Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro?Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

OT: Positive advice for dealing with Covid-19 (no politics or complaints about governance please)

18911131426

Comments

  • We know one thing Italy’s healthcare system is under strain and it’s only been two weeks from when the explosion in cases started.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    I was looking at the most complete data currently available. As South Korea has tested the most people (150 thousand people or more now) and hence reflects more people with the mild form of the virus.

  • Just found out today, its now here in Cyprus.. two soldiers (1 Greek & 1 Cypriot), both flew over from Greece.. Then another was a Doctor who flew from UK.. Now Nicosia General is closed in parts.. Also a couple of days ago, they closed Ledra Street crossing in Nicosia .. (Boarder separates Greek side from Turkey side from 1974 War, when Turkey invaded Cyprus.. For those who are not sure)..

  • edited March 2020
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @Max23 said:

    @knewspeak said:
    We know one thing Italy’s healthcare system is under strain and it’s only been two weeks from when the explosion in cases started.

    we will see if what Italy is doing is bearing fruit.
    if not its going to explode all over Europe soon.

    thats what I asked myself when I saw pictures from Milano in the news.
    is the next thing in the new these pictures from Frankfurt?

    Yes it could be anywhere in Europe, but at least we have reasonably good healthcare systems for all our citizens, America on the other hand....is shamefully sad in such a wealthy nation.

  • @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

  • Agree. Hope our country here in US wakes up and is not too complacent in this regard. I hope universal care comes someday cause it really is unfair as most hard working adults don’t have medical care.

    @knewspeak said:

    @Max23 said:

    @knewspeak said:
    We know one thing Italy’s healthcare system is under strain and it’s only been two weeks from when the explosion in cases started.

    we will see if what Italy is doing is bearing fruit.
    if not its going to explode all over Europe soon.

    thats what I asked myself when I saw pictures from Milano in the news.
    is the next thing in the new these pictures from Frankfurt?

    Yes it could be anywhere in Europe, but at least we have reasonably good healthcare systems for all our citizens, America on the other hand....is shamefully sad in such a wealthy nation.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    Lots of people in America can’t self isolate, they need to work to survive. The practices you talk about are good in theory, but in practice, not.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    Lots of people in America can’t self isolate, they need to work to survive. The practices you talk about are good in theory, but in practice, not.

    I understand that self-isolating can be a hardship. Nothing that I wrote should be taken otherwise.

    Most people can become MORE self-isolating than usual -- even though many can't be completely self-isolating -- we all need to do what we can: and we all need to think about how we can. If we can't think as a community, we are screwed.

    I thoroughly understand that it will cause hardship -- but the hardships we face now will vastly reduce the hardships we will experience if people don't help reduce the transmission opportunities.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    0.7%, or even 3% of the population is most likely not even going to include everyone over 70 with existing health issues, so I wouldn’t panic if you’re a reasonably healthy 50, 60, or even 70 something. Most deaths have been much older, or with existing respiratory, heart or inflammatory issues. Hence the number of cases in Italy which has a large number of older inhabitants.

    The reality is that most of us are going to get it, but most of us will shake it off as a bad case of flu. There also doesn’t seem to be much evidence of secondary infection, so it’s likely that by the next wave we’ll have vaccines in place.

    That’s my positive thoughts about it anyway, but my fears are an overloaded health system and general UK meltdown, and making sure it’s kept from those that are most at risk.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    Lots of people in America can’t self isolate, they need to work to survive. The practices you talk about are good in theory, but in practice, not.

    I understand that self-isolating can be a hardship. Nothing that I wrote should be taken otherwise.

    Most people can become MORE self-isolating than usual -- even though many can't be completely self-isolating -- we all need to do what we can: and we all need to think about how we can. If we can't think as a community, we are screwed.

    I thoroughly understand that it will cause hardship -- but the hardships we face now will vastly reduce the hardships we will experience if people don't help reduce the transmission opportunities.

    It is good practice and can’t fault what you say, to some degree it may slow transmission, but vaccines and seasonal changes are the only thing that slows the progression of flu and in the last few days I’ve heard quite a few remarks like, flu kills more people. Seems like quite a lot of complacency and also hysteria too, not good for a sensible reasoned approach.

  • edited March 2020
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • @knewspeak said:

    It is good practice and can’t fault what you say, to some degree it may slow transmission, but vaccines and seasonal changes are the only thing that slows the progression of flu and in the last few days I’ve heard quite a few remarks like, flu kills more people. Seems like quite a lot of complacency and also hysteria too, not good for a sensible reasoned approach.

    We can't bank on what happens later. There isn't any evidence yet that there will be seasonal changes (and I have heard quite a few epidemiologists being borderline angry that people are assuming that there will be a seasonal aspect). It seems unlikely that a vaccine will be available any sooner than 12-18 months from now IF an effective vaccine can be found. For some viruses, coming up with an effective vaccine is challenging. No one should count on vaccines.

    The sooner that people start taking active measures to reduce exposure and spread the better. It isn't a case that these precautions MIGHT slow transmission. They are certain to slow transmission.

    Whether it is enough to provide the needed to buffer our healthcare system can't be known but we shouldn't be waiting for catastrophe to change our habits to the extent we can -- and we kind of all need to dig deep and take it seriously and think about what we can do.

    Every transmission and spread model that you will see will show you that early action has the most dramatic impact. In fact, if we take the actions we can to reduce transmission opportunities, it will dramatically increase the impact of whatever treatments come later.

    Everyone can do something even if it isn't the maximal amount. And by changing our habits to the extent we can -- and letting others know what they can do and encourage them to do the same, encourages individuals to act as communities -- and this will protect the individuals.

  • Btw, I think this article does a good job of explaining reasons why each of us should be proactive in reducing the virus' opportunity to be transmitted:

    https://www.vox.com/2020/3/10/21171481/coronavirus-us-cases-quarantine-cancellation

  • I've seen this echoed in the thread, but not explicitly stated enough.

    These precautions are not about YOU. They are about EVERYBODY.

    Lockdowns, quarantines - call them what you will, but they don't work unless every single person is on board and follows the rules. We're all in this together, folks.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @knewspeak said:

    It is good practice and can’t fault what you say, to some degree it may slow transmission, but vaccines and seasonal changes are the only thing that slows the progression of flu and in the last few days I’ve heard quite a few remarks like, flu kills more people. Seems like quite a lot of complacency and also hysteria too, not good for a sensible reasoned approach.

    We can't bank on what happens later. There isn't any evidence yet that there will be seasonal changes (and I have heard quite a few epidemiologists being borderline angry that people are assuming that there will be a seasonal aspect). It seems unlikely that a vaccine will be available any sooner than 12-18 months from now IF an effective vaccine can be found. For some viruses, coming up with an effective vaccine is challenging. No one should count on vaccines.

    The sooner that people start taking active measures to reduce exposure and spread the better. It isn't a case that these precautions MIGHT slow transmission. They are certain to slow transmission.

    Whether it is enough to provide the needed to buffer our healthcare system can't be known but we shouldn't be waiting for catastrophe to change our habits to the extent we can -- and we kind of all need to dig deep and take it seriously and think about what we can do.

    Every transmission and spread model that you will see will show you that early action has the most dramatic impact. In fact, if we take the actions we can to reduce transmission opportunities, it will dramatically increase the impact of whatever treatments come later.

    Everyone can do something even if it isn't the maximal amount. And by changing our habits to the extent we can -- and letting others know what they can do and encourage them to do the same, encourages individuals to act as communities -- and this will protect the individuals.

    An average person touches their face over 100 times a day, involuntary, instinctively, good luck changing habits of a lifetime,teaching children would be easier, most likely taking several years for them to adopt basic practices, I think.

  • @knewspeak said:

    An average person touches their face over 100 times a day, involuntary, instinctively, good luck changing habits of a lifetime,teaching children would be easier, most likely taking several years for them to adopt basic practices, I think.

    Not sure what your point is. It sounds like you are saying "well people are still going to touch their faces, so there isn't anything we can do." That presents a false dichotomy.

    If you wash your hands frequently, you reduce transmissibility enormously even if you touch your face because the likelihood that there is virus on your hands to transit to your face is reduced. While you may not be able to stop touching your face entirely (sure, no one can), if you increase your awareness you can often wait to do it when you are at the store (or wherever) and wait till you've had a chance to wash your hands.

    Even these little things slow it down. Being fatalistic and not doing anything doesn't help. Helping people develop better but not perfect habits slows down the transmission.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @knewspeak said:

    An average person touches their face over 100 times a day, involuntary, instinctively, good luck changing habits of a lifetime,teaching children would be easier, most likely taking several years for them to adopt basic practices, I think.

    Not sure what your point is. It sounds like you are saying "well people are still going to touch their faces, so there isn't anything we can do." That presents a false dichotomy.

    If you wash your hands frequently, you reduce transmissibility enormously even if you touch your face because the likelihood that there is virus on your hands to transit to your face is reduced. While you may not be able to stop touching your face entirely (sure, no one can), if you increase your awareness you can often wait to do it when you are at the store (or wherever) and wait till you've had a chance to wash your hands.

    Even these little things slow it down. Being fatalistic and not doing anything doesn't help. Helping people develop better but not perfect habits slows down the transmission.

    Any evidence to back up the fact it slows it down, because in the Ebola outbreak a few years ago, medical trained staff, using rigorous procedures caught the virus, which is nowhere near as transmissible as the Corona virus.

  • @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    The reading of 0.7 percent is only the current data based on testing 150 thousand people in South Korea 🇰🇷 . If the amount of people tested was higher like in the millions is would most likely be lower. Yes of course be hygienic and take precautions 👍

  • @knewspeak said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @knewspeak said:

    An average person touches their face over 100 times a day, involuntary, instinctively, good luck changing habits of a lifetime,teaching children would be easier, most likely taking several years for them to adopt basic practices, I think.

    Not sure what your point is. It sounds like you are saying "well people are still going to touch their faces, so there isn't anything we can do." That presents a false dichotomy.

    If you wash your hands frequently, you reduce transmissibility enormously even if you touch your face because the likelihood that there is virus on your hands to transit to your face is reduced. While you may not be able to stop touching your face entirely (sure, no one can), if you increase your awareness you can often wait to do it when you are at the store (or wherever) and wait till you've had a chance to wash your hands.

    Even these little things slow it down. Being fatalistic and not doing anything doesn't help. Helping people develop better but not perfect habits slows down the transmission.

    Any evidence to back up the fact it slows it down, because in the Ebola outbreak a few years ago, medical trained staff, using rigorous procedures caught the virus, which is nowhere near as transmissible as the Corona virus.

    There is a lot of research demonstrating that hand washing is effective and slows transmission of these sorts of viruses. This is why public health folks are putting so much emphasis on it.

    Here is one interesting summary of an interesting study, but if you take the time you can find lots of information on the subject.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200210153323.htm

  • @Shiro said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    The reading of 0.7 percent is only the current data based on testing 150 thousand people in South Korea 🇰🇷 . If the amount of people tested was higher like in the millions is would most likely be lower. Yes of course be hygienic and take precautions 👍

    But 150,000 haven’t had the virus.

  • @Shiro said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    The reading of 0.7 percent is only the current data based on testing 150 thousand people in South Korea 🇰🇷 . If the amount of people tested was higher like in the millions is would most likely be lower. Yes of course be hygienic and take precautions 👍

    It isn’t clear that it would be much lower. Even if it is “only” as fatal as the flu, that means a lot more people dying than from the flu since more will be infected due to lack of a vaccine.

  • @knewspeak said:

    @Shiro said:

    @espiegel123 said:

    @Max23 said:

    @Shiro said:

    @Max23 said:

    @dendy said:

    @Max23
    we only see numbers from ppl who got testet, America doesnt test like they do here in Europe,

    yeah, totally agree, that is very likely..

    which means there is LOT more infected people than we know..

    on other side, it's a bit complicated to hide death, so i guess number of deaths is realistic (not underestimated) - there is no more "hidden" deaths caused by ncov which we don't know..

    which very clearly means (just apply a bit of logic thinking) that mortality is probably waaaay much less than it looks ...

    the dead don't show up if they aren't tested
    they just show up in another statistic ...

    as made up example
    granny had a bad heart and died from pneumonia ... (maybe she died of corona, who knows if not tested)
    not exactly unusual, you really don't need much phantasy for that ...
    :#

    but I agree, the numbers of dead are probably way more accurate.
    thats fucking 6% for now

    the current best testing is in South Korea and the death rate is 0.7 or lower.

    are you looking at local data?
    you need to see the big picture

    A few key points.

    An overall fatality rate of 0.7% is 7-15 times that of the flu.

    To make things worse, the fatality rate (and susceptibility to infection) seems to be dramatically higher for people over 50.

    Because there is no vaccine, far more people will become infected with this virus in affected communities than with the flu.

    Current estimates in the U.S. alone is that close to 100 million people will catch it. While the vast majority of those won't become terribly sick that leaves close to 700,000 dead if fatality rate is "only" 0.7 percent.

    Those numbers don't figure in the people with non-corona virus related health problems that don't receive the medical attention they need due to an overstrained medical system (i.e. If hospital beds and respirators aren't available).

    So, even "only" 0.7% of a highly transmisssble contagion is still pretty bad.

    Those of us in affected communities need to help slow transmission rates so the system doesn't become over-burdened.

    Wash hands, wash hands, wash hands.

    Avoid crowded or confined places.

    Reduce exposure.

    Give the virus fewer opportunities to play hopscotch/leap frog on your body.

    The reading of 0.7 percent is only the current data based on testing 150 thousand people in South Korea 🇰🇷 . If the amount of people tested was higher like in the millions is would most likely be lower. Yes of course be hygienic and take precautions 👍

    But 150,000 haven’t had the virus.

    Correct

  • @Shiro : we do know that of the people that become symptomatic, the fatality rate is much higher in some age groups than for the flu. Discussion of overall fatality rate misses this. I’d be disinclined to have any confidence in what “real” numbers will turn out to be or overlooking the uneven distribution of the consequences.

  • There is also emerging evidence that the newer strain of the virus has a more aggressive transmission system. But this evidence has only been gathered from a few hundred cases.

  • A/ when do the orgies start? Or have they started without me?
    B/ Ireland: No St. Pats parade, New York: Parade, Boston: No parade. First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is.
    C/ sorry for the travails @MonzoPro. The frogs are biblical.
    D/ @wim, here in the south men are called “Menzes” by black women. So I guess women are “Womenzes”

  • @knewspeak said:
    There is also emerging evidence that the newer strain of the virus has a more aggressive transmission system. But this evidence has only been gathered from a few hundred cases.

    The analysis I saw from an epidemiologist indicated that the "more aggressive" aspect is statistically not significant enough to draw any conclusions from.

Sign In or Register to comment.