rt.live
-
About a week~10 days ago, we got down to only two states having R values above 1.
As of this morning, there are nine states with R values above 1.
I've noticed that trend as well.
Do you think it has anything to do with "re-opening," or is it a factor of having more positives because of testing?
wrote on 28 May 2020, 11:59 last edited byAbout a week~10 days ago, we got down to only two states having R values above 1.
As of this morning, there are nine states with R values above 1.
I've noticed that trend as well.
Do you think it has anything to do with "re-opening," or is it a factor of having more positives because of testing?
It’s going to spread as we open up. I don’t think there are any people disallusioned about that fact.
We are just beginning to seethe economic pain.... the real layoffs are just starting. Stark choices ahead.
-
-
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 20:14 last edited by
Rt.live not looking good. Might want to sit down before refreshing that rt.live page.
-
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 20:23 last edited by
Looks great to me. Virtually unchanged since last week and generally better than last month.
-
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 21:47 last edited by
So much for it not liking the warm weather
-
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 21:48 last edited by
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
-
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 22:51 last edited by -
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 22:57 last edited by
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 23:27 last edited by"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
Exactly. Suddenly everyone is moving the goalpost. It would be great if we could stop the spread completely, but the cost is likely too high, and that wasn’t the goal in the first place.
-
wrote on 21 Jun 2020, 23:52 last edited by
Thank you
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 02:19 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
Unfortunately I think that one thing will lead inevitably to the other. I don't see how a high infection rate is sustainable without overwhelming the local hospitals. I'd love to be wrong.
-
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
Exactly. Suddenly everyone is moving the goalpost. It would be great if we could stop the spread completely, but the cost is likely too high, and that wasn’t the goal in the first place.
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 13:12 last edited by"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
Exactly. Suddenly everyone is moving the goalpost. It would be great if we could stop the spread completely, but the cost is likely too high, and that wasn’t the goal in the first place.
The 'behavior' I was referring to was protests, political rallies, massive groups of people congregating at the beach. The cost of not doing those things is not too high IMHO.
I was only joking
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
Unfortunately I think that one thing will lead inevitably to the other. I don't see how a high infection rate is sustainable without overwhelming the local hospitals. I'd love to be wrong.
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 14:46 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
Unfortunately I think that one thing will lead inevitably to the other. I don't see how a high infection rate is sustainable without overwhelming the local hospitals. I'd love to be wrong.
Sadly, you're right.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
Unfortunately I think that one thing will lead inevitably to the other. I don't see how a high infection rate is sustainable without overwhelming the local hospitals. I'd love to be wrong.
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 16:29 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
Flatten the curve, not eradicate the virus. It's always been about not overwhelming the medical system.
Flattening the curve doesn't seem to be working for a lot of the country. Not particularly surprising when you see how everybody is behaving.
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
I haven't read anything about hospitals and ICUs being overwhelmed, turning patients away in the last 5-6 weeks. Have you?
If not, the "flattening" has worked. If you want to talk about infection rates, that's another discussion.
Unfortunately I think that one thing will lead inevitably to the other. I don't see how a high infection rate is sustainable without overwhelming the local hospitals. I'd love to be wrong.
What do you define as "high" and over how long of a period of time?
Virginia is adding on 500 cases a day, and we are being told that is quite manageable for a long time. On April 22nd we were adding on 600 cases a day and it was the apocalypse...
-
"Flattening the Curve" was all about not overwhelming the healthcare facilities, not about reducing mortality or infection rates.
Exactly. Suddenly everyone is moving the goalpost. It would be great if we could stop the spread completely, but the cost is likely too high, and that wasn’t the goal in the first place.
The 'behavior' I was referring to was protests, political rallies, massive groups of people congregating at the beach. The cost of not doing those things is not too high IMHO.
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 16:31 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in rt.live:
The 'behavior' I was referring to was protests, political rallies, massive groups of people congregating at the beach. The cost of not doing those things is not too high IMHO.
I agree about the beach, and I also agree about the current protests and rallies. However, that doesn't mean that the costs of all protests are too high. There are some political causes that are worth some risk.
-
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 18:59 last edited by Doctor Phibes
Hypothetically, there's always something worth putting people at risk over. For some people, it's defending against the Nazi hordes, for others it's getting childcare 250 miles away and visiting a historic monument to "test their eyesight".
-
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 19:03 last edited by
For some reason I cannot think of any political cause at the moment worth that risk. Colour me complacent.
-
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 20:23 last edited by
Black lives have been considered worthless for all of America’s history. If white people die of COVID due to the BLM protests, well, good.
-
wrote on 22 Jun 2020, 20:54 last edited by
Yes, those whites are awful
The men are the worst
