Coronavirus Outbreak...

[NorrinRadd]

Actually, I'm pretty sure the annual flu vaccine is actually a "cocktail" that protects against the flu strains seen as most likely to be circulating that year. The one used in the U.S. actually protects against four strains.

As I understand it, even when the shot targets the proper strain(s), it's not 100% effective.

[JimL]

As I understand it, even when the shot targets the proper strain(s), it's not 100% effective.

That's true, the vaccine is not 100% effective in prevention, and it is more effective in healthy adults than in children and the elderly. Overall, I believe it is about 65 to 70 % effective in prevention. But, though it isn't 100% effective in prevention, it usually reduces the seriousness of the condition and helps prevent pneumonia, hospitilization and death, which is particularly important to the elderly.

[lilpixieofterror]

A claim that flies in the face of the data that suggests some 40% of Americans cannot deal with an unexpected $400 expense.

Yet, many middle class upgrade their phones every year and have phone bills in the hundreds of dollars monthly.

[JimL]

Yet, many middle class upgrade their phones every year and have phone bills in the hundreds of dollars monthly.

[carpedm9587]

As I understand it, even when the shot targets the proper strain(s), it's not 100% effective.

It is never 100% effective because it is always best guess what strains will dominate and the effectiveness of a vaccine can vary widely by recipient based on a host of factors. Medicine is not an exact science; too many variables.

[carpedm9587]

Yet, many middle class upgrade their phones every year and have phone bills in the hundreds of dollars monthly.

An interesting claim. First, where is your data come from? Can you source it? Also, how can you know this is not largely the 60%?


ETA: I've poked around at several sites that offer this kind of calculation and they all pretty closely agree. If you are in the bottom 40% (where presumably most of the people who are unprepared for a $400 unexpected expense reside), you would have an annual income under $44K. I'm sure some of them have iPhones and a monthly phone bill in the hundreds. Somehow, I doubt it is a dominant number, especially the "phone bill in the hundreds per month" claim, but I look forward to your sources so I can look at them.

[lilpixieofterror]

An interesting claim. First, where is your data come from? Can you source it? Also, how can you know this is not largely the 60%?


ETA: I've poked around at several sites that offer this kind of calculation and they all pretty closely agree. If you are in the bottom 40% (where presumably most of the people who are unprepared for a $400 unexpected expense reside), you would have an annual income under $44K. I'm sure some of them have iPhones and a monthly phone bill in the hundreds. Somehow, I doubt it is a dominant number, especially the "phone bill in the hundreds per month" claim, but I look forward to your sources so I can look at them.

[lilpixieofterror]

Figures little Jimmy, would do that.

[Ronson]

The US and most countries don't have enough test kits at the moment to meet current patient needs, better understanding of what's going on has to wait.

For now until testing capabilities improve*, if your illness is not serious, don't call to ask for a test. You don't get any special treatment even if you test positive, you don't get the test anyway, and they get too many calls as it is.

*depends on which country you're in. A few countries have enough tests

A person I work with just recently had his brother-in-law die in California, from "flu-like" symptoms at a VA hospital. He was never tested and won't be. His family would like to know what the cause was.

Right now, my state is claiming 90 confirmed cases. IMO, that probably translates into 900 to 3,000 that are unknown carriers.

[simplicio]

It is never 100% effective because it is always best guess what strains will dominate and the effectiveness of a vaccine can vary widely by recipient based on a host of factors. Medicine is not an exact science; too many variables.

In other words, they "guess" one year in advance which strains are likely to be prevalent next year.

They use past epidemiological studies, the way the flu spreads, in order to predict which strains to protect against next year. Not perfect, but it does provide significant benefits in lives saved.

[simplicio]

A person I work with just recently had his brother-in-law die in California, from "flu-like" symptoms at a VA hospital. He was never tested and won't be. His family would like to know what the cause was.

Right now, my state is claiming 90 confirmed cases. IMO, that probably translates into 900 to 3,000 that are unknown carriers.

I wonder just what the infection rates are. The US is not testing widely (except for the Very Important People in government). We have some state recording almost no spread of the disease while neighboring states do. We basically have to extrapolate data collected in other countries, such as Iceland and South Korea.

There is no hard data in the US on morbidity and mortality, we will have to examine the number of deaths for each months and estimate the number of deaths by comparing numbers of deaths in the past, which is how we estimate deaths due to epidemics in the 19th century: How many more deaths.

[firstfloor]

[rogue06]

As I understand it, even when the shot targets the proper strain(s), it's not 100% effective.

Vaccines are never 100% effective and rely on herd immunity which is why anti-vaxxers don't just endanger themselves but everyone.

[rogue06]

A claim that flies in the face of the data that suggests some 40% of Americans cannot deal with an unexpected $400 expense.

It often requires a shift in priorities

[simplicio]

It often requires a shift in priorities

You do realize that in one post you note that antivaxxers don't just endanger themselves, but pose a threat to others because of the potential transmission of the disease, then in the next you avoid that conclusion.

Testing is central to any rational approach to this, the countries, like China (!) which have made progress have targeted the quarantines to those infected. We either need to clamp down on everyone, a hard lockdown, or give people information to make a decision.