Thread: Coronavirus Impact
Results 511 to 520 of 596
-
-
04-05-2020 01:48 PM
It generally has to be well over a seven hour trip before I'll fly, now. Had a shoot come up in FL about a month and a half ago. They said it looks like flights are cheapest to Orlando right now. I said, I'm driving, it's only seven hours. I like traveling on my own schedule. Way more flexibility and more comfort. Race got rained out that afternoon and because I was doing corporate type stuff, I didn't have to stay. I jumped in my truck and was home by about 11:30 that night. If I had flown, I would have had to waste half of the next day traveling home.
-
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 51,819
04-05-2020 02:14 PM
Agreed exactly. Although 7 hours isn't my tipping point, I take it further. On the way out to Vegas (1,500 miles) I qualified for two Iron Butt Association runs, 1,000+ miles in 24 hours and 1,500 miles in 36 hours. And on the way back I qualified again for another 1,500 miles in 36 hours.
Normally I don't like to do a run like that, I like to space it out and see the country, but that wasn't a choice this time.
There were years I was flying 100,000+ miles, I held Gold status on three separate airlines simultaneously even. First Class upgrades were fairly common, and flying was fine. But without that perk, it's just miserable and I avoid it whenever possible.
Remember when flying was a special occasion, and people used to actually dress up for the plane? Of course, back in those days 90% of the passengers were smoking too. That was a different world. It's amazing how quickly we adapt and can't even imagine going back to how things were.
1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
-
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Location
- Long Island
- Posts
- 8,926
-
04-05-2020 03:37 PM
I didn't have the patience to watch this. But I read an article recently which quoted an epidemiologist who basically said that we need to ABSOLUTELY AVOID the worst case scenarios. So, even though there's a lot of uncertainty and even though the best case and average scenarios might not be that bad, the worst case scenario is so bad that we have to render it impossible.
But maybe once we get more data, if the range of possible outcomes is not so bleak then we can relax?
1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
-
04-05-2020 03:49 PM
More voices critical to the dogmatic government slides:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...aths-estimate/
Another piece of information, a military study shows that those who vaccinated against the flu show an increased infection rate of 36% of the coronavirus.
Note that coronavirus is a family of viruses, the research is not specific to SAR-Cov-2 (it conceivably did not exist at the time of the study), but SAR-Cov-2 is a coronavirus as well!
https://www.disabledveterans.org/202...onavirus-risk/
The actual study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...64410X19313647
virus-flu.jpgLast edited by Cary Knoop; 04-05-2020 at 04:26 PM.
-
04-05-2020 04:28 PM
That 36% increased risk is misinterpreting the studies findings of an odds ratio of 1.36. Relative risk and odds ratio are not interchangeable. In addition, the paper states that a similar study found no correlation between the flu vaccine and the coronavirus. That being said, this novel coronavirus is lethal primarily due to our immune system not reacting effectively to the disease. In general, the disease is not overwhelming the immune system and causing fatal tissue decay. Instead, the immune system is overwhelming the body and causing fatal tissue decay. I am sure that a person's history of infections and vaccinations could be correlated with how their body reacts to the infection. It also makes me think that a treatment to prevent the cytokine storm and inflammation should be possible.
0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
-
-
-
04-05-2020 07:17 PM
The fatality rate in Germany is 1.4% and they're doing lots and lots of tests and they are intervening early with hospitalization and intubation for patients: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/w...eath-rate.html