Covid-19 in OKC (coronavirus)

[Bits_Of_Real_Panther]

Meant medical history. Only 8 people under 50 in the state of Oklahoma have died. I'm sure they know their medical history but that could be important on who it is effecting the most. I think the under 40 crowd should be out now and getting things going again. The death rate for under 40 is very very low. Go out use caution unless you have a medical condition that make you vulnerable. What is that medical condition?

Sounds like you are wanting a breakdown of #s by pre-existing conditions?

[Bill Robertson]

The pre-existing condition thing is very difficult. I was an avid bicycle rider/racer from junior high to a few years ago. I've personally known three very healthy, very fit riders that died of coronaries while on leisurely Saturday or Sunday morning breakfast rides. One of which I was right there with him when it happened. None of them had any idea they had any heart issues but post-mortem investigations found issues they didn’t know they had. So I wonder if most or all of the “perfectly healthy” deaths from COVID had some kind of unknown issues.

[Bits_Of_Real_Panther]

^ Yeah, it makes sense there is a subtlety that exists. There are vulnerable populations of seemingly healthy people who have never been diagnosed with any conditions.

Then a bike ride or Covid-19 comes along...

[Canoe]

The old post removed by myself because it might be considered political. I have replaced it with the below comment.

Naturally I am against authoritarian policies because I do not have faith that the people using the additional power will do so responsibly.

I believe each person should take responsibility for himself, his family, and his community. He needs good information and from that point he will act in his own interest.

[soonerguru]

The old post removed by myself because it might be considered political. I have replaced it with the below comment.

Naturally I am against authoritarian policies because I do not have faith that the people using the additional power will do so responsibly.

I believe each person should take responsibility for himself, his family, and his community. He needs good information and from that point he will act in his own interest.

Read up on Typhoid Mary to broaden your perspective a bit.

[soonerguru]

This happened.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5...Tu94qpgnLyvREw

[Bits_Of_Real_Panther]

The old post removed by myself because it might be considered political. I have replaced it with the below comment.

Naturally I am against authoritarian policies because I do not have faith that the people using the additional power will do so responsibly.

I believe each person should take responsibility for himself, his family, and his community. He needs good information and from that point he will act in his own interest.

The problem we are having is that when there is a public health crisis, your own interest must take a backseat, at least temporarily, to the interest of your fellow citizens, in a collective sense.

[Bill Robertson]

I typed this and deleted it a couple of times before I decided to go ahead and post it. I’m not trying to be at all controversial. Just real. I’m asking for input on something I honestly can’t wrap my head around.
I keep hearing/reading testing, testing, testing. Will testing really be a relevant, useful tool unless we can test everyone, and I mean every single person, every couple of days? And compel (fines, jail) those who test positive to isolate until they test negative? Otherwise it seems to me that there is always going to be a possibility of contacting someone who has it. Also contact tracing. I’ve been VERY good about keeping my butt on the couch except for going to work, the grocery only as really necessary, the pharmacy and the gas station. And the only non- work place I actually go inside are the grocery stores. Even at that I couldn’t possibly list everyone I’ve been within 6 feet of in the past 14 days. I can’t help but feel like both testing and contract tracking are just the only lifelines to grab on to with no vaccine in sight. Therefor that’s what gets pushed as the answer.

[OKC Guy]

I typed this and deleted it a couple of times before I decided to go ahead and post it. I’m not trying to be at all controversial. Just real. I’m asking for input on something I honestly can’t wrap my head around.
I keep hearing/reading testing, testing, testing. Will testing really be a relevant, useful tool unless we can test everyone, and I mean every single person, every couple of days? And compel (fines, jail) those who test positive to isolate until they test negative? Otherwise it seems to me that there is always going to be a possibility of contacting someone who has it. Also contact tracing. I’ve been VERY good about keeping my butt on the couch except for going to work, the grocery only as really necessary, the pharmacy and the gas station. And the only non- work place I actually go inside are the grocery stores. Even at that I couldn’t possibly list everyone I’ve been within 6 feet of in the past 14 days. I can’t help but feel like both testing and contract tracking are just the only lifelines to grab on to with no vaccine in sight. Therefor that’s what gets pushed as the answer.

Even if 340,000,000 Americans could be tested you have to test the whole world or else close all borders and flights and ships forever until its cured. It can never happen thus we need to start opening up the country and keep working on medical potentials.

[Bits_Of_Real_Panther]

Public health is the most important thing right now.

Economy and right to be an individual is in 2nd place.

[brian72]

Public health is the most important thing right now.

Economy and right to be an individual is in 2nd place.

Good Luck with that.

[mugofbeer]

Here's my current take. Once some sort of treatment can be developed that keeps people from dying if they get the virus, it seems to me it's inevitable that everyone is going to have to be exposed to it. Get it, develop the antibodies and move on. The key is controlling deaths.

[David]

"Let everyone get it" has the problem of not knowing the long-term effects.

Take chicken pox as an example. Having it as a child means that later on in life you can develop shingles. I can tell you personal experience that that is not fun, and I was a young adult when I got to have that fun. For someone 60 or 70+ shingles can have a much more drastic health impact. This is one of the reasons why we're now vaccinating for chicken pox and not just letting kids have it as before.

What happens 20, 30 years after you have COVID-19? Who knows, but the best way to avoid that is to just not have it in the first place.

[chuck5815]

"Let everyone get it" has the problem of not knowing the long-term effects.

Take chicken pox as an example. Having it as a child means that later on in life you can develop shingles. I can tell you personal experience that that is not fun, and I was a young adult when I got to have that fun. For someone 60 or 70+ shingles can have a much more drastic health impact. This is one of the reasons why we're now vaccinating for chicken pox and not just letting kids have it as before.

What happens 20, 30 years after you have COVID-19? Who knows, but the best way to avoid that is to just not have it in the first place.

That sounds great in theory, but it’s probably a bit unrealistic at this point, especially since the Learned Doctors are saying most folks will be cool-de-la:

For now, it appears most patients who have had mild symptoms can expect no lasting harm, experts said.
“For the vast majority of people who get the coronavirus, they’re not going to have any long-term consequences for it,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security in Baltimore and a spokesman for the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told TODAY.

[Mott]

Forgive me, but what the hell do churches have to do with opening the economy back up?

Really! I guess the collection plates are empty.

[Bill Robertson]

Forgive me, but what the hell do churches have to do with opening the economy back up?

Directly very, very little to nothing. Indirectly for many of us successfully reopening churches will be a milestone that gives us a feeling of things moving toward an end to this mess. Getting back to church will open the door for many to feel able to shop, eat out, etc. which will re-open the economy.

[David]

That sounds great in theory, but it’s probably a bit unrealistic at this point, especially since the Learned Doctors are saying most folks will be cool-de-la:

For now, it appears most patients who have had mild symptoms can expect no lasting harm, experts said.
“For the vast majority of people who get the coronavirus, they’re not going to have any long-term consequences for it,” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security in Baltimore and a spokesman for the Infectious Diseases Society of America, told TODAY.

Sure, but just remember that that is a prediction based on at best data from other corona viruses but not this one in particular. We have no data for COVID-19 20 years on because of course we don't, and we won't know for actual certain until we get there.

Doctors lie all the time when they think it is in the interest of their patients or the public. Remember all the statements about how nobody but medical personnel needed to be wearing masks, right up until they did a 180 and everyone should be wearing them?

[jonny d]

Sure, but just remember that that is a prediction based on at best data from other corona viruses but not this one in particular. We have no data for COVID-19 20 years on because of course we don't, and we won't know for actual certain until we get there.

Doctors lie all the time when they think it is in the interest of their patients or the public. Remember all the statements about how nobody but medical personnel needed to be wearing masks, right up until they did a 180 and everyone should be wearing them?

You use such harsh, negative language here, when just above, you talk about them having no data to work with. Which is it?

[Edmond Hausfrau]

Some people are demanding 1 marshmallow now. The others are okay with waiting and receiving 2 marshmallows later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanfo...low_experiment

Ah, the ole marshmallow test. A favorite from the 1970s.
Of course , much like BF Skinner, the results were not purely behavioral. Factors like cognitive ability, socioeconomic status are also in play. Just as they are today. People in lower SES may not be able to afford to be "safer at home."
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ess-180969234/

[David]

You use such harsh, negative language here, when just above, you talk about them having no data to work with. Which is it?

If they are making definitive predictions about long-term health impacts when we have no long-term data for them to base it off it, it's a mistruth at best. Maybe they'll be right, but they cannot know for certain at this time.

And my lie judgement was about the masks which is why it was in that paragraph, not the long-term impacts of the virus which I covered in the first paragraph. What other conclusion can be made about the flip-flop on whether masks should be worn by the general public? Either they were lying then or they are lying now.

[HangryHippo]

Really! I guess the collection plates are empty.

You’re right! Should help with the taxes they pay.

[OKC Talker]

Here's my current take. Once some sort of treatment can be developed that keeps people from dying if they get the virus, it seems to me it's inevitable that everyone is going to have to be exposed to it. Get it, develop the antibodies and move on. The key is controlling deaths.

It's impossible to know for sure because of the lack of testing, but current estimates are that 748k of the 328 million people in the United States have been infected with Covid-19, 66k have been hospitalized, and 13k have died. (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...spitalizations)

That means that the infection of 0.2% of the population has caused all this chaos and assuming we're really at the peak this will likely double in the next month. If we go with your "everyone is going to have to be exposed to it. Get it, develop the antibodies and move on." instead of the infection of 0.4% of the US population, those numbers will be closer to the worst case scenarios before the "flatten the curve" movement and all the lockdowns happened. Assuming that even 10% of the US population gets infected, people could literally be dying outside of hospitals waiting for a bed, somone will have to choose who gets life saving ventilators or miracle treatments that are still in testing, and the economy will completely crash. I'll let you crunch the numbers on how many people will be hospitalized and how many deaths that will mean if we completely "reopen the economy" with no restrictions and get 100% of the US population exposed, but I guarantee you it would be ugly.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ronavirus.html

[PhiAlpha]

These numbers a really a joke. 105 new cases out of how many test? Conditions of those that died?

hospitalizations and deaths are the only stats that really matter

[PhiAlpha]

Yes, you can. This is such a silly argument. The government is not trying to "take our freedoms." They're responding to a pandemic and trying to keep people from dying. There have been, and always will be, necessary trade-offs and limits to freedoms. We all make these trade-offs every. single. day. In this case, exercising "your freedoms" can cause other people to die. We all should seek to preserve important freedoms, but if you don't know the proper times to sacrifice like this pandemic or during WWII then it's more about putting individual selfishness over welfare of others.

Thats one way to look at it, but I don’t think it’s the right one. Though I don’t agree with you very often so that probably shouldn’t be surprising. It isn’t individual selfishness, it’s an unwillingness to give up freedoms because of the slippery slope it creates. I will never agree to anything like what you are suggesting and the massive invasion of privacy that creates...and I say that as a Republican with Republicans in control of most of the government currently. Mandatory tracking of individuals by using their cell phones is just not a box I want opened.

[Pete]

Updated for Sunday: