I don't like news like this.
 

Hopefully it doesn't take that long.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-virus-plan-anticipates-18-month-pandemic-and-widespread-shortages/ar-BB11ktjA

Click bait. ^ Look away.

With everyone spun up the competition for bigger and bigger bleed ramps up.

When you see a "STORY" with some outrageous claim ... it is click-bait.

How long does Flu season last? Why would this last any longer?

Because it is roughly 30x more contagious and likely will linger for the summer season, then ramp up again in the fall. That's what many of the models are predicting, leading us to waves of surges to the medical community.

On Friday night, after I leave work, I am trying my hardest to turn off the TV, the radio, and the computer till Monday morning .
I did this most of the day last Sunday, and life felt normal for a few hours

Were did you get "30x more contagious"?

Everything I've read about it agrees on one point. They don't really know how contagious it is.
One big problem... Influenza typically has a shorter incubation period than Corona.

Honestly, I don't even remember at this point.

If it were 30x more contagious then everyone on the Princess would have been sick and not 20%.

hmmmm.....HMMMMMMM......

That ship was a good petri dish. We should be able to make decent comparisons.
20% got COVID-19.
How many came down with the flu?

Sounds like they are doing lots of testing on them.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/1055377-something-not-look-forward.html

"How long does Flu season last? Why would this last any longer? "

Plenty of places to read about this if you are truly interested.

It is different in many ways. As far as "duration," that depends on the definition of "duration."

The article in the OP of course refers to a model... likely complex and likely one of many, many models.

Here is an article on the CIDRAP site:

Modeling study suggests 18 months of COVID-19 social distancing, much disruption | CIDRAP

I have not looked at any models, but I am pretty sure there are many. And they likely take into account not just death totals and %rates, but also look at the things like elements of the capacity of healthcare delivery systems and projected costs.

Public health officials that work in governments likely include infectious disease and epidemiology experts on the medical side, and the science side. Healthcare and epidemiology economists, regulatory folks, ethics folks and lawyers.

All very complex.

On both the healthcare side and on the economic side.

And of course the virus itself might be able to change in ways we would all find helpful, or in ways which make things tougher.

Again, there are likely many models-- that article refers to one of them, and seems to report on the results of some input variables, some of which are likely assumptions and some of which are likely informed by learnings achieved and shared thus far.

On the Rx side, when we have studies of, for example medicines that demonstrate high efficacy in pounding down the morbidity and mortality and that also have sufficient safety, we may get some "woo hoo!" moments.

A lower level of illness, a lower duration of illness requiring care in hospital and hospital-like settings (especially ICU settings), and a lower risk of mortality from such RX, from a sufficiently robust study or family of studies... then you plug those into models and voila you may have lower duration requirements for things like social distancing.

That is presuming the medicine(s) are abundantly available and at costs that make the models fly.

Then as testing (collecting and analyzing samples) has higher and higher throughput and availability resources can be more judiciously applied.

Of course all of these things might lay over geographies in ways we may need to deal with, so I kind of think that just like the implementation of measures currently taken has been somewhat regional, relaxation of the measures might be as well.

Yep, that ship was a virtual virus incubator, full of older folks. At least 3 who died were over 80 years old, and all were over 70.

Using that data, I believe the extrapolated overall case fatality rate (CFR) was calculated to be around 0.5%.

I’m sure the Italians will be relieved.

Dig them up and say eveything's OK.

With the Flu 1 person gives it on average to 1 other person.

With CV 1 person gives it on average to 4 other people...some while being asymptomatic...

So there you have it...it is the contagion that makes it bad..and the fact that it OVERWHELM health care facilities in the USA and world. Where people who would survive if they were able to be cared for will die. The mortality rate otherwise is relatively low.

Being transmissible through the air also makes it more dangerous...that means a sneeze two hours ago in your space means you can get it...A Chinese study indicated that a hot and DRY climate might make it less contagious as those sneeze air droplets would evaporate quicker in hot and dry conditions?

Everyone is an expert. 30x, eh?

It's summertime around here Tabs and it's spreading just fine :(