Sorry Stephanie:
Colloidal silver lining Adams pocketsJQH wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 3:25 pm Trump's denialism might finish up costing him.
"Natural News" has been a Trump cheerleader since his election. Adams has turned on the "Trump administration" now since they are discouraging Americans from stocking up on emergency supplies that Adams just happens to sell.
Every cloud has a silver lining.
For ages amongst the kids. Netflix and chill is a compound verb meaning to f.ck.purplehaze wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 5:48 pmNetflix is a verb now?It says she is no longer allowed to self-isolate at home because her studio did not comply with the requirements for it. She's been transferred to a different location via ambulance. According to a county health spokesperson, the new location has good wifi so that she can continue to study and Netflix.
Many of those in the US with it have been exposed via travel to China, and so probably aren't in the poorest sector of society. It's more that they just aren't testing people.Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:14 amOr that US healthcare for those with the virus is 6 times worse than China's.dyqik wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:53 am The US has tested 472 people. And now stopped announcing new results.
Also, the mortality rate in the US is 12%, which suggests there's at least 6 times as many people with it than have been tested.
Or that USAians only present at hospital for screening once they are too sick not to.
The high price of healthcare in the USA compared to, well, pretty much anywhere else on the planet, means much Dr. Googling, self-medication, and only turning up at ER/A&E if you absolutely have to
In the US, they probably already own more than one house, so can self-isolate at the lake, in the city apartment, the big house where the kids are, or the cabin in the mountains.Stephanie wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 8:20 amHa, this came up on twitter. Apparently, rich folk should be very worriedlpm wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 11:10 pm I wonder what will happen with divorce rates. Imagine being stuck at home for weeks with a legally pair bonded partner. Christmas or 2 weeks holiday is bad enough for blazing rows.
https://time.com/5793806/wealthy-rich-p ... ronavirus/
Wealthy couples who aren’t used to actually spending time together are in for trouble, according to Mitchell Moss, who studies urban policy and planning at New York University. “This is going to destroy the marriages of the rich,” said Moss. “All these husbands and wives who travel will now have to spend time with the person they’re married to.”
Pssst - it wasn't me who mentioned the GHS index - I've not posted in the Brittle threaddyqik wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 11:09 amMany of those in the US with it have been exposed via travel to China, and so probably aren't in the poorest sector of society. It's more that they just aren't testing people.Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:14 amOr that US healthcare for those with the virus is 6 times worse than China's.dyqik wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:53 am The US has tested 472 people. And now stopped announcing new results.
Also, the mortality rate in the US is 12%, which suggests there's at least 6 times as many people with it than have been tested.
Or that USAians only present at hospital for screening once they are too sick not to.
The high price of healthcare in the USA compared to, well, pretty much anywhere else on the planet, means much Dr. Googling, self-medication, and only turning up at ER/A&E if you absolutely have to
Also this goes exactly against the GHS index you mentioned over in the Brittle thread...
Sorry, pre-coffee brain. Woodchopper's name was standing out at me for some reason.Martin_B wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:20 pm
Pssst - it wasn't me who mentioned the GHS index - I've not posted in the Brittle thread
(ETA: It was Woodchopper, and I'd have to not shave for while to look like his avatar!)
Interesting thanks. Did you make that graph yourself, where are you getting the data from ?shpalman wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:33 pm Today's data point of 2024 infected people is well below the number expected (something like 2700) extrapolating the exponential growth of the past week or so.
So maybe the containment has actually been working.
Figure_1.png
I can't remember the source, but as far as I recall the advice was hours, possibly days under ideal circumstances. Books in the post are probably safe - likely spending time in a dry environment.tenchboy wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:45 am Idle thoughts twixt tea and toast...
What is the survival time of a/this virus after leaving its host/host material?
Does it stay viable after the pool of snot has dried on the door handle/shopping trolley?
If someone self-isolates and then spends that time to catch up on posting out all those books that they've sold on e-bay...
Sneezing while they're doing so...
Cheers Woodman; just the same, maybe I'll wear some gardening gloves when I open it; and leave it on the windowsill in the sun shine for a day or two.Woodchopper wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:57 amI can't remember the source, but as far as I recall the advice was hours, possibly days under ideal circumstances. Books in the post are probably safe - likely spending time in a dry environment.tenchboy wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:45 am Idle thoughts twixt tea and toast...
What is the survival time of a/this virus after leaving its host/host material?
Does it stay viable after the pool of snot has dried on the door handle/shopping trolley?
If someone self-isolates and then spends that time to catch up on posting out all those books that they've sold on e-bay...
Sneezing while they're doing so...
A recent article in JHI saying coronavirus can persist on environmental surfaces for for up to 9 days:tenchboy wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:45 am Idle thoughts twixt tea and toast...
What is the survival time of a/this virus after leaving its host/host material?
Does it stay viable after the pool of snot has dried on the door handle/shopping trolley?
If someone self-isolates and then spends that time to catch up on posting out all those books that they've sold on e-bay...
Sneezing while they're doing so...
We don't stand a chance, do we.RoMo wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 8:35 amA recent article in JHI saying coronavirus can persist on environmental surfaces for for up to 9 days:tenchboy wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:45 am Idle thoughts twixt tea and toast...
What is the survival time of a/this virus after leaving its host/host material?
Does it stay viable after the pool of snot has dried on the door handle/shopping trolley?
If someone self-isolates and then spends that time to catch up on posting out all those books that they've sold on e-bay...
Sneezing while they're doing so...
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection. ... 3/fulltext
Thanks for that.RoMo wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 8:35 amA recent article in JHI saying coronavirus can persist on environmental surfaces for for up to 9 days:tenchboy wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:45 am Idle thoughts twixt tea and toast...
What is the survival time of a/this virus after leaving its host/host material?
Does it stay viable after the pool of snot has dried on the door handle/shopping trolley?
If someone self-isolates and then spends that time to catch up on posting out all those books that they've sold on e-bay...
Sneezing while they're doing so...
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection. ... 3/fulltext
More in Haaretz todayCoronavirus in Israel: Over 1,000 High School Students Quarantined
Infected teen attended soccer match in Tel Aviv, thousands of fans ordered to enter quarantine
■ 27 fifth-graders quarantined after homeroom teacher testes positive for the virus
Ok the number of active infections yesterday was actually 2263, from 2502 who ever tested positive minus 160 recoveries and 79 deaths.shpalman wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 7:01 am The data is now coming from http://www.salute.gov.it/portale/nuovoc ... menu=vuoto
... but the earlier days are from an analysis which someone at the politecnico did and sent around on the internal mailing list (in any case you can find those numbers on Wikipedia). And my boss happened to have a python script which implemented the SIR model, I'm not sure from where.
Code: Select all
days I R
0 3 0
1 19 1
2 59 3
3 152 5
4 221 8
5 314 11
6 409 15
7 593 62
8 821 67
9 1049 79
10 1577 117
11 1835 201
12 2263 239
As someone who is no stranger to this kind of ecological modelling, I wouldn't worry too much about points falling a little bit away from the line. This is partly because of measurement issues meaning that the number of cases is never precisely known, but mostly because the numbers you're using to generate those curves are not known precisely.shpalman wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 11:09 am If I want to model this slowdown I could reduce the susceptible population to some number which isn't several orders of magnitude greater than the number of cases, i.e. 6000 instead of 60 million. But to get the same exponential increase in the first week or so I need to increase the contact parameter so R_0 is now 11.3.
Figure_1.png
Reducing the susceptible population fudges the idea of quarantine and travel restrictions, so that the virus can't actually reach the entire population of Italy.
It predicts that we'll have 2625 active infections by the end of today.
(ETA I think https://www.corriere.it/salute/malattie ... 09c8.shtml is a more comprehensive source of information, for example, that 25856 swabs have been taken).