COVID-19....Who will be first?

Not too bad for us , sixty something couple and adult son. Son has adopted the role of Sargent major to keep us on the program. We don't live in a crowded city so all is tolerable.

I guess I'll finally get around to restringing my ten string charango. And I just rewrote the Dads Army theme song for the COVID age. Will record it today.
 
If ya catch Corona-virus twice, is it Dos Eques?
 
The thing is someone might get it, but it might only manifest as a bit of a cold. You probably wouldn't know you've had it. It affects people differently.
 
I had been sick in late February, diagnosed with atypical pneumonia. Symptom lingered and since I have an underlying respiratory condition, my doctor sent me to Covid-19 screening in March. I'm in a high risk group and ticked all the boxes, so I was sent to a mobile testing station and told I was presumed to be infected until the test said otherwise. After close to two weeks the backlog of tests was completed and I was notified that I tested negative. At this point all I know is that I did not have it on the day I was tested. Did I have it (so now I have some immunity, but possibly infected other during that time)? Did I not have it (so I didn't infect others, but I'm still at high risk)? I'm hoping there is blood test developed soon that will detect antibodies so we have a more complete picture of where the virus has been and who is still at risk.
 
I just got over a bug. Had several of the symptoms but no fever.

I am at a very high risk to the virus being 68 and with respiratory problems.

The Med Center where my wife works just had their first patient who tested positive.
 
I don't want to minimize the situation by any means, nor question the experts on the approach that is being taken. But they are indeed proceeding with a GREAT abundance of caution. Even at the apparent alarming number of cases and the rate of spread, we still have only a fraction of a fraction of the population being infected. And then a relatively small percent of them that go critical or lose the battle. I am quite an avid numbers girl and also inclined to do my own collecting of the facts rather than listen to the sensation loving press. Your chances of getting Covid-19, if you follow the social distancing rule are really low statistically.

I understand you are not trying to minimize the situation, but I don't think there really has been a great abundance of caution. I think only now are most people starting to realize this is heading in a bad direction. Since you are a numbers girl, then you understand that today's numbers are meaningless. The rate of spread of *known* cases is exponential even though it is likely grossly understated because there isn't enough testing being done since there aren't enough test kits. Harvard estimated the number of actual cases could be 50x what is known.

In any rate, when something doubles every 3 days, that means it doubles ten times in a month, which is the same thing as 2^10 (two to the 10th power, or 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2). That means the number of cases a month from now would be 1,024x what is it today. Think about that. That is scary.

So, yes, even though it's only a small percentage of people who need hospital care, it's a small percent of a really, really big number. This is why hospitals are getting overrun (think northern Italy, NYC).

It would be phenomenal if we could flatten the curve more quickly, but so far there is nothing showing in the data that is different about the exponential growth curve we are on vs. most every other country. Only a few countries have managed to flatten their curves.
 
Last edited:
Well , when the experts say 100-200k dead in US is the low end, assuming everybody follows the recommendations, that is sobering. Projected peak at about April 16th with a single daily death total then of 2600. Wow.
 
Tom Rush tested positive, as did Jackson Brown. Sadly, John Prine has it too, and is in tough shape, on a ventilator.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom