|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Mar 26, 2020 20:21:25 GMT -6
The real issue is testing. Without enough, we are all flying blind and the rest of this talk is meaningless.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 26, 2020 20:42:11 GMT -6
True and true. It's a quick changing scenario - no doubt. I'm just biding my time for the "hell on earth" scenario in....less than 2 weeks. One thing is for SURE. Time will show exactly how things will play out. Yes and if the drastic measures work and the medical system can handle the load and doesn’t collapse we’ll have the usual bogus uproar of “sEe?? iT wAs aLl juSt FAAaaAaKe nEWs!” the same way the guy who gets talked into stepping away from the gas pump while he’s lighting his cigarette has the luxury of saying “wHat tHE hEll tHEre wAS nO DanGeR aFtER aLL!” when it doesn’t explode. (Not my analogy, but it fits) It’ll still be worth it. Putting up with fraudulent posturing is worth less dead people in my book. The problem, as I mentioned before, is that you won't be able to distinguish between a working quarantine and a gross overreaction. Unfortunately, all sides will politicise it as much as possible and claim correctness. Both result in fewer dead, but one was due to our reaction, one was due to natural causes. Politics aside, it's human nature/instinct to overreact. The fight/flight response is purely one of survival. The fight response here is to "do something" and naturally, we want to believe that we're capable of combating anything for the good of humanity, and we want to believe that the power structure is good, knowledgeable, and prepared for us, which is why we're rightfully angry when *any* leader screws up.. but the truth is that it's still up to the individual to handle our own lives, especially in the cases of quarantine. So if quarantining really does work, it means that the individual removing themselves from society was the fix, not government intervention, not world leaders, but we the people. However, the more likely scenario is that no matter how many die directly from infections, many, many more will be jobless and homeless for a lot longer than the disease will be around, and that is directly the fault of government in that they denied many company applications to make and deploy nCOV-19 tests as early as January. When the government finally acted, the tests they used were faulty and untold numbers of people had false positives, which sent others into frenzy. We should have immediately acted like South Korea and approved tests in January, then deployed testing as far and wide as possible. Sick people went to quarantine, healthy people stayed at work. No mass quarantine, no economic catastrophe. But then again, if the disease is as quick and infectious as some say, some reports are saying that up to 80% of Americans could already be exposed. That's actually a good thing, as it drastically lowers the death *rate* and builds immediate herd immunity. But because of the high percentage of symptomless cases that will never be tested, we'll never truly know what the rate of death really is, and that's where statistics will fail us in this case, because we don't have the data to know the truth. And that's where my complaint is. Let's say 80% of Americans have been exposed and only 20% of those get symptoms, and only 2% of those end up in hospitals, and only 2% of those die.. How do we know that wasn't far off from what would have naturally occurred with no response? If a hospital is at capacity and it's turning patients away, like Italy had been doing, that would mean the should be a drastic rise in death rates due to lack of care, right? So why is their death rate curve starting to flatten even with lack of care for anyone over 60? The obvious answer is that most anyone who would have become sick and died has already started the process and new cases are getting less. It's nearly run it's course. Also, if you look at most of the death rate graphs they tend to flatten around the same number of deaths, also another indicator of a small percentage of people highly susceptible people, not a disease that will kill everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 26, 2020 20:42:27 GMT -6
The real issue is testing. Without enough, we are all flying blind and the rest of this talk is meaningless. Spot on. |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Mar 26, 2020 20:49:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Mar 26, 2020 20:58:38 GMT -6
svart No doubt. The now infamous imperial college study even directly said this - 500k is unlikely to happen as worst case because people will react. The problem is, in this individual risk is low, but collective risk is high. It's a cooperation problem. Individuals - especially young, dumb ones - don't cooperate well. It's like the tragedy of the commons, except times a million (literally). Kind of unknowable. I think a pretty significant economic turndown was baked in. This thing isn't a joke, and if the gov't said "ride it out" and then NYC happens like it is, people would absolutely lose their minds. Now, NYC goes tits up for a few days and everyone shrugs. Humans are weird. S Korea's test (and Chinas, and the WHO) had significant issues, and maybe only 50% accurate. Our current test in the US also has issues, some reports are that its ~70%. I think our test situation is a mess, but we're on the ball now, and long run I don't think it will matter. S Korea is the only place to lick this thing without going massive shutdown, and thats a HUGE function of preparedness from SARS as well as culture (masks by many people absolutely help reduce the spread). I very much doubt the high number of exposure. For one, if 80% were there we'd see eponential growth dropping ricky tick. With an R0 of 2.2 you get herd immunity (as in, pandemic ends) at ~85%. It would have rolled over and started slowing well before that, because it tails off asymptotically. Also a bunch of infections means a bunch of jumps, means a bunch of genome changes. We haven't observed that - doesn't mean they're not there, but it is not likely. Oh don't worry. We'll do antibody testing. The CDC is already developing a test. This is going to be the most scrutinized event of the 21st century. People are going to be dissecting this one for decades. Antibody tests will tell the tale - there will be clarity here. And it won't take that long. I think this is not quite right. Italy's daily numbers rolled over like clockwork ~5 days after strict isolation / quarantine measures were put in place. First Lombardy, which caused a pause in the growth, then all of Italy. Every western country has began on a 33% growth rate and rolled over to a 22% not based on deaths or infections per capita but based on ~5 days after they shut down. Same with Wuhan. I think we've demonstrated we can make the thing wait by shutdown. Now we have to figure out what to do... we're kinda like the boy with his finger in dike now. Testing is a HUGE part of the exit strategy from shutdown. I think that is the real thing the 15 days were for (and to buy time to add some hospital surge capacity).
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Mar 26, 2020 21:03:57 GMT -6
I've got a close friend in the same boat. Active, early 40's, healthy until : 104 fever, came on out of nowhere, quick acting, double pneumonia, negative for "flu". Tested and waiting for results. Keeping a positive attitude here. Me too, but it's tough. Suddenly everything is in question. Everything. Best of outcomes to your friend! Just got the news. (Good). It's not Covid-19 - just a bad case of bi-lateral pneumonia. Whew! Hope your friend improves quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by dmo on Mar 26, 2020 21:08:52 GMT -6
Front line doc perspective - I don't care about the stats because we don't have enough data currently to make an accurate assessment. The statistical value for mortality won't be known till this is over, until then I only care about bed, ventilator and PPE availability. The rest is just noise. Current numbers give us an estimate of 81% mild disease, 14% severe enough for hospitalization and 5% intubated but that's skewed by many mild cases not tested and doesn't really help me when I start my shift. From the ED's in LA, NYC and NOLA I know numbers are surging, beds are tight and in those cities ICU's are full, over capacity or nearly full. Lower population density areas may see less growth but also have much more limited critical care capacity. When it's all over the epidemiologists/statisticians can tell me what the actual percentages were, in the meantime I'm just hoping I have enough day to day capacity for each shift.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 26, 2020 21:18:45 GMT -6
svart No doubt. The now infamous imperial college study even directly said this - 500k is unlikely to happen as worst case because people will react. The problem is, in this individual risk is low, but collective risk is high. It's a cooperation problem. Individuals - especially young, dumb ones - don't cooperate well. It's like the tragedy of the commons, except times a million (literally). Kind of unknowable. I think a pretty significant economic turndown was baked in. This thing isn't a joke, and if the gov't said "ride it out" and then NYC happens like it is, people would absolutely lose their minds. Now, NYC goes tits up for a few days and everyone shrugs. Humans are weird. S Korea's test (and Chinas, and the WHO) had significant issues, and maybe only 50% accurate. Our current test in the US also has issues, some reports are that its ~70%. I think our test situation is a mess, but we're on the ball now, and long run I don't think it will matter. S Korea is the only place to lick this thing without going massive shutdown, and thats a HUGE function of preparedness from SARS as well as culture (masks by many people absolutely help reduce the spread). I very much doubt the high number of exposure. For one, if 80% were there we'd see eponential growth dropping ricky tick. With an R0 of 2.2 you get herd immunity (as in, pandemic ends) at ~85%. It would have rolled over and started slowing well before that, because it tails off asymptotically. Also a bunch of infections means a bunch of jumps, means a bunch of genome changes. We haven't observed that - doesn't mean they're not there, but it is not likely. Oh don't worry. We'll do antibody testing. The CDC is already developing a test. This is going to be the most scrutinized event of the 21st century. People are going to be dissecting this one for decades. Antibody tests will tell the tale - there will be clarity here. And it won't take that long. I think this is not quite right. Italy's daily numbers rolled over like clockwork ~5 days after strict isolation / quarantine measures were put in place. First Lombardy, which caused a pause in the growth, then all of Italy. Every western country has began on a 33% growth rate and rolled over to a 22% not based on deaths or infections per capita but based on ~5 days after they shut down. Same with Wuhan. I think we've demonstrated we can make the thing wait by shutdown. Now we have to figure out what to do... we're kinda like the boy with his finger in dike now. Testing is a HUGE part of the exit strategy from shutdown. I think that is the real thing the 15 days were for (and to buy time to add some hospital surge capacity). All the discussion aside, a really good friend of mine that I've known for 15+ years recently shut down pretty much all human contact. I went to check on her and found her in a state of paranoia, probably an anxiety attack. She was flipping between all the news channels, and reading all their death tickers on the screen. Each channel with their own version of the end of times being recited over and over. A normal even-tempered, highly educated and professional person had been completely convinced of impending horrible death by the ratings whores on TV. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 26, 2020 21:41:22 GMT -6
svart No doubt. The now infamous imperial college study even directly said this - 500k is unlikely to happen as worst case because people will react. The problem is, in this individual risk is low, but collective risk is high. It's a cooperation problem. Individuals - especially young, dumb ones - don't cooperate well. It's like the tragedy of the commons, except times a million (literally). Kind of unknowable. I think a pretty significant economic turndown was baked in. This thing isn't a joke, and if the gov't said "ride it out" and then NYC happens like it is, people would absolutely lose their minds. Now, NYC goes tits up for a few days and everyone shrugs. Humans are weird. S Korea's test (and Chinas, and the WHO) had significant issues, and maybe only 50% accurate. Our current test in the US also has issues, some reports are that its ~70%. I think our test situation is a mess, but we're on the ball now, and long run I don't think it will matter. S Korea is the only place to lick this thing without going massive shutdown, and thats a HUGE function of preparedness from SARS as well as culture (masks by many people absolutely help reduce the spread). I very much doubt the high number of exposure. For one, if 80% were there we'd see eponential growth dropping ricky tick. With an R0 of 2.2 you get herd immunity (as in, pandemic ends) at ~85%. It would have rolled over and started slowing well before that, because it tails off asymptotically. Also a bunch of infections means a bunch of jumps, means a bunch of genome changes. We haven't observed that - doesn't mean they're not there, but it is not likely. Oh don't worry. We'll do antibody testing. The CDC is already developing a test. This is going to be the most scrutinized event of the 21st century. People are going to be dissecting this one for decades. Antibody tests will tell the tale - there will be clarity here. And it won't take that long. I think this is not quite right. Italy's daily numbers rolled over like clockwork ~5 days after strict isolation / quarantine measures were put in place. First Lombardy, which caused a pause in the growth, then all of Italy. Every western country has began on a 33% growth rate and rolled over to a 22% not based on deaths or infections per capita but based on ~5 days after they shut down. Same with Wuhan. I think we've demonstrated we can make the thing wait by shutdown. Now we have to figure out what to do... we're kinda like the boy with his finger in dike now. Testing is a HUGE part of the exit strategy from shutdown. I think that is the real thing the 15 days were for (and to buy time to add some hospital surge capacity). All the discussion aside, a really good friend of mine that I've known for 15+ years recently shut down pretty much all human contact. I went to check on her and found her in a state of paranoia, probably an anxiety attack. She was flipping between all the news channels, and reading all their death tickers on the screen. Each channel with their own version of the end of times being recited over and over. A normal even-tempered, highly educated and professional person had been completely convinced of impending horrible death by the ratings whores on TV. Wow. That's terrible. I may be an outlier because I just don't watch that stuff but I can't really fathom this kind of thing. I mean, I know there are people for whom the TV is just kinda...on...in perpetuity...but even then. The little snippets I've seen of cable news just look like the usual thing, ie, the US media gets obsessed with some current story (sniping back and forth from left to right and right to left) and they fill the minutes with sensationalist drivel until the next thing comes along. But, to speak in pandemic terms, how do we not have herd immunity from it at this point? I don't mean to downplay what you're friend is experiencing at all but how does cable news have this much impact on someone at this stage in the game? I mean other than the political dogmatics for whom cable news is church. How does it impact a not-one-of-those-persons like that? |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 26, 2020 21:44:19 GMT -6
Also re: government action vs personal responsibility, it's a pretty solidly chicken and egg situation as far as whether people are staying home out of a sense of rugged, personal responsibility or because their local governments have issued orders to. You can't easily assign credit or blame to one or the other because it's a stew of mixed motives that's all over the map in a given chunk of the population.
|
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 26, 2020 22:22:02 GMT -6
No offense.. but just kind of wondering.. What’s wrong with staying home and watching TV? That’s exactly what we are supposed to do. Cable news.. yeah I know it’s terrible, but there are tons of people that I know that love it 24/7/365 same reason people want to see how bad an accident is. Maybe she is trading stocks and wanted to know if the bill was signed yet? ;P
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 26, 2020 22:26:20 GMT -6
No offense.. but just kind of wondering.. What’s wrong with staying home and watching TV? That’s exactly what we are supposed to do. Cable news.. yeah I know it’s terrible, but there are tons of people that I know that love it 24/7/365 same reason people want to see how bad an accident is. Maybe she is trading stocks and wanted to know if the bill was signed yet? ;P I don't mean to say something is "Wrong" with it, like with a capital W. I can't claim to know that. I was just wondering, is this how someone could get to the point where that kind of media has that kind of sway in their mental state? I mean it as a question. I certainly don't know the answer. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 26, 2020 22:48:59 GMT -6
No offense.. but just kind of wondering.. What’s wrong with staying home and watching TV? That’s exactly what we are supposed to do. Cable news.. yeah I know it’s terrible, but there are tons of people that I know that love it 24/7/365 same reason people want to see how bad an accident is. Maybe she is trading stocks and wanted to know if the bill was signed yet? ;P I don't mean to say something is "Wrong" with it, like with a capital W. I can't claim to know that. I was just wondering, is this how someone could get to the point where that kind of media has that kind of sway in their mental state? I mean it as a question. I certainly don't know the answer. Constant barrage from all sides reporting the absolute worst viewpoint until someone let's it get to them. Sensationalism. Ratings. Political leanings. She's not a tv watcher, not a regular news fanatic either. Left leaning but mostly centrist. A pretty average person I'd say. You just never know what will get to you. I'll admit, even I took pause once the other day when I needed to meet with a client, simply because the instinct to run from danger is hard to fight sometimes. But news media knows this, and they supplement the human desire for leadership with their "#1 trusted" rhetoric and strong looking anchors. |
|
|
|
Post by jampa on Mar 27, 2020 1:32:00 GMT -6
Front line doc perspective I drink to your health good sir/madam |
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Mar 27, 2020 9:14:34 GMT -6
(best Gilligan/Bob Denver voice) "Fraudulent AND fake posting too Professor".
Chris
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2020 9:36:45 GMT -6
One thing to consider, aside all what was said about missing parameters for estimations in the statistical data of all countries, there could still be drawn a conclusion on the actual situation anytime, as long as there IS evaluation of statistics.
John Hopkins university is the point, where all statistics concentrate, worldwide. They take the most reliable numbers of all countries, adapt them with further factors, to make them as comprehensive to those of all other countries, and gives out the curves of infection and death cases. At this point in time, German government uses these to decide on the actions to take.
What is crucial with these curves is the following: no matter how many factors may be unknown, wrongly estimated etc., the curves show at leasst ONE thing, that can be an indicator if the actions taken are having enough impact on "flattening the curve". And this thing is, if the curve still follows an exponential growth line or if the greowth bows down again. If the curve does not bow down from exponential growth before the country reaches the limit of ventilation possibilities in the healthcare system, things get really ugly, in terms of fatality. When triage begins, which in fact is only needed, when this point is reached, this is already a worst case. From this moment on, medical doctors have to decide who gets the life-saving treatment and who will die, becaouse he doesn't.
That's what happens in Italy.
I encourage everyone to look into the graphs at the John Hopkins website and make oup your own mind.
This is by no means a matter of left wing or right wing politics, but a matter of civilization. All this will for sure be one of the biggest hits on worldwide economy, that we will experience in our lifetime. No political party has an interest to make this worse. In Germany right now we have the most serious cuts into citizens rights since WW2 to hopefully get the situation under control before the critical saturation of the healthcare systems is reached. These measurements are devastating for our economy already. People lose their jobs, smaller companies lose their liquidity or will go bankrupt. Freelancers lose their existances, the government only offers "nearly unlimited" credits to try to fight against this and makes laws in no time to secure the most vital society requirements, like that you can not be thrown out of your house as long as the nationwide income situation is as it is, no matter how much you are behind your payments. But all this only means, that many, many people will go out of this with a huge load of personal debt and noone knows what consequences this will have on our society in a whole. Please consider our german government as a conservative government with Merkel representing the traditional conservative party of our country. IF these severe cut of citizen's rights (personal contact regulation in terms of 1.5m distance in public and no more than 2 people walking together, except people that live in the same flat anyway, shutting down of all non-essential businesses with contact of people etc...) would not be necessary, a conservative government would not act like that, esp. in a country that relies on one of the strongest export economies in the world, similar to the US ...
We all will see, what happens in future, but one thing is for sure, there is no precedency case to this global pandemia. There has been the black plague in medieval times that had devastating impact on civilization in Europe, but was not a global phenomenon, the world was much "smaller" back in time, the disease was incurable and had a very high fatality etc., etc.. Then there was the Spanish flu last century. More like the current situation, but in the meantime, the world has globalized in another dimension, our economies strongly rely on each other countries in a network, and shutdowns severly hit them all. So noone is able to say where this ends, but one thing is already clear, this will already have a huge impact on the world as a whole, that we can not oversee from where we are right now.
Hope this makes sense to anyone. Probably the last post on this topic from my side, until we all know substantially more how this developes ...
|
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Mar 27, 2020 10:09:45 GMT -6
I don't want this to come across the wrong way because my family of 4 have been strictly quarantined for 2 weeks now. I support doing all we can but this ability to report someone that you think may be going out for a reason other than necessities is a little creepy:  This is in a county of 530,000 people with 31 cases of Covid-19 for what it's worth. |
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 27, 2020 10:31:29 GMT -6
I think that’s for employees who boss won’t comply
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 27, 2020 11:58:42 GMT -6
is there math without people? Theoretically, of course, but without people, we don't get the math stats. It's VERY clear on both extreme sides of this Covid issue that there's either faulty mathematicians, blundering idiots, or a decided skewing of the "facts / stats" to meet their sides agenda's. Neither is helpful, and potentially, if we fall where I think we will, the most damaging of the stats will have come from the "end of the world as we know it" krew. Again, children having to live thru this insanity....may heaven bless them, cause they are gonna get seriously warped and anxious. It's not "either-or" - those 3 possibilities are not mutually exclusive. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 27, 2020 12:02:37 GMT -6
Yes and if the drastic measures work and the medical system can handle the load and doesn’t collapse we’ll have the usual bogus uproar of “sEe?? iT wAs aLl juSt FAAaaAaKe nEWs!” the same way the guy who gets talked into stepping away from the gas pump while he’s lighting his cigarette has the luxury of saying “wHat tHE hEll tHEre wAS nO DanGeR aFtER aLL!” when it doesn’t explode. (Not my analogy, but it fits) It’ll still be worth it. Putting up with fraudulent posturing is worth less dead people in my book. The problem, as I mentioned before, is that you won't be able to distinguish between a working quarantine and a gross overreaction. Unfortunately, all sides will politicise it as much as possible and claim correctness. Both result in fewer dead, but one was due to our reaction, one was due to natural causes. Politics aside, it's human nature/instinct to overreact. The fight/flight response is purely one of survival. The fight response here is to "do something" and naturally, we want to believe that we're capable of combating anything for the good of humanity, and we want to believe that the power structure is good, knowledgeable, and prepared for us, which is why we're rightfully angry when *any* leader screws up.. but the truth is that it's still up to the individual to handle our own lives, especially in the cases of quarantine. So if quarantining really does work, it means that the individual removing themselves from society was the fix, not government intervention, not world leaders, but we the people. However, the more likely scenario is that no matter how many die directly from infections, many, many more will be jobless and homeless for a lot longer than the disease will be around, and that is directly the fault of government in that they denied many company applications to make and deploy nCOV-19 tests as early as January. When the government finally acted, the tests they used were faulty and untold numbers of people had false positives, which sent others into frenzy. We should have immediately acted like South Korea and approved tests in January, then deployed testing as far and wide as possible. Sick people went to quarantine, healthy people stayed at work. No mass quarantine, no economic catastrophe. But then again, if the disease is as quick and infectious as some say, some reports are saying that up to 80% of Americans could already be exposed. That's actually a good thing, as it drastically lowers the death *rate* and builds immediate herd immunity. But because of the high percentage of symptomless cases that will never be tested, we'll never truly know what the rate of death really is, and that's where statistics will fail us in this case, because we don't have the data to know the truth. And that's where my complaint is. Let's say 80% of Americans have been exposed and only 20% of those get symptoms, and only 2% of those end up in hospitals, and only 2% of those die.. How do we know that wasn't far off from what would have naturally occurred with no response? If a hospital is at capacity and it's turning patients away, like Italy had been doing, that would mean the should be a drastic rise in death rates due to lack of care, right? So why is their death rate curve starting to flatten even with lack of care for anyone over 60? The obvious answer is that most anyone who would have become sick and died has already started the process and new cases are getting less. It's nearly run it's course. Also, if you look at most of the death rate graphs they tend to flatten around the same number of deaths, also another indicator of a small percentage of people highly susceptible people, not a disease that will kill everyone. How do we "know"?
We don't, obviously. But just as obviously it's prob ably best to err on the side of caution because if we don't and we're wrong.........
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 27, 2020 12:10:39 GMT -6
All the discussion aside, a really good friend of mine that I've known for 15+ years recently shut down pretty much all human contact. I went to check on her and found her in a state of paranoia, probably an anxiety attack. She was flipping between all the news channels, and reading all their death tickers on the screen. Each channel with their own version of the end of times being recited over and over. A normal even-tempered, highly educated and professional person had been completely convinced of impending horrible death by the ratings whores on TV. Wow. That's terrible. I may be an outlier because I just don't watch that stuff but I can't really fathom this kind of thing. I mean, I know there are people for whom the TV is just kinda...on...in perpetuity...but even then. The little snippets I've seen of cable news just look like the usual thing, ie, the US media gets obsessed with some current story (sniping back and forth from left to right and right to left) and they fill the minutes with sensationalist drivel until the next thing comes along. But, to speak in pandemic terms, how do we not have herd immunity from it at this point? I don't mean to downplay what you're friend is experiencing at all but how does cable news have this much impact on someone at this stage in the game? I mean other than the political dogmatics for whom cable news is church. How does it impact a not-one-of-those-persons like that? I keep my TV on pretty much 100% of the time except when U-Verse fucks up, but that doesn't mean that I'm paying much attention to it. Right now I'm busy ignoring one of the best medical shows........ House. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 27, 2020 12:12:02 GMT -6
Wow. That's terrible. I may be an outlier because I just don't watch that stuff but I can't really fathom this kind of thing. I mean, I know there are people for whom the TV is just kinda...on...in perpetuity...but even then. The little snippets I've seen of cable news just look like the usual thing, ie, the US media gets obsessed with some current story (sniping back and forth from left to right and right to left) and they fill the minutes with sensationalist drivel until the next thing comes along. But, to speak in pandemic terms, how do we not have herd immunity from it at this point? I don't mean to downplay what you're friend is experiencing at all but how does cable news have this much impact on someone at this stage in the game? I mean other than the political dogmatics for whom cable news is church. How does it impact a not-one-of-those-persons like that? I keep my TV on pretty much 100% of the time except when U-Verse fucks up, but that doesn't mean that I'm paying much attention to it. Right now I'm busy ignoring one of the best medical shows........ House. I didn't mean to imply there was something intrinsically wrong about it, seems like maybe it came off that way. I was just wondering if that kind of thing could contribute to what svart's friend was experiencing. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Mar 27, 2020 12:15:58 GMT -6
Classic case in point as to how the media is beyond hyping this thing.
This morning, awoke to hear that the US is now the "WORLD EPICENTER" of Covid-19 cases. How about we just say that the US now leads the world in reported Covid-19 cases. The word "epicenter" is inflammatory. Damn press....
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 27, 2020 12:19:14 GMT -6
I keep my TV on pretty much 100% of the time except when U-Verse fucks up, but that doesn't mean that I'm paying much attention to it. Right now I'm busy ignoring one of the best medical shows........ House. I didn't mean to imply there was something intrinsically wrong about it, seems like maybe it came off that way. I was just wondering if that kind of thing could contribute to what svart's friend was experiencing. Yeah, I know. I was just attempting to inject a bit of dry humor.
I DO have House on, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Mar 27, 2020 12:22:26 GMT -6
"House Calls"? "(Little) House On The Prairie"? "House Of Cards"? It couldn't be "Real Housewives" could it? With all that plastic-ahem-elective surgery?  Chris |
|
