemiologists have is a grand solution to everything,” Bergstrom says. “Usually we only see that coming from enormous research teams from the best schools, or someone’s basement.”