• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

When skiing returns

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,765
Points
48
Location
PRNJ
Anybody within close proximity to NYC should be stopping anybody from the city from coming into their states if they are serious about slowing the spread. Florida is starting to crack down on people flying in but drivers should be checked as well

The fleeing of COVID19+ people from NYC is a serious problem; Dr. Birx said so in the White House press conference yesterday.
 

Sunday Rivah Rat

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2020
Messages
22
Points
3
I found a lot of comfort by looking at the link below. Particularly the fact that the death rate for those with no pre-existing conditions is only 0.9.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

The economic impact is going to kill WAY MORE folks.

Quote from the movie The Big Short. Brad Pitt played
Ben Rickert:
"If we're right, people lose homes. People lose jobs. People lose retirement savings, people lose pensions. You know what I hate about f***ing banking? It reduces people to numbers. Here's a number - every 1% unemployment goes up, 40,000 people die, did you know that?"

Some basic calculations of an increased death rate from this recession to come IN THE US ONLY:
So if we expect an average of a 5% increase in Unemployment over the next 5 years that means 40,000 people times 25 = 1,000,000 people will die from the recession to follow in the US alone.

The cure is definitely going to kill more than COVID-19, no question.

So far 23,595 people have died worldwide this virus, most with pre existing conditions.....

Globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the flu kills 290,000 to 650,000 people per year.

WTF?????
 

urungus

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
655
Points
18
Location
Western Mass
This is a mental game on my part, just the product of five minutes of googling and some shaky associations by me.

If Italy has a total pop of 60 million and current corona deaths are ~7500, and they are approaching a point where deaths will lessen each day, and projected 2020 Italy corona deaths are 30,000 (wild guess), that equals 0.05% of the population.

If US has a total pop of 330 million and we have as bad a time as Italy and 0.05% percent of our population dies of corona in 2020, that would equal 150,000 dead people.

Compare the 150,000 figure to leading causes of death in USA in 2017:
Heart disease: 647,457
Cancer: 599,108
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 169,936
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 160,201
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 146,383
Alzheimer’s disease: 121,404
Diabetes: 83,564
Influenza and pneumonia: 55,672
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,633
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,173
Roadway deaths: 40,231

Draw your own conclusions about the economic damage from panic and over-reaction vs. the actual health damage of this crisis. I know this is way over simplified. Shoot me down if you care to.

You are calculating 150,000 dead Americans assuming we lock down society and the economy, as Italy has (belatedly) done. But it would presumably be much more than that if we decided the economy is more important than Grandma. Also I fear that your projection of 30,000 fatalities in Italy will be on the low side, they have already surpassed 8,000 and have been averaging about 700 per day for the last few days. At that rate they will have surpassed 30,000 in about a month. This article has a sobering graph of how the number of cases is the US is accelerating faster than in Italy: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/3/20/21179040/coronavirus-us-italy-not-overreacting
 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
480
Points
28
You are calculating 150,000 dead Americans assuming we lock down society and the economy, as Italy has (belatedly) done. But it would presumably be much more than that if we decided the economy is more important than Grandma. Also I fear that your projection of 30,000 fatalities in Italy will be on the low side, they have already surpassed 8,000 and have been averaging about 700 per day for the last few days. At that rate they will have surpassed 30,000 in about a month. This article has a sobering graph of how the number of cases is the US is accelerating faster than in Italy: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/3/20/21179040/coronavirus-us-italy-not-overreacting

Nobody is saying the economy is more important than Grandma. Selectively opening parts of the country to certain people is not telling Grandma to drop dead
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,765
Points
48
Location
PRNJ
This article has a sobering graph of how the number of cases is the US is accelerating faster than in Italy

Vox is either intentionally trying to scare people, or whoever made that graph is a flipping idiot.

Knowing Vox, my money is on the former.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,965
Points
48
Location
NJ
I found a lot of comfort by looking at the link below. Particularly the fact that the death rate for those with no pre-existing conditions is only 0.9.

Yea...sure is comforting to know that only 1 out of every 100 people I know that have no pre-existing conditions would die if they get COVID-19.

Also a somewhat interesting article about research into the impact of a recession on death rates (as opposed to numbers you used that were thrown out by a movie)...
https://drexel.edu/now/archive/2014/July/Unemployment-Study/
 

p_levert

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
345
Points
18
This is a mental game on my part, just the product of five minutes of googling and some shaky associations by me.

If Italy has a total pop of 60 million and current corona deaths are ~7500, and they are approaching a point where deaths will lessen each day, and projected 2020 Italy corona deaths are 30,000 (wild guess), that equals 0.05% of the population.

If US has a total pop of 330 million and we have as bad a time as Italy and 0.05% percent of our population dies of corona in 2020, that would equal 150,000 dead people.

Compare the 150,000 figure to leading causes of death in USA in 2017:
Heart disease: 647,457
Cancer: 599,108
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 169,936
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 160,201
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 146,383
Alzheimer’s disease: 121,404
Diabetes: 83,564
Influenza and pneumonia: 55,672
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,633
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,173
Roadway deaths: 40,231

Draw your own conclusions about the economic damage from panic and over-reaction vs. the actual health damage of this crisis. I know this is way over simplified. Shoot me down if you care to.

As pointed out by someone else, Italy did take preventive measures, so the toll would be higher than 300K.

When the hospitals are in better shape (enough gear to welcome new patients), and we have testing for CV-19, then we consider loosening things up.

How about this, we accept 300K CV-19 deaths and reduce the speed limit to 55 to compensate? Or we fully lock down everyone over 70 (ie they can't leave the house and all food is delivered). We could do that too. But these kinds of solutions tend to be impossible politically, at least in this country. China is different.
 

nhskier1969

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
336
Points
18
Yea...sure is comforting to know that only 1 out of every 100 people I know that have no pre-existing conditions would die if they get COVID-19.

Also a somewhat interesting article about research into the impact of a recession on death rates (as opposed to numbers you used that were thrown out by a movie)...
https://drexel.edu/now/archive/2014/July/Unemployment-Study/

1 out of 100 people don't die.
break down the stats

1 out of 100 people will catch it. Out of the 1 out of 100, 80% will have light to no systems at all. 15% have moderate symptoms have moderate sysmptoms and may need to be hospitalized. 5% are severe, and need ventilators. United states is averaging a 1.3% mortality rate. It's higher in Washington because it went thru a lot of Nursing homes.
 

p_levert

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Messages
345
Points
18
Maybe re-read my comment. I didn't say 1 out of 100 people will die. I said 1 out of every 100 people that GET it will die.

Not quite correct, since we've only been testing people with symptons. So you should say 1 out of 100 people that get it *and* are symptomatic will die.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
3,965
Points
48
Location
NJ
Not quite correct, since we've only been testing people with symptons. So you should say 1 out of 100 people that get it *and* are symptomatic will die.

Well I was responding specifically to someone that pointed to data showing the death rate was "only" .9 among people with no pre-existing conditions and the fact that they said that number was "comforting" to them. So my response of course is going to respond to the number they cited in the link to the data they mentioned.

You're absolutely right that it "could" be lower. It also "could" be higher if we overload the healthcare system by "opening things up" too quickly as some people on this forum seem to be in favor of doing. The US has one of the lowest death rates at the moment compared to many other countries. I'd prefer to see it stay that way until we better understand things and are better prepared to deal with it.
 

Sunday Rivah Rat

New member
Joined
Mar 26, 2020
Messages
22
Points
3
Yea...sure is comforting to know that only 1 out of every 100 people I know that have no pre-existing conditions would die if they get COVID-19.

Also a somewhat interesting article about research into the impact of a recession on death rates (as opposed to numbers you used that were thrown out by a movie)...
https://drexel.edu/now/archive/2014/July/Unemployment-Study/

congrats cdskier for finding the 1 article that contradicts numerous studies showing higher unemployment causing an increased death rate :

https://news.yale.edu/2002/05/23/ri...r-death-rates-new-study-yale-researcher-shows

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448606/

https://www.genre.com/knowledge/blo...-lead-to-an-increasing-mortality-rate-en.html

https://www.livescience.com/13578-unemployment-health-mortality.html
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
25,738
Points
48
Location
Southeast NH
Regardless of the stats, the real concern I have is people dying because we don't have the equipment to save them like we normally would.

I started my day with a very sobering conversation with the Director of Nursing of a hospital in VT. If the rate of infection in NYC hits VT, within 3 weeks the hospital will have to switch to a policy of no ventilators for patients over age 60. These heroes are very well used to DNR situations and see sad endings of life every day, but it's pretty much unprecedented they have to make the DNR choice for their patients and loved ones because they lack the resources to treat.

That's not media fear mongering. It's legitimate fear of the providers on the front lines. Let's hope it doesn't get that bad.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
480
Points
28
Is the rate of infection in a highly populated, highly dense city likely to occur in a highly rural state?
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
25,738
Points
48
Location
Southeast NH
Is the rate of infection in a highly populated, highly dense city likely to occur in a highly rural state?
If VT didn't take the extreme measures they have maybe. I mean just look at what happened in Boston because of one small conference for Biogen. VT extended school cancellation for the year today as a precaution. The reality is that maybe 5 of the 15 hospitals in the state have the ICU capability of treating a serious Covid-19 patient. Outside of UVM Med Center the capacity of the others is maybe 2-5 patients each for those 4. UVM capacity might be 30 patients. It's not just a lack of Vents, it's a lack of negative pressure isolation rooms. I'd be surprised if the latter exceeded 50 patient rooms for the entire state. That's not a lot to serve a population of 600k people.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
 

Siliconebobsquarepants

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2013
Messages
2,683
Points
48
Location
Lehigh County Pa.
Website
www.youtube.com
Regardless of the stats, the real concern I have is people dying because we don't have the equipment to save them like we normally would.

I started my day with a very sobering conversation with the Director of Nursing of a hospital in VT. If the rate of infection in NYC hits VT, within 3 weeks the hospital will have to switch to a policy of no ventilators for patients over age 60. These heroes are very well used to DNR situations and see sad endings of life every day, but it's pretty much unprecedented they have to make the DNR choice for their patients and loved ones because they lack the resources to treat.

That's not media fear mongering. It's legitimate fear of the providers on the front lines. Let's hope it doesn't get that bad.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

With elective surgeries on hold will this make a viable dent in the deficit?

https://poststar.com/news/local/loc...cle_fe2c16f5-9199-5b4a-ae1b-5c58e9bb4b33.html
 
Top