jkpackfan said:

---

Wow

---

This is what I have been trying to say.

A poor, lazy, denial driven response has led us to be sitting on a time bomb.

But no politics amirite?

It's been clear for weeks now that this administration wanted to deflate the numbers. Trump literally said on air that he didn't want the Diamond Princess to land as it would make the "numbers go up". The actual infected in our country is astronomically higher than the reported amount because, due to our administrations refusal to fund the CDC and proper testing, we haven't tested anyone. If you don't test a person, they can't be confirmed as having it.

AMERICANS ARE DYING BECAUSE THIS ADMINISTRATION CARES MORE ABOUT PERCEPTION THAN REALITY.

GoPack2008 said:

---

^name a bigger public health crisis of the past century?

I am specifically saying the last 100 years. A century, after all.

Can you name one that has
-shut down an entire country
-has shut down all major sports
-spread rapidly throughout the world
-May kill 1-3% of who it infects
-has crashed the stock market
-May shut down Major US cities entirely

what else has done this? Can you name a single thing?

---

In the last 20 years: Ebola, Zika, SARS, Avian Flu and the Swine Flu off just the top of my head.

You know what the difference is between now and all of those other times....panic. Everyone wants to lose their minds and blow everything way out of proportion. Today you had an Ohio health official say that they have an estimated 100,000 estimated cases of this virus. If that is true then at a 2% death rate then i would expect to see 2000 people dead from this, but that's not the case. Even if you say that's because they all haven't gotten that bad off yet lets back it up a bit. If they have an estimated 100K cases now i think it is safe to say that they had at least 20K people infected last week. Sticking with the same 2% death rate then we should have 400 people on death's door right now in Ohio alone, but that's not the case.

Lets look at another virus that goes through this country every year. According to the CDC there have been an estimated 31 million people catch the flu so this flu season. From this between 210,000 and 370,000 people have been hospitalized and its estimated that 30,000 people will die from the flu this season alone. I don't see people shutting down everything you listed for this amount of death....and this is an every year kinda thing. People get flu vaccinations, but how many of us have gotten that and still ended up with the flu? My guess is most of us have experienced this. People also just stay at home if they are sick, wash their hands more, avoid old or sick folks and just go along with their day.

Lets take a few lines and review what happened. The media and politicians lost their mind trying to politicize something that didn't need to be politicized. People started to panic and rush out to buy things, horde away needed supplies that could of gone to better use, and started a bunch of arguments on the inside pack sports website because sports got cancelled. People panicking and running out to buy stuff has helped to increase the spread of this exponentially and it was all unnecessary. All we needed to do, according to the doctors, is to wash our hands, don't touch your face, stay away from old and sick people, and be cautious about being in rooms full of people....seems alot like the same things we would do to stop the flu from spreading.

We have no idea of the death rate of this, regardless of whatever number you tossed up there. Doctors from the CDC have said that there are lots of people who already have this and its like a bad cold, so those cases never got reported. That tells me that the death rate that everyone is running will has to be lower then your numbers already.

cowboypack02 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

^name a bigger public health crisis of the past century?

I am specifically saying the last 100 years. A century, after all.

Can you name one that has
-shut down an entire country
-has shut down all major sports
-spread rapidly throughout the world
-May kill 1-3% of who it infects
-has crashed the stock market
-May shut down Major US cities entirely

what else has done this? Can you name a single thing?

---

In the last 20 years: Ebola, Zika, SARS, Avian Flu and the Swine Flu off just the top of my head.

You know what the difference is between now and all of those other times....panic. Everyone wants to lose their minds and blow everything way out of proportion. Today you had an Ohio health official say that they have an estimated 100,000 estimated cases of this virus. If that is true then at a 2% death rate then i would expect to see 2000 people dead from this, but that's not the case. Even if you say that's because they all haven't gotten that bad off yet lets back it up a bit. If they have an estimated 100K cases now i think it is safe to say that they had at least 20K people infected last week. Sticking with the same 2% death rate then we should have 400 people on death's door right now in Ohio alone, but that's not the case.

Lets look at another virus that goes through this country every year. According to the CDC there have been an estimated 31 million people catch the flu so this flu season. From this between 210,000 and 370,000 people have been hospitalized and its estimated that 30,000 people will die from the flu this season alone. I don't see people shutting down everything you listed for this amount of death....and this is an every year kinda thing. People get flu vaccinations, but how many of us have gotten that and still ended up with the flu? My guess is most of us have experienced this. People also just stay at home if they are sick, wash their hands more, avoid old or sick folks and just go along with their day.

Lets take a few lines and review what happened. The media and politicians lost their mind trying to politicize something that didn't need to be politicized. People started to panic and rush out to buy things, horde away needed supplies that could of gone to better use, and started a bunch of arguments on the inside pack sports website because sports got cancelled. People panicking and running out to buy stuff has helped to increase the spread of this exponentially and it was all unnecessary. All we needed to do, according to the doctors, is to wash our hands, don't touch your face, stay away from old and sick people, and be cautious about being in rooms full of people....seems alot like the same things we would do to stop the flu from spreading.

We have no idea of the death rate of this, regardless of whatever number you tossed up there. Doctors from the CDC have said that there are lots of people who already have this and its like a bad cold, so those cases never got reported. That tells me that the death rate that everyone is running will has to be lower then your numbers already.

---

1) Why are those examples you listed more severe than coronavirus? You listed them. Can you explain why, say, Ebola was a bigger public health crisis than coronavirus? How many people were infected? How many countries did it spread to? You say it with confidence, so what's your evidence?

2) We do have an idea of the death rate. We have data from China, Korea, Singapore, Japan, Italy, Spain, Germany, the UK, and a number of other countries. This isn't a perfectly reliable death rate, but we can clearly put the rate in a general range and then use different assumptions to make different models. But you can't, in any way, say we have "no idea." We absolutely have some idea.

Let's talk about the flu for a second.

Step 1: We need to convert from raw numbers to rates. I'll assume your flu numbers are correct as I have no reason to think they aren't, given that you cited the CDC.

31 million cases
210-370,000 hospitalizations
14,700-29,400 ICU visits
30,000 deaths

That translates into:
-A hospitalization rate of 0.6% to 1.2% (see, we don't know the exact data there, either, so we work with a range)
-A case fatality rate of 0.09%, let's round up and call it 0.1%
-Of influenza patients admitted to the hospital, ~7% (rounding up) need to be in the ICU
-That translates into an overall ICU rate of 0.042% to .084%

Remember, these numbers are spread out over several months, so those 210-370,000 hospitalizations happen over time.

With Coronavirus, the case fatality rate could be as low as 1%, and as high as 5-6% (the numbers coming out of Italy). The rate of ALL cases needing the ICU seems to be about 5% (compare that to the miniscule number with influenza), and the rate needing hospitalization about 15%. So I'm clear: 6-7% of hospitalized flu patients need the ICU. 33% of hospitalized covid patients need the ICU. Let's run the numbers.

Assume: 31 million coronavirus cases

CFR of 3%, which was reported out of China. 15% hospitalization rate, 5% ICU rate

-930,000 deaths
-4.65 million hospitalizations
-1.55 million ICU stays (where the HELL are we going to find 1.5 million ICU beds???)

bUt wE dOnT kNow tEh nUMbeRz!

Okay so let's sugarcoat it and make a lot of really optimistic assumptions. CFR drops to 0.5%, which is better than anyone has reported so far. Hospitalization rate drops to 5% (totally unrealistic but it's an exercise), and the ICU rate drops to 1%

Still assume 31 million cases:

-155,000 deaths
-1.55 million hospitalizations
-310,000 ICU stays (again, where are we going to find this number of ICU beds?

How about a third scenario, where it's really "just the flu."

Okay. Now you've DOUBLED the flu. Think that's not a big deal? You just said the flu is a big deal (and it indeed is!). If this is another flu, we've doubled the flu! Isn't that bad? It is. It's really bad.

There are two key issues here:

1) We have no immunity to the coronavirus

This means it will spread naturally and easily among humans, unless we act aggressively to limit its path of spread through social distancing and cancelling events. It spreads through human contact. Right now, that is the only lever we have to pull

2) If it spreads rapidly, even based on conservative numbers of ICU and hospitalization usage, it will overwhelm hospitals

Remember that hospitals aren't sitting idle and just doing nothing. They're treating strokes and heart attacks, they're treating cancer patients with complications, they're treating other infections like the flu. Hospitals are a fixed physical resource, as are ICU beds. There may be some room to expand, but it hits a cap.

If a big cluster of cases emerges in a single area, it will overwhelm all of the hospitals in that area. People with other medical needs will suffer. Doctors and nurses will be exposed and some of them will die.

Even if you think the numbers are wrong, and you greatly reduce them, the situation is still very bad.

Importantly, we are not doomed. But everyone needs to understand that the way we remain "not doomed" is to take this seriously until a vaccine comes along.

This is the whole rationale of flattening the curve. It's why sporting events are cancelled. If we can spread the infection out over several months, then the hospital system will be able to manage the severe cases. If we fail at that, it will overload the system.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/03/13/world/asia/coronavirus-death-life.html

Young healthy doctors do not die treating flu patients.

Numbers, analysis and a call to action here. Seems plausible. Not panicking, but am definitely planning and acting.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

FuzzyRed said:

---

Numbers, analysis and a call to action here. Seems plausible. Not panicking, but am definitely planning and acting.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

---

I think this is the correct path.

We can be concerned, informed, prepared, and smart without panicking.

Anyone accusing us of panicking is merely projecting.

My first cousin has been working in wake county for the past 3 weeks. Last night he was sent to the hospital in Richmond county. Fever of 104, headache, cough, etc. Hopefully nothing out of the normal, but they did test him for coronavirus. Hope to get results today or tomorrow by the latest.

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

It's a good question. False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

The numbers are of "confirmed cases." If a person tested positive and then had subsequent negative tests and it was concluded that they did not have covid, that wouldn't be included most likely.

The false positive rate for the CDC test is about 3% from what I recall, which means the true positive rate is 97%. It doesn't make a massive difference on a population level.

The response to this supposed "coronavirus" is 100% an over-reach and WAY out of proportion to the alleged threat -- fueled by the hysteria of the Establishment media. The regular flu has killed FAR more people this year (and every year), and there is never this level of panic and hysteria.

It's being used by the NWO powers-that-be to usher in a tyrannical agenda. I'm far more worried about the erosion of our rights than this virus, if it even exists. I think there is a very good possibility that this is all contrived and planned in advance - as the excuse for a planned/engineered economic collapse, and government power grabs. I'm concerned about the economy collapsing/tanking, and laws being passed to destroy civil liberties --such as gun confiscations, forced vaccinations, etc.

Here is a good short video covering this:

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Yes, they adjust numbers. Everything reported right now are confirmed cases and reflect the most conservative numbers. They are a lower bound on the actual number of cases.

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

---

That doesn't answer the question nor does it really address anything I wrote. Again, we see numbers going up but how many are false positives and are the numbers adjusted when it is shown they are false positives?

On another note. Why the **** is everyone buying truck loads of toilet paper???

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Yes, they adjust numbers. Everything reported right now are confirmed cases and reflect the most conservative numbers. They are a lower bound on the actual number of cases.

---

Thank you. I will add that I see the numbers reported and they have an asterisk that says "supposed cases or presumptive cases included."

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

---

That doesn't answer the question nor does it really address anything I wrote. Again, we see numbers going up but how many are false positives and are the numbers adjusted when it is shown they are false positives?

On another note. Why the **** is everyone buying truck loads of toilet paper???

---

Check my edit, as you're right I didn't totally address the question.

I have no idea why people are buying so much toilet paper. It's absolute insanity.

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

---

That doesn't answer the question nor does it really address anything I wrote. Again, we see numbers going up but how many are false positives and are the numbers adjusted when it is shown they are false positives?

On another note. Why the **** is everyone buying truck loads of toilet paper???

---

Check my edit, as you're right I didn't totally address the question.

I have no idea why people are buying so much toilet paper. It's absolute insanity.

---

Dropped into the grocery store yesterday. Couldn't find a sheet of **** paper anywhere but the shelves were full of Lysol, wipes, soap, etc. I must be missing something with this virus. I swear I thought it attacked the upper respiratory system but apparently it attacks the lower **** making system.

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

---

That doesn't answer the question nor does it really address anything I wrote. Again, we see numbers going up but how many are false positives and are the numbers adjusted when it is shown they are false positives?

On another note. Why the **** is everyone buying truck loads of toilet paper???

---

Check my edit, as you're right I didn't totally address the question.

I have no idea why people are buying so much toilet paper. It's absolute insanity.

---

Dropped into the grocery store yesterday. Couldn't find a sheet of **** paper anywhere but the shelves were full of Lysol, wipes, soap, etc. I must be missing something with this virus. I swear I thought it attacked the upper respiratory system but apparently it attacks the lower **** making system.

---

People are literally so scared that they're ****ting themselves.

I had to actually restock TP this week because I was running low, and holy hell was that annoying to deal with.

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

False positives (and false negatives) can happen with any test for any condition. It's an unfortunate reality of all science.

It will happen when you test a lot of people for any condition.

However, if you apply these tests in the correct context, you can be a lot more confident. For example, in your above scenario, if the person feels fine and has no travel history, that's likely a false positive.

If they have respiratory symptoms and a fever and were in contact with a person who also tested positive, the odds actually favor that the negative tests were "false negatives."

Doctors deal with this all the time by doing things like ruling out other diagnoses--for example if the person has a fever and cough, they will also test for the flu and other viral illnesses. If they come back positive for the flu, that's a more likely explanation. If they come back negative for everything, then it makes Covid more likely. They can also order additional tests, and they often simply treat it "as if" it's a given condition because they've eliminated all other reasonable explanations.

---

That doesn't answer the question nor does it really address anything I wrote. Again, we see numbers going up but how many are false positives and are the numbers adjusted when it is shown they are false positives?

On another note. Why the **** is everyone buying truck loads of toilet paper???

---

Check my edit, as you're right I didn't totally address the question.

I have no idea why people are buying so much toilet paper. It's absolute insanity.

---

Dropped into the grocery store yesterday. Couldn't find a sheet of **** paper anywhere but the shelves were full of Lysol, wipes, soap, etc. I must be missing something with this virus. I swear I thought it attacked the upper respiratory system but apparently it attacks the lower **** making system.

---

People are literally so scared that they're ****ting themselves.

I had to actually restock TP this week because I was running low, and holy hell was that annoying to deal with.

---

Thankfully, I didn't need any. I will say the media has made this a more "panic minded" event then needed. There is a difference in preparing people or fear mongering. Sadly, with the craziness that is the stores at this time, the media seems to have won the battle so far. Oh well, I got food and **** paper so I guess I'm prepared.

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Yes, they adjust numbers. Everything reported right now are confirmed cases and reflect the most conservative numbers. They are a lower bound on the actual number of cases.

---

Thank you. I will add that I see the numbers reported and they have an asterisk that says "supposed cases or presumptive cases included."

---

Most "official" numbers are confirmed cases only. No one can control what reporters are reporting.

Most experts think the number is far higher than confirmed cases so some are attempting to extrapolate a decent estimate. There are still many people who can't get tests. Additionally, cases we see now are people infected 1-2 weeks ago. They've been contagious that whole time and many others are currently infected but not yet showing symptoms.

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Yes, they adjust numbers. Everything reported right now are confirmed cases and reflect the most conservative numbers. They are a lower bound on the actual number of cases.

---

Thank you. I will add that I see the numbers reported and they have an asterisk that says "supposed cases or presumptive cases included."

---

Most "official" numbers are confirmed cases only. No one can control what reporters are reporting.

Most experts think the number is far higher than confirmed cases so some are attempting to extrapolate a decent estimate. There are still many people who can't get tests. Additionally, cases we see now are people infected 1-2 weeks ago. They've been contagious that whole time and many others are currently infected but not yet showing symptoms.

---

Again, thank you. Much appreciated!

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Isn't it true that only the CDC does the "tests" and all the samples must be sent to Atlanta? Are we really going to trust the CDC and only them to give us accurate info?

I've also heard that the testing for "coronavirus" is totally inaccurate and useless.

IMO, it's very possible that it's all regular flu....and this claim of some "super deadly new virus" is contrived.

Heard that they're "scalping" toilet paper on ebay.

Don't people understand that they are putting themselves at more risk by packing the stores hunting toilet paper? TP should be the least of your worries, there's more than one way to handle that particular situation.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

One thing I am learning is that many test that have been given have shown a false positive. One the 2nd and 3rd test, they tested negative. My question is this. When it comes back negative the 2nd and 3rd time, are the numbers adjusted for that or do they remain the same with the first test saying positive?

---

Isn't it true that only the CDC does the "tests" and all the samples must be sent to Atlanta? Are we really going to trust the CDC and only them to give us accurate info?

I've also heard that the testing for "coronavirus" is totally inaccurate and useless.

IMO, it's very possible that it's all regular flu....and this claim of some "super deadly new virus" is contrived.

---

No one has said it is "super deadly." It is a new virus, and it is very contagious. It is more fatal than the flu, and sends more to the hospital. Exactly how much worse it is is open to debate as reported numbers vary significantly . The lack of a vaccine or any herd immunity makes it a much larger threat at the moment. It won't be as bad in subsequent years, but right now it could overwhelm hospital ICUs.

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Don't people understand that they are putting themselves at more risk by packing the stores hunting toilet paper? TP should be the least of your worries, there's more than one way to handle that particular situation.

---

I really do need TP. If I can't find some this weekend I'm going to have to resort to paper towels.

GoPack2008 said:

---

NCAA tournament cancelled.

NCAA just left $1 billion in ad revenue on the table.

This is not the result of a social media mob. These are stone cold businessmen who understand what's going on.

---

Social media mob. Mass hysteria. Ridiculous decision. Should have postponed.

National emergency being declared. I do personally think things will begin to return to normal in a couple of weeks. Things will worsen but get better quickly. As for the economy, it will be a slow down but I believe the underlying economy is strong and will rebound quicker then in times past.

I do like the way the state and local governments are taking action against large gatherings. Isolation is a key to this. If it helps to slow it down, go for it. A short term "inconvenience" is better then a long term problem. With this virus, it does hammer home for me that I don't want the federal government controling anything. Just like the Obama/Biden cluster**** with H1N1, the trump/pence cluster**** with COVID19 has been equally pathetic.

I'm trapped working from home through the end of the month. You all are my coworkers now.

packgrad said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

NCAA tournament cancelled.

NCAA just left $1 billion in ad revenue on the table.

This is not the result of a social media mob. These are stone cold businessmen who understand what's going on.

---

Social media mob. Mass hysteria. Ridiculous decision. Should have postponed.

---

How would you postpone?

It might be 3 months before things clear.

Do you call back kids who have graduated and reform the teams? The base logistics of postponing aren't possible.

GoPack2008 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

NCAA tournament cancelled.

NCAA just left $1 billion in ad revenue on the table.

This is not the result of a social media mob. These are stone cold businessmen who understand what's going on.

---

Social media mob. Mass hysteria. Ridiculous decision. Should have postponed.

---

How would you postpone?

It might be 3 months before things clear.

Do you call back kids who have graduated and reform the teams? The base logistics of postponing aren't possible.

---

Evaluate in a couple weeks and decide then.

metcalfmafia said:

---

I'm trapped working from home through the end of the month. You all are my coworkers now.

---

I've been working mostly from home for over a year now.... by the end of month one you'll be driving yourself crazy. Especially with no sports.

packgrad said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

GoPack2008 said:

---

NCAA tournament cancelled.

NCAA just left $1 billion in ad revenue on the table.

This is not the result of a social media mob. These are stone cold businessmen who understand what's going on.

---

Social media mob. Mass hysteria. Ridiculous decision. Should have postponed.

---

How would you postpone?

It might be 3 months before things clear.

Do you call back kids who have graduated and reform the teams? The base logistics of postponing aren't possible.

---

Evaluate in a couple weeks and decide then.

---

It's not going to be better in a couple of weeks. Any reasonable assessment of the current situation and what's happening in other countries ought to make that very clear. No expert expects this to be better in a couple of weeks.

You also had Kansas and Duke flatly refusing to participate.

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2020/03/coronavirus-ncaa-kansas-duke-arizona-state-ncaa-tournament