Coronavirus: How 'overreaction' made Vietnam a virus success

[Orangesapples 1,954]

6 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Well, if we listen to the experts, they may very well be subject to the second wave.

Not if they've eliminated it and control their borders, quarantining everyone who enters. 

[Dashinka 24,741]

6 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

Not if they've eliminated it and control their borders, quarantining everyone who enters. 

Not sure anyone can eliminate a virus, and if they are going to quarantine every visitor now for 14 plus days until whenever, I don’t see a lot of folks going there

[Orangesapples 1,954]

49 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Not sure anyone can eliminate a virus, and if they are going to quarantine every visitor now for 14 plus days until whenever, I don’t see a lot of folks going there

New Zealand already has:

 

And yes, you're getting it, not many people are going to go there, that's the point, isn't it? 

[Dashinka 24,741]

18 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

New Zealand already has:

 

And yes, you're getting it, not many people are going to go there, that's the point, isn't it? 

Unless you are a business reliant on tourism, or something like movie production.  Btw, how can anyone know if they have eliminated the virus unless they test the entire population?

[yuna628 9,700]

The argument about virus elimination is just about nonsensical at this point. The better claim should be does X country have better control over X virus spreading? Even then it will be continually difficult for the long term. We will not be eradicating this virus. It has taken us hundreds of years to eliminate certain diseases from our country through vaccination programs or medication or herd immunity. Even then, there are risks of resurgence, especially when enough population of persons are not vaccinating. Even in countries that have good efforts through testing, contact tracing, health programs, quarantine measures and eventually vaccinations - pockets will continue to cluster into outbreaks (hopefully better controlled ones). An abatement phase followed by second or even third wave resurgence will follow and this may become aggravated especially when the science isn't fully informed yet regarding how long term our immunity can last. We cannot expect an eventual vaccination to be a miracle cure-all either. We have to know if it's safe, effective, how long it will last and finally the problem will happen that not enough persons will accept it.

[laylalex 7,300]

I'm still scratching my head thinking that anyone could in good faith consider this a "benign virus." 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, Dashinka said:

Unless you are a business reliant on tourism, or something like movie production.  Btw, how can anyone know if they have eliminated the virus unless they test the entire population?

Ask the Lancet, they're not a reputable scientific journal or anything... 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

46 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

The argument about virus elimination is just about nonsensical at this point. The better claim should be does X country have better control over X virus spreading? Even then it will be continually difficult for the long term. We will not be eradicating this virus. It has taken us hundreds of years to eliminate certain diseases from our country through vaccination programs or medication or herd immunity. Even then, there are risks of resurgence, especially when enough population of persons are not vaccinating. Even in countries that have good efforts through testing, contact tracing, health programs, quarantine measures and eventually vaccinations - pockets will continue to cluster into outbreaks (hopefully better controlled ones). An abatement phase followed by second or even third wave resurgence will follow and this may become aggravated especially when the science isn't fully informed yet regarding how long term our immunity can last. We cannot expect an eventual vaccination to be a miracle cure-all either. We have to know if it's safe, effective, how long it will last and finally the problem will happen that not enough persons will accept it.

The Lancet clearly said it has been eliminated in New Zealand. Elimination is not the same as eradication. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, Dashinka said:

Unless you are a business reliant on tourism, or something like movie production.  Btw, how can anyone know if they have eliminated the virus unless they test the entire population?

International tourism will suffer regardless. But if the citizens of a country know that when they come back from a foreign country they'll have to quarantine and meanwhile there are no restrictions back home, they are more likely to choose vacation in their home country. And New Zealand is looking into a travel agreement with Australia. 

[yuna628 9,700]

4 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

The Lancet clearly said it has been eliminated in New Zealand. Elimination is not the same as eradication. 

They base this on not having any new cases since early May. Okay. Good. Which means about a hill of beans right now because we know how long of an incubation period it takes before persons show symptoms again, we know there are asymptomatic persons running around, and the country hasn't fully opened back up to the same state it was before. As the publication says it is a country of 5 million, and only 150,000 tests have been run - focusing mostly on those showing symptoms and not those asymptomatic carriers. The jury is still out on such assumptions for now until there is more data and there are quite a few interesting reasons how a person that was cleared as being 'negative' could actually be positive even after quarantine and potentially infect the population.

[yuna628 9,700]

33 minutes ago, laylalex said:

I'm still scratching my head thinking that anyone could in good faith consider this a "benign virus." 

Yes, I'm sure the person I know dying in a hospital bed would like to be told ''good news it's benign!"

[90DayFinancier 910]

57 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Yes, I'm sure the person I know dying in a hospital bed would like to be told ''good news it's benign!"

Did he say the virus was benign? Maybe he meant beignets !

 

 

[Dashinka 24,741]

10 hours ago, laylalex said:

I'm still scratching my head thinking that anyone could in good faith consider this a "benign virus." 

Sure, it is a virus that kills people, in fact my first cousin recently died with it, but not because of it.  The simple fact is the mortality rate appears to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.1-0.4% which of course is not good, but it is not as bad as some of the pandemics we have or are actually dealing with.  Heck, HIV is still considered a pandemic and though not as contagious as this novel coronavirus, it can be more deadly.  The simple fact is that people die, and looking at the weekly number of deaths of all causes through week 19 of 2020, the overall numbers are in the same ballpark.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Sure, it is a virus that kills people, in fact my first cousin recently died with it, but not because of it.  The simple fact is the mortality rate appears to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.1-0.4% which of course is not good, but it is not as bad as some of the pandemics we have or are actually dealing with.  Heck, HIV is still considered a pandemic and though not as contagious as this novel coronavirus, it can be more deadly.  The simple fact is that people die, and looking at the weekly number of deaths of all causes through week 19 of 2020, the overall numbers are in the same ballpark.

HIV is a pandemic and it was treated as such. Obviously, lockdowns would not have helped because of the way it's transmitted. Also, there is treatment for HIV and if you just take one pill a day, you can live a normal life and reach old age. So you can't compare HIV with SARS-CoV2

Edited May 17, 2020 by Orangesapples

[Dashinka 24,741]

42 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

HIV is a pandemic and it was treated as such. Obviously, lockdowns would not have helped because of the way it's transmitted. Also, there is treatment for HIV and if you just take one pill a day, you can live a normal life and reach old age. So you can't compare HIV with SARS-CoV2

How long did it take to develop a therapeutic fro HIV?  Regardless, shutdowns were put in place to reduce the stress on the medical community which they accomplished and I applaud, but now that the curve is long and flat, and we are on the down slope, it is time to reopen and let human nature work.  As to the US adopting policies like NZ or Vietnam, that has been discussed, and it won’t happen for a number of reasons.  Besides even if the federal government closed the borders and required mandatory quarantine for 14-21 days for anyone coming in, which could only be done via an Executive Order, it would be immediately challenged in a court of law mainly just because of who occupies the WH.