Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;1256012]My niece was born in February. We just had a conversation on Sunday with my bro-in law, if she would be able to attend school or have a normal childhood, like you just mentioned. There is a lot of concern from people about that. I think schools will never be what they were before. It will be people opting for true homeschool, or states & counties going to all-distance learning for good. You may hear about the odd county here and there that has traditional in-class schooling, but i do believe that is a thing of the past now. I do believe all online school is how we go from now on.

I wonder though, what will happen to all of the schools that don't end up being needed again? I wonder if some schools will get remodeled into apartment buildings or care facilities, etc.....?[/quote]

lol you just fold like a lawn chair? all the sudden we can never be around people again? this is so stupid, so false and so wrong.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Schools - I imagine a vaccine will be needed before things go back to normal re school and after school care etc. There has to be an end point to this, right?

----------------------------

President Donald Trump is throwing a big wrench into negotiations between the White House and Senate Republicans over the next coronavirus relief bill by demanding a payroll tax cut be included and funding for testing be reduced or cut completely.

“Not a fan of that, I’ve made that pretty clear,” Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, said of the payroll tax cut proposal. “I don’t think it’s something that changes anyone’s behavior and has trust fund implications. I just think there are better ways to do it.”

Republicans are trying to get on the same page before they start negotiating with Democrats before they leave for a month-long August recess.

Republican senators also denounced any attempt by the White House to cut funding for coronavirus testing.

“My view is, we should do whatever we need to do to make sure we have adequate tests,” Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chairman of the Health Committee, said. “All roads to open school, opening, going back to work, child care, lead through testing.

Funds for testing: Senate Republicans are pushing back on the administration’s idea to cut funding for coronavirus testing.

“Well, I think that's a that's going to be a priority for our members, for sure,” Thune said. Alexander told reporters “I believe that we should fund testing as generously as it needs to be funded.”

Blunt, who has been working with Alexander to increase testing capabilities, told reporters “I just think that’s wrong” to cut funding, citing a new rapid test the National Institutes of Health is working on that will need increased funding in the next bill. “It’s going to take more money to quickly focus in on those tests and have them ready, by the time, hopefully, by the time school starts,” he said.

Meanwhile, Meadows told reporters “How would they even know what funding for testing is?” when told Republican senators want to increase funds.

Increased unemployment benefits: Republicans aren’t a fan of extending the $600 per week increased unemployment payments and neither is the administration, but Democrats are pushing for it.

“Obviously it will be a negotiation between the Republicans, Democrats and the White House,” Thune said. “ I can’t imagine a scenario where extending it at the current level would happen.”

Stimulus checks: Republicans are torn over more direct payments, but the administration wants it.

“Nothing is final. But I suspect that there will, there's a high level of interest in doing something more to help people, particularly on the lower end of the income scale,” Thune said. “But I think the last version of this cost somewhere on the order of $300 billion, and there'll be a plug in there to help people and whether that's payroll tax, or, you know, the direct checks, checks, or what form that takes, I'm not sure.”

Grassley favors stimulus checks over payroll tax cuts.
[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-throws-wrench-coronavirus-bill-030957273.html[/url]

-------------------------------------

[B]Payroll tax cut [/B]-- takes directly away from Social Security. As a 41 year old who has worked his entire working eligible life and paid into the system ... dont continue to rob me. This would only help people already employed, the more you make the more it helps you.

if they cut the payroll tax by 2% and I make just over 100k a year, that benefits me (who doesnt need it) much more than someone who makes 43k.

[B]Stimulus checks[/B] - sounds like it will go to people making less than 40K or so a year. Id rather just continue raising the debt and go with stimulus checks vs taking away from Soc Sec even though that would benefit me

[B]Defund or reduce testing[/B] - i dont understand this. Dont we want and need rapid testing as a first step towards opening schools back up, being able to contact trace? I think they increase funding for testing not reduce or defund.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1255998]Good news out of Oxford regarding vaccine trials.

[url]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-vaccine-oxford-trial-results-extremely-encouraging/[/url]

Sounds like some other trials are making progress too.

Fingers crossed.[/quote]

We have some very good friends who live in England .I's being reported over there that trump has said if the US develops a vaccine we won't share it with the World. They now all feel the same, if they develop something we aren't going to see it,thanks donnie.


P.S.

They will all get their shots free of charge , how much will we have to pay for ours?

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SunnySide;1256058]Schools - I imagine a vaccine will be needed before things go back to normal re school and after school care etc. There has to be an end point to this, right?

----------------------------

President Donald Trump is throwing a big wrench into negotiations between the White House and Senate Republicans over the next coronavirus relief bill by demanding a payroll tax cut be included and funding for testing be reduced or cut completely.

“Not a fan of that, I’ve made that pretty clear,” Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, said of the payroll tax cut proposal. “I don’t think it’s something that changes anyone’s behavior and has trust fund implications. I just think there are better ways to do it.”

Republicans are trying to get on the same page before they start negotiating with Democrats before they leave for a month-long August recess.

Republican senators also denounced any attempt by the White House to cut funding for coronavirus testing.

“My view is, we should do whatever we need to do to make sure we have adequate tests,” Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chairman of the Health Committee, said. “All roads to open school, opening, going back to work, child care, lead through testing.

Funds for testing: Senate Republicans are pushing back on the administration’s idea to cut funding for coronavirus testing.

“Well, I think that's a that's going to be a priority for our members, for sure,” Thune said. Alexander told reporters “I believe that we should fund testing as generously as it needs to be funded.”

Blunt, who has been working with Alexander to increase testing capabilities, told reporters “I just think that’s wrong” to cut funding, citing a new rapid test the National Institutes of Health is working on that will need increased funding in the next bill. “It’s going to take more money to quickly focus in on those tests and have them ready, by the time, hopefully, by the time school starts,” he said.

Meanwhile, Meadows told reporters “How would they even know what funding for testing is?” when told Republican senators want to increase funds.

Increased unemployment benefits: Republicans aren’t a fan of extending the $600 per week increased unemployment payments and neither is the administration, but Democrats are pushing for it.

“Obviously it will be a negotiation between the Republicans, Democrats and the White House,” Thune said. “ I can’t imagine a scenario where extending it at the current level would happen.”

Stimulus checks: Republicans are torn over more direct payments, but the administration wants it.

“Nothing is final. But I suspect that there will, there's a high level of interest in doing something more to help people, particularly on the lower end of the income scale,” Thune said. “But I think the last version of this cost somewhere on the order of $300 billion, and there'll be a plug in there to help people and whether that's payroll tax, or, you know, the direct checks, checks, or what form that takes, I'm not sure.”

Grassley favors stimulus checks over payroll tax cuts.
[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-throws-wrench-coronavirus-bill-030957273.html[/url]

-------------------------------------

[B]Payroll tax cut [/B]-- takes directly away from Social Security. As a 41 year old who has worked his entire working eligible life and paid into the system ... dont continue to rob me. This would only help people already employed, the more you make the more it helps you.

if they cut the payroll tax by 2% and I make just over 100k a year, that benefits me (who doesnt need it) much more than someone who makes 43k.

[B]Stimulus checks[/B] - sounds like it will go to people making less than 40K or so a year. Id rather just continue raising the debt and go with stimulus checks vs taking away from Soc Sec even though that would benefit me

[B]Defund or reduce testing[/B] - i dont understand this. Dont we want and need rapid testing as a first step towards opening schools back up, being able to contact trace? I think they increase funding for testing not reduce or defund.[/quote]

They've walked back the idea of having the cut-off point for checks being people who make under 40K a year. Average median income for a typical american family is around 63K. If they cut off at 40K, then way less than half of american families would receive the benefit. They want the next package to be able to help everyone, or as close to everyone as possible.

I have heard both Democratic and Republican talking points on potentially too much testing. Governors from both sides have pointed out how so many people are clogging up the test queues that don't have any symptoms, and the tests come back negative. So many people are getting tested that probably really don't need it. So now some states are starting to prioritize testing for the sick / people showing visible symptoms, and I think that is how it should have been from the beginning.

As far as is there an end point to this? The US will probably be battling this for years to come. Even after a Vaccine comes out at the end of this year, it would take months to inoculate the entire country. So let's assume that everything continues going well (fingers crossed), and we get a vaccine by the end of 2020. 2021 would be mostly spent trying to inoculate as many people as possible. No way you could get the whole country vaccinated in six months. So by 2022, you have the majority of people vaccinated, and now you are watching the case numbers every day start to tick down. 2023 you have low case numbers, or low enough that schools and such are allowed to open again. So i think that is when you would see a return to "normal", or as normal as possible. There is a whole lot of people, i'd say probably more than half, that don't want things to be "normal" again for safety reasons, so it's hard to say what the "new normal" will look like when this is all over.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

too much testing --- with all due respect, that sounds like a twitter or internet talking point that is not based in reality. I think rapid testing is vital and I dont think we have that or reliable enough testing. Ive read there are some areas that have excess tests vs hot spots that dont have enough.

But this is about getting better quicker tests and more of them.

--------------------

But the US testing program can’t be considered “best in the world.” The US has run 83.24 tests per thousand individuals, according to numbers from Our World in Data. By comparison, Russia, which is also being hit hard by the virus, has run 120.07 tests per thousand people.

And the US is currently testing about 500,000 people per day, far behind the 5-million-a-day mark that Trump said the country was closing in on in late April. That is not necessarily because it can’t test more people: the country’s testing capacity has significantly improved since the pandemic began. Still, a Washington Post survey of about 20 states last month found the country was running at least 235,000 fewer tests a day than it could have run. While places with spikes in infections—like Arizona—are facing shortages, large swaths of the country are actually reporting underutilized availability.

[url]https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/06/27/1004545/us-covid-19-coronavirus-test-capacity-unused-available-reopening/[/url]

---------------------

Funding for better quicker and patient friendlier tests are 100% absolutely needed imo.

Being against funding for testing is absurd to me. Testing is needed for schools to reopen.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Giantone;1256070]We have some very good friends who live in England .I's being reported over there that trump has said if the US develops a vaccine we won't share it with the World. They now all feel the same, if they develop something we aren't going to see it,thanks donnie.

P.S.

They will all get their shots free of charge , how much will we have to pay for ours?[/quote]

Well let's just hope that is hearsay and/or both countries aren't that petty. A vaccine that can reach everyone would be good for local, state, and federal governments regardless of country, which would be in turn good for us as we trade with most countries and definitely England.

I believe a flu shot only costs like 25 bucks. I think the time to mass manufacture a proven vaccine will be more of an issue than the costs.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SunnySide;1256058][B]Payroll tax cut [/B]-- takes directly away from Social Security. As a 41 year old who has worked his entire working eligible life and paid into the system ... dont continue to rob me. This would only help people already employed, the more you make the more it helps you.

if they cut the payroll tax by 2% and I make just over 100k a year, that benefits me (who doesnt need it) much more than someone who makes 43k.

[B]Stimulus checks[/B] - sounds like it will go to people making less than 40K or so a year. Id rather just continue raising the debt and go with stimulus checks vs taking away from Soc Sec even though that would benefit me

[B]Defund or reduce testing[/B] - i dont understand this. Dont we want and need rapid testing as a first step towards opening schools back up, being able to contact trace? I think they increase funding for testing not reduce or defund.[/quote]

I'm 37, I've lived my whole working life under the assumption that I'll never collect social security. I'll be pleasantly surprised if I do. But won't plan it as part of my retirement.

That being said, I think direct cash into taxpayers hands is the better option than a payroll tax cut.

I don't understand defunding testing either. I would need to read more about his reasoning for this. Seems like you could only fund testing less if there was a vaccine readily available.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SolidSnake84;1256086]They've walked back the idea of having the cut-off point for checks being people who make under 40K a year. Average median income for a typical american family is around 63K. If they cut off at 40K, then way less than half of american families would receive the benefit. They want the next package to be able to help everyone, or as close to everyone as possible.[/quote]

I sure hope this is the case. I make more than 40k but less than 63k. In San Diego that is peanuts. Because of COVID my company cut all overtime. So I've been out around 300-500 a paycheck. If people are getting checks again, I'd sure like one.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1256095]I'm 37, I've lived my whole working life under the assumption that I'll never collect social security. I'll be pleasantly surprised if I do. But won't plan it as part of my retirement.

That being said, I think direct cash into taxpayers hands is the better option than a payroll tax cut.

I don't understand defunding testing either. I would need to read more about his reasoning for this. Seems like you could only fund testing less if there was a vaccine readily available.[/quote]

We are roughly the same age. I will turn 36 in September. I am like you, i think there is no way that i / we will ever be able to collect the money. The system will be bankrupt / gone / USA will have collapsed / whatever by then.

I wish there was a way that i could stop paying into it now, with the stipulation that i am waiving any right to any future payouts when i get old. Otherwise, i feel robbed, like most people do i'm sure when we go to retire and it isn't there.

I suppose part of the defunding testing talk might be based under the belief that most likely, and hopefully, one, or ALL of the vaccines currently in phase 3 trials will be approved by the end of the year, and with production able to supply billions of doses in 2021, testing would logically be scaled down as the pandemic subsides. America won't be the only country in that boat. Probably within the next couple of months many other major countries will have their vaccines readied / finalized. And i do believe, no matter how tough they talk, whichever country successfully produces it first has an ethical responsibility to share it with the world. Even Donald Trump wouldn't pass up the opportunity to gloat to the world that his administration produced the world's first approved vaccine and because of the goodness of the USA or whatever crap, we are sharing it with the world.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Social Security will be there. Source: I work there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=MTK;1256111]Social Security will be there. Source: I work there.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

Won't change my planning. But I have no qualms with having extra money upon retiring.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[url]https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/policy-basics-understanding-the-social-security-trust-funds[/url]

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=sdskinsfan2001;1256112]Won't change my planning. But I have no qualms with having extra money upon retiring.[/quote]

Yeah that’s the thing, Social Security should only be a part of your long term planning, not the focus.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Like to get folks thoughts on if we will have a vaccine announcement by end of year? Or Vaccine being administered by end of year? Or longer ways off than most think?

I feel we will have an announcement around November and vaccinations probably within 60 days. I feel progress has yielded better than expected results from what I read.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

By the end of the year seems optimistic. If I had to bet I’d say a vaccine may be available sometime in the 2nd quarter of 2021.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Chico23231;1256135]Like to get folks thoughts on if we will have a vaccine announcement by end of year? Or Vaccine being administered by end of year? Or longer ways off than most think?

I feel we will have an announcement around November and vaccinations probably within 60 days. I feel progress has yielded better than expected results from what I read.[/quote]

Everything i am hearing also says that we will have a vaccine before the end of the year, but it will only receive emergency authorization from the FDA, and the first round of doses will only be for the most at risk people, first responders, etc..... Everyone else & "normal" people will be able to begin getting vaccinated in the 1st quarter of 2021. With the help of the US Military setting up vaccination sites, i'm sure it will take the rest of 2021, but we should have close to everyone or as many people as possible vaccinated by this time next year...

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Vaccines - im getting worried there will not be a magical vaccine.

Will the vaccine prevent all mutation strains of Covid?

Will the vaccine only protect for 2-3 months then the antibodies die off?

-----------

A new mutation of Covid-19 is now the most dominant strand of the virus globally and forming clusters quicker in the UK than the original virus from Wuhan, an expert has warned. Professor Nick Loman of the University of Birmingham, who is part of the Covid-19 Genomics Consortium, said the mutation, known as D614G, has an observable impact on cases in humans. While it is not thought the new form of the virus causes a greater risk of death, or lengthier hospital stays, it is helping outbreaks spread more rapidly across the world.[B] Prof Loman also said he suspected the new mutation would not impact the process of finding a vaccine for Covid-19[/B], particularly given its prevalence globally. So how far away is a vaccine? Here is the latest on the UK and US trials.

[url]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/22/wednesday-evening-news-briefing-covid-19-mutation-spreading/[/url]

---------------------

A doctor at Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer tested positive again for the novel coronavirus three months after initially recovering from the disease.
The doctor “tested positive again because she has remnants of her first virus still floating around in her body,” a hospital spokesperson told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.
The doctor suffered from fever, cough and muscle pain when she tested positive for the virus in April, but she recovered and tested negative in May and June.
Earlier this month, she came in contact with a confirmed patient and subsequently tested positive for the virus.
The cases are the latest in a series of incidents of suspected reinfection that have raised questions concerning how long immunity against the virus lasts.
In May, a 45-year-old woman from Jisr e-Zarka tested positive for coronavirus after being readmitted to Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera, suffering from fever and chest pains. This came a month after she was discharged after recovering from the virus and testing negative twice.
Several studies are attempting to figure out how long protection provided by antibodies will last, Dr. Maria van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 technical lead, said last week, adding that some initial studies have found they “may wane after a couple of months.”
With coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS, people had some form of immunity for about a year or even longer, but with other human coronaviruses that circulate regularly, the immunity period is much shorter, Kerkhove said. This is “early data,” and more studies are needed, she said.
[B]Preliminary studies in China, Germany, the UK and elsewhere have found patients infected with the novel coronavirus make protective antibodies as part of their immune system’s defenses, but these appear to last only a few months.[/B]
That raises big problems for developers of potential COVID-19 vaccines, experts say, and for public health authorities seeking to deploy them to protect populations from future waves of the pandemic.
To be truly effective, COVID-19 vaccines “will either need to generate stronger and longer-lasting protection... or they may need to be given regularly,” said Stephen Griffin, a Leeds University associate professor of medicine. “And those things are not trivial.”
[url]https://www.jpost.com/health-science/israeli-doctor-reinfected-with-coronavirus-3-months-after-recovering-635550[/url]

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[url]https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863[/url]

Open this up and look at the data

[IMG]https://www.acsh.org/sites/default/files/coronavirus%20covid%20mortality%20us%20by%20age.png[/IMG]

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Chico23231;1256181][url]https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863[/url]

Open this up and look at the data

[IMG]https://www.acsh.org/sites/default/files/coronavirus%20covid%20mortality%20us%20by%20age.png[/IMG][/quote]

the ones 85 and older what underlying issues did they have and would they have passed anyway?

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

73.6 million minors in the US as of 2016

0.0016 infection mortality rate for 5-9 year olds

117,760 minor deaths (assumes entire minor population gets infected, which it wont)

That only looks at deaths .. not hospitalizations, long term health consequences etc

--------------------------

I understand the importance of mortality rates to be included as part of the discussion but I dont understand the motivation to downplay the virus by tunnel visioning on just the mortality rate and ignoring all other considerations.

Thankfully the mortality rate is not higher .. but when you put those small percents to huge infection rates = huge death totals.

if 50k kids die because all schools open .. that is not a win.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Wow you are spinning this wildly. Stick to the facts

Jfc it’s pathetic at this point

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[IMG]https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/56397508/fucking-percentages-how-do-they-work.jpg[/IMG]

chico - can you calmly or rationally explain how I am spinning this or ignoring facts? I 100% honestly want to know. Is my math wrong? Could very well be. Arent percentages only important when you apply that percent to a total number?

You want to champion a low percent mortality rate, okay that is an important part of the discussion .. but then end the discussion as "spinning" when a person takes the logical next step of appling that rate to the total infection number.

If I am spinning ... please spell it out for me in a logical way. I 100% want to know if perhaps I am bias blind here. I very well could be and genuinely want to know.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Giantone;1256184]the ones 85 and older what underlying issues did they have and would they have passed anyway?[/quote]

I don’t know g1 but that’s the official cdc stats

But the deaths are small enough under 55 year old where you should be able to parse the data to find out if each death had an underlying medical issue.

My guess is, I would say at a minimum a third had underlying issues or high risk. 1/3 would be extremely conservative estimate based on other data

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Like to see the Flu deaths from 2019 in the same age ranges for the same months


Wonder what they would be?

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Chico23231;1256192]Like to see the Flu deaths from 2019 in the same age ranges for the same months


Wonder what they would be?[/quote]

CDC estimates that influenza was associated with more than 35.5 million illnesses, more than 16.5 million medical visits, 490,600 hospitalizations, and 34,200 deaths during the 2018–2019 influenza season. This burden was similar to estimated burden during the 2012–2013 influenza season1.

[url]https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html[/url]

Am I allowed to *gasp* do math here or will that be considered spinning?

34,200/35,500,000 = ________________ ?

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

Cool got the raw data from CDC of influenzas from 2017-2018

[url]https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018.htm#table1[/url]

So running estimates of COVID deaths versus flu death even with a vaccine...the point where deaths separate looks to be after 35 years of age. COVID takes off...but under 35 Years old total deaths down big time versus COVID.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[IMG]https://www.acsh.org/sites/default/files/Screen%20Shot%202020-06-23%20at%206.18.52%20PM.png[/IMG]


None of the above data answers the question, "What is my risk of dying from coronavirus if I get infected?" For that, we need to look at the infection fatality rate (IFR), which is the percentage of people who die given that they are infected. (This includes people with asymptomatic infections or those who are infected but never get tested.) One group believes the range is 0.1% to 0.41% (with a point estimate of 0.28%). Another group, which examined deaths in Geneva, Switzerland, concluded that the overall IFR is 0.38% to 0.98% (with a point estimate of 0.64%.)

Of course, IFR varies depending on age. Young people are far less likely to die than older people. The Swiss study estimated IFR's by age group.

Also from my cdc link above

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Chico23231;1256216][IMG]https://www.acsh.org/sites/default/files/Screen%20Shot%202020-06-23%20at%206.18.52%20PM.png[/IMG]


None of the above data answers the question, "What is my risk of dying from coronavirus if I get infected?" For that, we need to look at the infection fatality rate (IFR), which is the percentage of people who die given that they are infected. (This includes people with asymptomatic infections or those who are infected but never get tested.) One group believes the range is 0.1% to 0.41% (with a point estimate of 0.28%). Another group, which examined deaths in Geneva, Switzerland, concluded that the overall IFR is 0.38% to 0.98% (with a point estimate of 0.64%.)

Of course, IFR varies depending on age. Young people are far less likely to die than older people. The Swiss study estimated IFR's by age group.

Also from my cdc link above[/quote]
chico you're leaving out a very important fact(no surprise there) ,....................underlying conditions.The groups you are touting what were the "underlying"conditions these people had, I,E,....High blood pressure ,Diabetes, Heart disease....etc.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

In the study, researchers surveilled pediatric health centers across the U.S. from March 15 to May 20. Of 186 MIS-C patients in 26 states, researchers found that 73 percent were previously healthy and 70 percent tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The median age was 8.3 years, and patients were hospitalized for about a week.


The study found that most of the pediatric patients had no underlying health conditions. (iStock)
The study found that most of the pediatric patients had no underlying health conditions. (iStock)
Most patients had a fever lasting four or more days.

Also, for a small number of patients, 25 days had passed between the onset of COVID-19 symptoms and hospitalization for MIS-C.

“These findings suggest that a substantial proportion of the patients in this series were infected with SARS-CoV-2 at least 1 to 2 weeks before the onset of MIS-C,” authors wrote.


Study authors said 80 percent of patients underwent intensive care, and 20 percent received mechanical ventilation. Coronary-artery aneurysms were reported in 15 patients and four patients died.

[url]https://www.foxnews.com/health/kids-coronavirus-inflammatory-condition[/url]
If anyone sees a good article of kid hospitalizations or a clean accurate description of how covid final death numbers are counted, Please post it. I can’t find 100% clear articles on it.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[URL="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/27/the-worlds-biggest-coronavirus-vaccine-study-begins-a-us-trial-that-will-include-30000-people-to-see-if-the-shots-really-work.html"]The world’s biggest coronavirus vaccine study begins, a U.S. trial that will include 30,000 people to see if the shots really work[/URL]

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=sunnyside;1253459]128,557[/quote]

150,716

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[url]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vietnam-spread/in-just-days-vietnam-shifts-from-virus-free-paradise-to-panic-idUSKCN24V1ZQ[/url]

In just days, Vietnam shifts from virus-free paradise to panic

Its not just a US problem...it’s never been that from day one.


Looks like the media is effectively ignoring Sweden when three weeks ago it gleefully said it was a failure. Guess what, Sweden hasn’t recorded in a COVID death in a couple days

Why are Sweden's coronavirus figures falling so sharply and what does it mean for the future?

[url]https://www.thelocal.se/20200724/why-are-swedens-coronavirus-figure-falling-so-sharply[/url]

Heard immunity

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SunnySide;1256757]150,716[/quote]

328.2 Million Americans .


24,000 deaths from the Flu in the 2019/2020 flu season ...that's with flu shots.


Coronavirus deaths ...154,000 as of 7/30/2020

[url]https://www.google.com/search?ei=YTUjX_zIKtnCytMPrrOr0Aw&q=corona+death+toll+2020&oq=corona+death+toll+2020&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQDDoECAAQRzoICAAQBxAFEB46BggAEAcQHjoHCAAQsQMQQzoCCABQ_SNYiVBgl2doAHABeACAAUSIAbIEkgEBOZgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXrAAQE&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwi8_afq7_XqAhVZoXIEHa7ZCsoQ4dUDCAw[/url]


..................................perspective.

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

chico, this has you all over this................



Freedom to Breathe Agency!



[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-claiming-freedom-breathe-agency-115114470.html[/url]

A woman claiming to be from the "Freedom to Breathe Agency" was filmed telling a grocery store supervisor in Orange County, California, that she could face legal action for telling people to wear face coverings.

In a viral TikTok video, the mask-less woman — identified as Lenka Koloma — said they were "making sure that people's constitutional rights, civil and federal laws are not broken."


The two women, wearing badges that said "FTBA" and claimed to be from the "Freedom to Breathe Agency," gave Chavez a piece of paper that stated she could face legal action for telling people to wear masks.

"You personally need to take this to your manager because you personally can be sued for this, OK?" Koloma can be heard saying in the video.

"You are putting yourself into major legal liability — you personally," Koloma added, before leaving the shop.

According to Buzzfeed News, the paper also said that Chavez could go to prison for up to three to five years and could be fined up to $10,000 for telling customers to wear a mask.

"They weren't there to shop," Chavez told Buzzfeed News. "They honestly were probably just waiting for somebody to come up to them and ask them to wear a mask so they could do this."

The "Freedom To Breathe Agency" is not a real governmental agency. It has no official website and only uses a private Facebook group.

Koloma, who describes herself as the founder of the group, regularly posts anti-masks messages on her social media pages.

She told BuzzFeed News that she and the woman she was with "both have medical, health conditions and also religious beliefs that do not allow us to wear a mask," but did not say what those medical conditions are.

This is not the first time the "Freedom To Breathe Agency" has drawn attention.

In June, the group was given a warning by The Department of Justice. It had distributed "face mask exempt" cards that claimed to wear a mask put people at risk of mental or physical impairment and that the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) bars officials from questioning their decision not to wear face coverings.

"Do not be fooled by the chicanery and misappropriation of the DOJ eagle," US Attorney Martin said in a statement. "These cards do not carry the force of law. The 'Freedom to Breathe Agency,' or 'FTBA,' is not a government agency."

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Giantone;1256767]328.2 Million Americans .


24,000 deaths from the Flu in the 2019/2020 flu season ...that's with flu shots.


Coronavirus deaths ...154,000 as of 7/30/2020

[url]https://www.google.com/search?ei=YTUjX_zIKtnCytMPrrOr0Aw&q=corona+death+toll+2020&oq=corona+death+toll+2020&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQDDoECAAQRzoICAAQBxAFEB46BggAEAcQHjoHCAAQsQMQQzoCCABQ_SNYiVBgl2doAHABeACAAUSIAbIEkgEBOZgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXrAAQE&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwi8_afq7_XqAhVZoXIEHa7ZCsoQ4dUDCAw[/url]


..................................perspective.[/quote]

Well you know the naysayers are going to say those death totals are inflated because the hospitals get more money for a covid death

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=Giantone;1257164]chico, this has you all over this................



Freedom to Breathe Agency!



[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-claiming-freedom-breathe-agency-115114470.html[/url]

A woman claiming to be from the "Freedom to Breathe Agency" was filmed telling a grocery store supervisor in Orange County, California, that she could face legal action for telling people to wear face coverings.

In a viral TikTok video, the mask-less woman — identified as Lenka Koloma — said they were "making sure that people's constitutional rights, civil and federal laws are not broken."


The two women, wearing badges that said "FTBA" and claimed to be from the "Freedom to Breathe Agency," gave Chavez a piece of paper that stated she could face legal action for telling people to wear masks.

"You personally need to take this to your manager because you personally can be sued for this, OK?" Koloma can be heard saying in the video.

"You are putting yourself into major legal liability — you personally," Koloma added, before leaving the shop.

According to Buzzfeed News, the paper also said that Chavez could go to prison for up to three to five years and could be fined up to $10,000 for telling customers to wear a mask.

"They weren't there to shop," Chavez told Buzzfeed News. "They honestly were probably just waiting for somebody to come up to them and ask them to wear a mask so they could do this."

The "Freedom To Breathe Agency" is not a real governmental agency. It has no official website and only uses a private Facebook group.

Koloma, who describes herself as the founder of the group, regularly posts anti-masks messages on her social media pages.

She told BuzzFeed News that she and the woman she was with "both have medical, health conditions and also religious beliefs that do not allow us to wear a mask," but did not say what those medical conditions are.

This is not the first time the "Freedom To Breathe Agency" has drawn attention.

In June, the group was given a warning by The Department of Justice. It had distributed "face mask exempt" cards that claimed to wear a mask put people at risk of mental or physical impairment and that the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) bars officials from questioning their decision not to wear face coverings.

"Do not be fooled by the chicanery and misappropriation of the DOJ eagle," US Attorney Martin said in a statement. "These cards do not carry the force of law. The 'Freedom to Breathe Agency,' or 'FTBA,' is not a government agency."[/quote]

Freedom to Breathe Agency... these people are so dumb it hurts :doh:

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=htownskinfan;1257199]Well you know the naysayers are going to say those death totals are inflated because the hospitals get more money for a covid death[/quote]

Are you... are you a naysayer? You could just say it you know.

I'm also a prosayer or whatever the opposite of what a naysayer is. Does the count include people who die partially or fully due to COVID without ever going to a hospital to have it confirmed?

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=mooby;1257209]Are you... are you a naysayer? You could just say it you know.

I'm also a prosayer or whatever the opposite of what a naysayer is. Does the count include people who die partially or fully due to COVID without ever going to a hospital to have it confirmed?[/quote]

Well I'm in between,while I dont think there is rampant fraud going on I think it would be naive to think there's none going on

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=sunnyside;1256757]150,716[/quote]

200,005

Re: Coronavirus (non political)
 

[quote=SunnySide;1259770]200,005[/quote]

but,but chico said you can't get sick from kids,..........this can't be right?