Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Webmaster

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, kingseanjohn said:

Same. There's an online option for my state but they're asking about 2018 tax info. I have it in my safe deposit box at my bank. Bank lobbies are closed.

Interesting. Related to working in multiple states? Thought it was generally something like 18 months of information they'd need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, theJ said:

People keep saying that, but what does that mean exactly?  Unless people in China were ordered to stay in their homes, and not even leave to get food, it seems that the results turn out the same.  People still leave to get food and other necessities, mingle, and pass it around.  Same as America.

I just can't imagine that they weren't given some ability to move around.  Otherwise we'd be hearing about the hundreds of thousands or millions that starved to death.

EDIT: also, you don't have to answer that yourself.  It's a phrase that's been parroted around in each of these three threads, so i suspect some are just saying it because others have.  But i'm genuinely curious.

They had different restrictions in different parts of China. One person per dwelling was allowed to leave every second day with a pass. Upon return they were disinfected by military. In some parts of the country the army delivered food so no one left their dwelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Troy Brown said:

Interesting. Related to working in multiple states? Thought it was generally something like 18 months of information they'd need.

Not at all. They were asking for income for Q4 of 2018 and Q1-3 of 2019. Considering I have a few part time jobs, that info isn’t memorized or easily done by math. So due to that I currently can’t file for unemployment despite being furloughed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TVScout said:

This feels like another one of those things that we all knew but for some reason some people needed researchers to come out and say it before they'd accept it. 

It's even been mentioned here quite a few times, it's common sense...we know for a fact there are a lot more people that have the virus than has been confirmed, and since the death rate is only counting cases that are confirmed obviously it's lower than the numbers would indicate. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, rob_shadows said:

This feels like another one of those things that we all knew but for some reason some people needed researchers to come out and say it before they'd accept it. 

It's even been mentioned here quite a few times, it's common sense...we know for a fact there are a lot more people that have the virus than has been confirmed, and since the death rate is only counting cases that are confirmed obviously it's lower than the numbers would indicate. 

This feels like another instance that I'd like to see their data. This reads like another study with a lot of assumptions and guess work.

It's not fair to assume that all of the unreported/unconfirmed cases result in recovery either.

 

Edit: forgive me for being skeptical of an article/study suggesting that the measures that are being suggested and taken are more dangerous than the virus itself.

Edited by JDBrocks
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TVScout said:

Oxford study said the same thing

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/03/oxford-study-coronavirus-may-have-infected-half-of-u-k.html

There's a lot of disagreement on this though

I tend to think the CFR with proper treatment would be somewhere around 0.1% to 0.2% and may be much higher with healthcare system failure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...