# A second wave?



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

What is your take on the possibility of a "second wave" of virus for your area? Are you giving serious thought on prepping for one if it should come?

For me, being a "retired" homesteader, and due to the fact my garden has been miserable for the last three years--and my really low freezer and cupboards, I'm in full gear now to prep up--using the possibility of a second wave as my incentive. Also seriously thinking about a Generac to run off the natural gas.

geo


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

I think there will be a second wave.

I have a Generac on propane. They are offer deals now, or were.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

In my opinion, there will be a second wave of infections due to some states opening their businesses, beaches, etc. even tho infection rates are still climbing. It was, and is, a very poor decision.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

I think this is going to be around forever, like the common cold or the flu. They may find a vaccine, but I think it's going to be more like the flu vaccine which may or may not work depending on whether the vaccine makers made the right predictions for the coming year. Covid-19 has apparently already mutated into different strains, no reason to think that it won't continue doing so.

We're not really prepping for the virus, we're more prepping for what we think is going to be continued (or renewed, depending on when it happens, likely this fall) hair on fire nonsensical panic by governments and news media that causes "hoarding" behavior. Trying to keep the pantry/freezer full on human food and the shed full of animal feed mostly, because this is a very populated area and things disappear quickly. Still can't find any dang flour.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

geo in mi said:


> Also seriously thinking about a *Generac* to run off the natural gas.


Read lots of reviews before you buy one.
I've heard lots of bad things about them.

Most brands can be converted to run off natural gas or propane, but you lose efficiency and increase fuel consumption.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

There was always going to be a second wave. That was the purpose of the shelter in place. It is planned and everyone should have realized this by now.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

I suspect it will come back with a vengence this fall/winter. 1918 roadmap there for anybody that cares to look. Its a different virus for sure, but similar situation. Human nature hasnt changed that much. Better technology, but lack the political will to use it effectively.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

Mish said:


> I think this is going to be around forever, like the common cold or the flu. They may find a vaccine, but I think it's going to be more like the flu vaccine which may or may not work depending on whether the vaccine makers made the right predictions for the coming year. Covid-19 has apparently already mutated into different strains, no reason to think that it won't continue doing so.
> 
> We're not really prepping for the virus, we're more prepping for what we think is going to be continued (or renewed, depending on when it happens, likely this fall) hair on fire nonsensical panic by governments and news media that causes "hoarding" behavior. Trying to keep the pantry/freezer full on human food and the shed full of animal feed mostly, because this is a very populated area and things disappear quickly. Still can't find any dang flour.


I agree with your thoughts.
Time to reopen the economy and deal with whatever losses come along with it. 

My county of 39,000 has had (2) reported deaths and (193) cases.
This is not a pandemic. It is the equivalent of one or two people in my high school class being sick. There are way more people sick from regular flu than this stuff at any given time.

Whole lot of nonsense and panic over something where we have overwhelming survival odds in our favor.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Fishindude said:


> I agree with your thoughts.
> Time to reopen the economy and deal with whatever losses come along with it.
> 
> My county of 39,000 has had (2) reported deaths and (193) cases.
> ...


Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


----------



## mzgarden (Mar 16, 2012)

I believe there will be additional waves however, I also believe that between the waves, there will be new learnings and herd immunity will begin to build. Not saying wave 2,3,4 will be 'less' but I am saying that over time many things will change.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mzgarden said:


> I believe there will be additional waves however, I also believe that between the waves, there will be new learnings and herd immunity will begin to build. Not saying wave 2,3,4 will be 'less' but I am saying that over time many things will change.


We're building herd immunity now. Essential workers are being infected, and there are people that don't show symptoms and therefore don't isolate, and continue to infect people for up to two weeks.


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


Cousin Eddie and aunt Sally, they're always a pain at Thanksgiving dinner 

Two deaths from a new illness in my county of 39,000 people does not warrant shutting down the entire area economy, putting thousands out of work, bankrupting businesses, bankrupting families, burying the feds further in debt, keeping people away from needed medical procedures, etc. 

Had the economy been clicking along the last few weeks and people commuting to work, there quite possibly could have been equal unplanned deaths from automobile wrecks and nobody would demand shutting down the roads.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


You use that same argument all the time.
It's still just meaningless, emotional rhetoric when discussing actual data.



Irish Pixie said:


> *Essential workers* are being infected


So are lots of other people who are also just as "essential".


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Fishindude said:


> Cousin Eddie and aunt Sally, they're always a pain at Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> Two deaths from a new illness in my county of 39,000 people does not warrant shutting down the entire area economy, putting thousands out of work, bankrupting businesses, bankrupting families, burying the feds further in debt, keeping people away from needed medical procedures, etc.
> 
> Had the economy been clicking along the last few weeks and people commuting to work, there quite possibly could have been equal unplanned deaths from automobile wrecks and nobody would demand shutting down the roads.


And the second wave will be the same as the first? The second in 1918 killed many many more than the first, due in part to opening states/communities too soon.

Can auto wrecks be avoided? Definitely not easily, but second wave Covid deaths can managed be if openings are handled properly.

Governors will do what they want, and hopefully it will stay contained to the areas who's citizens feel, "Time to reopen the economy and deal with whatever losses come along with it."


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Fishindude said:


> Had the economy been clicking along the last few weeks and people commuting to work, there quite possibly could have been equal unplanned deaths from automobile wrecks and nobody would demand shutting down the roads.


The virus has cut down on deaths caused by drunk drivers, who kill 30 per day in the US.
I haven't heard anyone wanting to ban alcohol though.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


How would you like them to die? From the virus or suicide from depression? Lack of food from food shortage?

There is no easy answer to this issue. It can't be your way or the highway until we all have the proper facts.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

I don't think we need to shut down the entire economy in order to keep the highest risk people safe(r). Those who feel they are at higher risk can self-isolate without forcing those who are at lower risk to give up their livelihoods and their own families' health (food, housing, clothing, medical/dental/eye care all costs money and if you aren't working you're not making money) for something that probably isn't going to go away any time soon.

Personally, I have high risk people in my household. We adapted our behaviors - neither of the two "at risk" people in the household have left the property for going on two months now, the husband goes to work as usual and I do all of the "leaving the house" necessity stuff and we are very careful that we don't do things that put them more at risk while out and once we're home. On the other hand, my young, single adult son with no underlying health issues who lives alone shouldn't have to be locked up in his apartment for months because "high risk" people can't or don't want to lock themselves up and adapt their own behavior to keep themselves safe. 

It's not selfish of him to want to be able to go to work, go shopping, go to the gym, go hiking/biking/rock climbing, see his friends. It _is_ pretty selfish of me to demand that he stop living his life because I am worried about the high risk people in my house.

We don't have to worry about which relative we'd choose to die if we and our relatives were smart about it and took care ourselves, and let those who have less worry carry on with their lives. That is a straw man argument.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

mreynolds said:


> How would you like them to die?


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


No one wants to loose people they love and care about but it is definitely, absolutely, positively going to happen no matter what. pandemic or no pandemic
our clocks are ticking


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

I met an old friend on a small road today. We were passing each other going in opposite directions.
He and I both stopped. He had a big smile rolled his window down and wanted to chat.
I left my window up and told him I was glad he was still alive.
I waved and drove on.


----------



## dyrne (Feb 22, 2015)

If you never leave your home the likelihood of infection is nil. If you spend all your time in confined spaces hanging out with people it is probably pretty likely though in most cases it won't be super serious. Therefore, the chance of infection for each individual is a spectrum between two extremes

absolute social distancing 

constantly schmoozing in crowds

Complaining that the shutdown isn't necessary because you've only had two deaths in a county strikes me logically as the same as complaining that we require children to be vaccinated when almost no children get hepatitis or measles.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

dyrne said:


> If you never leave your home the likelihood of infection is nil. If you spend all your time in confined spaces hanging out with people it is probably pretty likely though in most cases it won't be super serious. Therefore, the chance of infection for each individual is a spectrum between two extremes
> 
> absolute social distancing
> 
> ...


I'm confused by your analysis, I'm probably reading it wrong based on your last paragraph. 

From what I'm reading, you think the spectrum goes from zero chance of infection with absolute isolation to a high chance of a non-serious infection.

Why is the shutdown necessary if that's the spectrum of possibilities - with worse case scenario for those constantly schmoozing types being an infection that isn't super serious? That seems to argue that the shutdown isn't necessary, at least the way I'm reading your logic.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

SRSLADE said:


> I met an old friend on a small road today. We were passing each other going in opposite directions.
> He and I both stopped. He had a big smile rolled his window down and wanted to chat.
> I left my window up and told him I was glad he was still alive.
> I waved and drove on.


That Russian lady is happy about that.


----------



## licomi (Nov 20, 2014)

Irish Pixie said:


> In my opinion, there will be a second wave of infections due to some states opening their businesses, beaches, etc. even tho infection rates are still climbing. It was, and is, a very poor decision.


If Whitmer gets the V.P. nod you should move to Michigan and apply for the job, you'd be a perfect replacement.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

I get the impression that some folks think there are only two ways to deal with this virus - leave everything shut down until the end of time or fire off the starter’s pistol and let there be a free-for-all. 

There is a middle ground here. It is possible to open gradually, starting with businesses/people who are low contact/low risk and moving cautiously from there. But we need to, in my opinion, start reopening. 

It’s really easy for people who are fortunate enough to be able to work from home and who are being paid to say “stay shut down” until whenever but people who aren’t as fortunate simply can’t afford to be sitting at home for months on end with no income.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Why would anyone think that a “second wave” will not occur, or a third ?
Does it really matter if its in a couple of months or a couple of years ? It’s just not feasible financially to keep shut down. And its unrealistic to expect human nature to keep the majority of people home. 
Might save a few lives from the covid virus if a really good treatment is found really fast. Look at the insurance business and its graphs and charts of what is acceptable risk and loss, including deaths. I suspect many people would be shocked at the factual viewpoints.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SLFarmMI said:


> There is a middle ground here. *It is possible to open gradually*, starting with businesses/people who are low contact/low risk and moving cautiously from there.


Someone else has been saying that same thing for a while now.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

We might not notice a second wave. A silly respiratory bug might be the least of our concerns at that point.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> I met an old friend on a small road today. We were passing each other going in opposite directions.
> He and I both stopped. He had a big smile rolled his window down and wanted to chat.
> I left my window up and told him I was glad he was still alive.
> I waved and drove on.


Do you really consider that a life worth living? In my mind I can't see it being worth it.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

SRSLADE said:


> I met an old friend on a small road today. We were passing each other going in opposite directions.
> He and I both stopped. He had a big smile rolled his window down and wanted to chat.
> I left my window up and told him I was glad he was still alive.
> I waved and drove on.


So your passing each in a manner where your bodies are closer than 6 feet ?


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Redlands Okie said:


> So your passing each in a manner where your bodies are closer than 6 feet ?


It was a small road.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

GTX63 said:


> It was a small road.


Where was he going?


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Someplace essential.
Maybe a protest.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Someone else has been saying that same thing for a while now.


There have been many people across the country, from all walks of life and belief systems who have been saying the same thing. It is hardly an original thought to anyone here at HT.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Very few do not want the economy and businesses to get back to work. How that process is accomplished and the timing and benchmarks used to accomplish that are very much in question. Balancing the health of the nation and the health of the economy will be difficult.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Members have been repeatedly warned about political discussion in GC.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Regional soft openings are the best way to open states. Areas of least infection first, highest infection last. And soft openings of businesses. The New York proposal would be a good example of this policy.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SLFarmMI said:


> There have been many people across the country, from all walks of life and belief systems who have been saying the same thing. It is *hardly an original thought *to anyone here at HT.


Exactly.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Regional soft openings are the best way to open states. Areas of least infection first, highest infection last. And soft openings of businesses. The New York proposal would be a good example of this policy.


I think that reopening everything today and then monitoring things and imposing regional soft closings would be more warranted. And certainly not making mistakes like the New Yorkers. Ordering positive tested patients that weren't sick enough to hospitalize to go back to their nursing homes was a really bad idea.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

HDRider said:


> Where was he going?


Yes. Find out where he was going and call 911 to report this criminal out there with non-essential travel killing grandma.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Detroit is thick with Covid. The rest of Michigan,m not so much. Foolish to keep 80 counties shut down while the problem is the lawless citizens of Detroit. But as soon as you let up on rural counties, Detroit residents will travel there.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

I'm not sure how we even quantify the areas of highest or lowest infection since almost no one is being tested. Still. 

San Diego county has tested 38,689 people to date out of a total population of 3,325,468. So 0.01163415194 of my county's population has even been tested. Out of that number, only 2,643, or 0.00079477535 percent of the county's population has tested positive.

At this point higher infection only means you're actually testing more people, not that infections are becoming more common. 

Barnbilder is right. Open it up already. Individuals can then decide what to do based on their particular circumstances.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I agree with Irish Pixie in the need to continue the self isolation. But people are growing restless. More people are traveling. Do we do a gradual opening the floodgates or let the dam burst?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

haypoint said:


> Yes. Find out where he was going and call 911 to report this criminal out there with non-essential travel killing grandma.


I went to a small store that I called a food order into. Perishables.
They meet me at the door with mask and gloves and I have mask and gloves.
But yous all carry on with conspiracy theories.


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

From reading the different opinions here, I will make at least one prediction: Sometime this winter, a lot of towns and suburbs will rescind their ordinances prohibiting the raising of backyard chickens.

And I have come to a few decisions:
1) To try to convince my granddaughter that eating rabbit meat is not sinful.
2) To use the 100 yr old pine tree lumber I saved from the county road project to make more storage shelves in the basement, rather than a big TV stand.
3) To order canning lids from Amazon. They're already gone from the Meijer shelves.
4) To clean and defrost the basement freezer.
5) To continue the weight loss program and get my breath back.
6) To make out my living will. Intubation sucks.

geo


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Second wave? I'm not sure my area has even had a ripple yet. That's what scares me.
As soon as everything is opened up, seasonals from high virus areas that aren't already coming this way will flood the area. 

What can you do other than take precautions, build up supplies, and try to avoid crowds.


----------



## Allen W (Aug 2, 2008)

SRSLADE said:


> I went to a small store that I called a food order into. Perishables.
> They meet me at the door with mask and gloves and I have mask and gloves.
> But yous all carry on with conspiracy theories.


That's fine with me, everyone has to make their own decisions on their safety and should be allowed to.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Mish said:


> I don't think we need to shut down the entire economy in order to keep the highest risk people safe(r). Those who feel they are at higher risk can self-isolate without forcing those who are at lower risk to give up their livelihoods and their own families' health (food, housing, clothing, medical/dental/eye care all costs money and if you aren't working you're not making money) for something that probably isn't going to go away any time soon.
> 
> Personally, I have high risk people in my household. We adapted our behaviors - neither of the two "at risk" people in the household have left the property for going on two months now, the husband goes to work as usual and I do all of the "leaving the house" necessity stuff and we are very careful that we don't do things that put them more at risk while out and once we're home. On the other hand, my young, single adult son with no underlying health issues who lives alone shouldn't have to be locked up in his apartment for months because "high risk" people can't or don't want to lock themselves up and adapt their own behavior to keep themselves safe.
> 
> ...


The strange thing is, with the isolating we are doing now, a lot of high risk, vulnerable are dying. How many more do you want to risk?


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

haypoint said:


> Detroit is thick with Covid. The rest of Michigan,m not so much. Foolish to keep 80 counties shut down while the problem is the lawless citizens of Detroit. But as soon as you let up on rural counties, Detroit residents will travel there.


Why are they lawless? Because they love in Detroit?


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Mish said:


> I'm not sure how we even quantify the areas of highest or lowest infection since almost no one is being tested. Still.
> 
> San Diego county has tested 38,689 people to date out of a total population of 3,325,468. So 0.01163415194 of my county's population has even been tested. Out of that number, only 2,643, or 0.00079477535 percent of the county's population has tested positive.
> 
> ...


Actually except your choice affects many people


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

keenataz said:


> Actually except your choice affects many people


As is yours. I'm betting that my choice will have less disastrous long term consequences to the entirety of the population than yours. 

No one says you have to go out. Lock yourself in as long as you want to. Protect yourself as you see fit and let others protect themselves as they see fit, which for most people means going to work and making money so that their kids can eat.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

keenataz said:


> The strange thing is, with the isolating we are doing now, a lot of high risk, vulnerable are dying. How many more do you want to risk?


So you're saying the isolating is working, or isn't?

Again, no one is telling _you_ not to continue isolating yourself if you want to.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Mish said:


> So you're saying the isolating is working, or isn't?
> 
> Again, no one is telling _you_ not to continue isolating yourself if you want to.


 I am saying we are isolating now and tens of thousands of vulnerable are dying. We go with your idea, many vulnerable will die. You realize you can’t totally isolate these people?


----------



## RobertDane (Feb 14, 2020)

HermitJohn said:


> I suspect it will come back with a vengence this fall/winter. 1918 roadmap there for anybody that cares to look. Its a different virus for sure, but similar situation. Human nature hasnt changed that much. Better technology, but lack the political will to use it effectively.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

keenataz said:


> I am saying we are isolating now and tens of thousands of vulnerable are dying. We go with your idea, many vulnerable will die. You realize you can’t totally isolate these people?


Glad you realize that you CAN NOT totally isolate these people.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Redlands Okie said:


> Glad you realize that you CAN NOT totally isolate these people.


That is why we are trying to protect them.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

keenataz said:


> The strange thing is, with the isolating we are doing now, a lot of high risk, vulnerable are dying. How many more do you want to risk?


I dunno, how many we got left? Isolation is not working. If you have food, power, water, and septic, you aren't isolating now, or if you are, you won't be for much longer. Essential people are not isolating. They are making sure everything is running and everyone is fed. If it made it into nursing homes, the one place it would have been pertinent to keep it out of, then the plan failed. You can't isolate humans enough to prevent a respiratory virus. It is ridiculous. Stop the spread. How about act like fools when we could actually be contributing to a society in which certain segments are under imminent threat?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

keenataz said:


> That is why we are trying to protect them.


I’m torn on the isolation concept because sooner or later, business is going to resume and with so many people still vulnerable, the problem still remains. 

We aren’t doing a very good job of protecting our most vulnerable now. Nursing homes are still being infected and hundreds of people in our meat processing facilities are infected. In my province, the plants are staffed by new Canadians and temporary foreign workers, who aren’t working for top dollar. 

Things are tough enough in Quebec that they’ve had to borrow medical personnel from the military.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

wr said:


> I’m torn on the isolation concept because sooner or later, business is going to resume and with so many people still vulnerable, the problem still remains.
> 
> We aren’t doing a very good job of protecting our most vulnerable now. Nursing homes are still being infected and hundreds of people in our meat processing facilities are infected. In my province, the plants are staffed by new Canadians and temporary foreign workers, who aren’t working for top dollar.
> 
> Things are tough enough in Quebec that they’ve had to borrow medical personnel from the military.


Believe me I am not saying there is a simple answer. I am just saying if we remove what we are doing I believe the more vulnerable will be dying at a higher rate. 
What worries me, if a second wave comes and more people start dying, that will destroy our economy. People will stay at home. 
Also I am worried about people I care about dying.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Why are they lawless? Because they love in Detroit?


I don't know why. Just that is where 70% of Michigan's murders, rapes and murders happen there. Most go unsolved due to a widespread belief that snitches get stitches. Some may associate the high crime rate to abject poverty, while others will site the 70% high school drop out rate creates an employ ability deficit.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

The meat packing industry keep going same as it always has.

now they are facing their wave of infections, closing the plants for lack of healthy workers. New York and Italy went through bad peaks as well when thry didn’t give up old habits of tight shoulder to shoulder activities.

I think we would have the same economic issues with or without the stay at home type orders.

without the stay at home, the hospitals would have been overwhelmed with patients.

with the orders, the Internet is overwhelmed with bored people.

neither a good situation, but here we are.

second wave, of course there will be. Hope the hospitals have prepared for it.

Paul


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

keenataz said:


> Believe me I am not saying there is a simple answer. I am just saying if we remove what we are doing I believe the more vulnerable will be dying at a higher rate.
> What worries me, if a second wave comes and more people start dying, that will destroy our economy. People will stay at home.
> Also I am worried about people I care about dying.


Our economy is already on the way down the toilet and the longer we continue this charade of a quarantine the further down it will be until there is no recovery possible.

I know you're worried about people you care about dying, but you can really continue on the way you've been doing. No one is telling you not to. There's no requirement for you or the people you care about to do anything differently. If what you're doing now isn't effective without everyone else also doing it, then the quarantine as it sits also isn't effective.

Take care of yourself. Let me take care of myself. You're worried about (I'm assuming elderly) people you care about dying from something that is really starting to look like it has a mortality rate similar to the flu. I'm worried about the entire economy crashing in a much worse way than it did 12 years ago, which will impact the young people I care about in very serious way for a very long time, and probably my grandchildren (should I ever be gifted with any) as well.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Mish I am blessed with very good health. I do not get sick. I am sure I catch things but I am never down or bedridden.
I probably have passed things to others though.
I could stay inside my fence lines for years. I could avoid any contact with outside humanity if I had to. I could set up plans for dealing with mail, items from the grocers, anything that may have been contaminated by others.
In the end, I am going to acquire something. It would happen.
It seems that what others would have everyone do is ignore reality.
We are all going to get something and some are going to die from it. It can be now or later.
Later may mean there is a bed and a coffin available, but that should be up to you and me, and no one else.


----------



## Jenn (Nov 9, 2004)

Tldr. There will be a second and ?annual waves. I am hoping that if I/family get it, we will be past the highest point of the curve (and hope second wave will be smaller) and I will get excellent hospital and ICU care, better than can be offered now with little knowledge of the disease and treatment and with beds and staff in some places overwhelmed and spread too thin. This is not just a matter of ICU beds, it's also a matter of how many nurses and docs will retire from hospital/ ER medicine after having gone through the hellscape they are dealing with in the hardest hit hospitals and the anxiety for all essential workers of harming their own or their family's health by doing their job. (No such hospitals in my state so far as I know for now, though.)

What I really hope is that the pneumonia I just recovered from was actually Corona, AND I am now immune for a few years. Maybe there will be antibody testing available later on that I can get to see if that is the case (test done 2 weeks after my worst symptoms was negative, but might have been a false negative).


----------



## debtoyou (Sep 3, 2015)

The government didn't shut down the states to protect us. They shut them down to help give the hospitals some relief. That's why some of the states not hit as hard took longer to shut down, and are now already opening up.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Just because there was a "second wave" in 1918 doesn't mean that's going to happen with COVID, or at least not in the same way. I personally think that what we're experiencing now IS the second wave, and that the first wave consisted of people who had mysterious fevers and coughs that weren't influenza, or people like me who had a "cold" that went away and quickly came back.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I agree this might be the "second wave". Yesterday I called the hospital to get copies of my chest x-rays and they said there were quite a few cases of a particularly nasty virus where people had covid 19 symptoms back in late December and January. But despite the number of cases, they didn't know to look for an unknown virus so they didn't do more testing. 
I was not the first person to ask to have their records reviewed.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Name the family and friends you're willing to lose, please. Just name two. I don't want to lose anyone I love and care about.


There's a long list of people that could go today, myself included. One of my brothers and my other brothers wife would be two at the top of the list.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

keenataz said:


> Why are they lawless? Because they love in Detroit?


I'd go with "because they ignore laws"


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

keenataz said:


> Believe me I am not saying there is a simple answer. I am just saying if we remove what we are doing I believe the more vulnerable will be dying at a higher rate.
> What worries me, if a second wave comes and more people start dying, that will destroy our economy. People will stay at home.
> Also I am worried about people I care about dying.


How can our loved ones get to heaven if we keep them alive forever?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

.Some people don't end up in nice places at death particularly hypocrites.
Old people are just old. Not stupid.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

debtoyou said:


> The government didn't shut down the states to protect us. They shut them down to help give the hospitals some relief. That's why some of the states not hit as hard took longer to shut down, and are now already opening up.


A major hospital in Detroit just laid off 3000 employees. They are losing money hand over fist, because they sit mostly empty. All elective and routine services are stopped. 

A major hospital in Grand Rapids is laying off employees as they are losing a million dollars a day. I know two nurses with 39 years senority that are laid off. 

I know of several small county hospitals that are considering closing, broke. They make their money with appointments and the doctors are not coming in because the non emergency cases are their main business.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

haypoint said:


> A major hospital in Detroit just laid off 3000 employees. They are losing money hand over fist, because they sit mostly empty. All elective and routine services are stopped.
> 
> A major hospital in Grand Rapids is laying off employees as they are losing a million dollars a day. I know two nurses with 39 years senority that are laid off.
> 
> I know of several small county hospitals that are considering closing, broke. They make their money with appointments and the doctors are not coming in because the non emergency cases are their main business.


Boy that will be real handy when all of these hospitals shut down and then the second wave hits.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

barnbilder said:


> Boy that will be real handy when all of these hospitals shut down and then the second wave hits.


 Most hospitals have been vacant through the first wave. Some of the film footage of overwhelmed New York hospitals was from Italy. 
Detroit, the worst area in the state that has the third most cases in the nation, has a hospital set up with 100 ICU beds, but peaked at 18 filled beds, a month ago.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> I agree this might be the "second wave". Yesterday I called the hospital to get copies of my chest x-rays and they said there were quite a few cases of a particularly nasty virus where people had covid 19 symptoms back in late December and January. But despite the number of cases, they didn't know to look for an unknown virus so they didn't do more testing.
> I was not the first person to ask to have their records reviewed.


Some people have replied, "So, where were all the people on ventilators back then, blah blah blah." It was probably a different strain that was circulating at the time.

I was at the gas station today, and the woman behind me in line grumbled to herself, "I just want this to be over." I turned around and replied, "We all do." She then told me that she had a friend who is an RN in NYC, and the friend said it's worse than anyone could imagine who wasn't there.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

thesedays said:


> Some people have replied, "So, where were all the people on ventilators back then, blah blah blah." It was probably a different strain that was circulating at the time.
> 
> I was at the gas station today, and the woman behind me in line grumbled to herself, "I just want this to be over." I turned around and replied, "We all do." She then told me that she had a friend who is an RN in NYC, and the friend said it's worse than anyone could imagine who wasn't there.


I've always thought that about NYC.


----------



## 54metalman (Jul 12, 2011)

To me, and I am a very simple guy, this manditory shelter stay home crap is crap. If you are truly worried and or at a high risk with underling issues, then by all means stay home and stay safe!! But demanding or ordering others to do the same is the same thing as getting weightloss surgery because your neighbor is over weight! Or you getting chemo because the guy down the street has cancer. I have been off work for 6 plus weeks now. Still no unemployment or stimulis check. Thank Heavenly Father I have a little stocked up but not for much longer. Stuff need to change or its going to hit the fan!! The fuse is lit and I hope they are ready for what they have started. I know I am.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

54metalman said:


> To me, and I am a very simple guy, this manditory shelter stay home crap is crap. If you are truly worried and or at a high risk with underling issues, then by all means stay home and stay safe!! But demanding or ordering others to do the same is the same thing as getting weightloss surgery because your neighbor is over weight! Or you getting chemo because the guy down the street has cancer. I have been off work for 6 plus weeks now. Still no unemployment or stimulis check. Thank Heavenly Father I have a little stocked up but not for much longer. Stuff need to change or its going to hit the fan!! The fuse is lit and I hope they are ready for what they have started. I know I am.


It's difficult to "stay safe" in ones home with others running around outside starting fires.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

54metalman said:


> To me, and I am a very simple guy, this manditory shelter stay home crap is crap. If you are truly worried and or at a high risk with underling issues, then by all means stay home and stay safe!! But demanding or ordering others to do the same is the same thing as getting weightloss surgery because your neighbor is over weight! Or you getting chemo because the guy down the street has cancer. I have been off work for 6 plus weeks now. Still no unemployment or stimulis check. Thank Heavenly Father I have a little stocked up but not for much longer. Stuff need to change or its going to hit the fan!! The fuse is lit and I hope they are ready for what they have started. I know I am.


Who started what?
What are you ready for?


----------



## reneedarley (Jun 11, 2014)

Irish Pixie said:


> And the second wave will be the same as the first? The second in 1918 killed many many more than the first, due in part to opening states/communities too soon.


Agreed. In my county in Sweden the Spanish flu was scarcely seen first time round-second time , horrific death toll.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

The second wave mortality in the spanish flu was caused by the stupid attempts at the ridiculous idea that you can "do something" about a viral respiratory pandemic, let alone with quarantine. I miss the good old days, when we could have a viral epidemic way bigger than this silly sniffle and we responded with Woodstock. Free love for the win. Build herd immunity and make some of the greatest musical achievements of the century in one fell swoop. Rolling around in the mud sharing acid with people you just met.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

I hope everyone is taking care of themselves and their families.
Ignore the down players and realize this is not fake.
Hunker in as best you can but get out with caution.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

54metalman said:


> To me, and I am a very simple guy, this manditory shelter stay home crap is crap. If you are truly worried and or at a high risk with underling issues, then by all means stay home and stay safe!! But demanding or ordering others to do the same is the same thing as getting weightloss surgery because your neighbor is over weight! Or you getting chemo because the guy down the street has cancer. I have been off work for 6 plus weeks now. Still no unemployment or stimulis check. Thank Heavenly Father I have a little stocked up but not for much longer. Stuff need to change or its going to hit the fan!! The fuse is lit and I hope they are ready for what they have started. I know I am.


I am sure there are millions more even worse off. Some companies shut down just to get free money from the SBA. I know if an "essential" car dealership (because a new car will keep me from getting sick after all) they worked 50 hours a week or more after the shut down. Then it was announced that the SBA would offer loans that could be forgiven if they were effected by the virus. 

Immediately, they shut every one down to 14 hours a week. Well, the ones on salary had to still come in because, ya know, salary people don't get Corona virus. Then they applied and got the loan. Now since they "were affected" by the virus they will get that money. 

People that play with other people's lives will find out that most people don't play.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Fear mongering.
Politicalization.
Irrational thought and behavior.
Shaming and blaming.
Manipulation, lying and purposely altering facts.
Poorly designed and rendered data models.
Absolutely 100% agree not fake.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

SRSLADE said:


> I hope everyone is taking care of themselves and their families.
> Ignore the down players and realize this is not fake.
> Hunker in as best you can but get out with caution.


No one is calling this fake. You don't really believe that.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

The virus is very real. The reaction is very contrived. The people that seem to be pushing for unrealistic and ineffective control measures seem to be all of one political persuasion. If the virus was something besides a different version of the same thing humanity has been surviving for thousands of years, I guess maybe those people should not have cried wolf so many times, and maybe people would take their message seriously.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Sickness is not political unless it's to someones advantage to make it so.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

From the mouth's of babes.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

reneedarley said:


> Agreed. In my county in Sweden the Spanish flu was scarcely seen first time round-second time , horrific death toll.


Yea and scariest thing is that given months to prepare, they are declaring victory and thinking just go back to normal. Not thinking second round at all. Nobody learned from 1918.

Oh they had some lady on tv, she was born at sea in 1918 on ship coming to America. She survived 1918 and apparently got covid19 in 2020 and survived that. Talk about double jeopardy. But not lot survivors of 1918 still around.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> Sickness is not *political* unless it's to someones advantage to *make it so*.


Who keeps doing that here?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

I have no idea but some people see things.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

SRSLADE said:


> Sickness is not political unless it's to someones advantage to make it so.


A great amount of the problems we have from the Wuhan covid-19 virus is a result of political goals or policies.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

barnbilder said:


> The second wave mortality in the spanish flu was caused by the stupid attempts at the ridiculous idea that you can "do something" about a viral respiratory pandemic, let alone with quarantine. I miss the good old days, when we could have a viral epidemic way bigger than this silly sniffle and we responded with Woodstock. Free love for the win. Build herd immunity and make some of the greatest musical achievements of the century in one fell swoop. Rolling around in the mud sharing acid with people you just met.


Can you imagine how many people would have gotten AIDS at Woodstock had it happened 15 years later?


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

thesedays said:


> Can you imagine how many people would have gotten AIDS at Woodstock had it happened 15 years later?


Probably not many. Aids is not a viral respiratory disease, transmission is not nearly as easy.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Nearly al of Michigan's hospitals are nearly vacant. This has caused thousands of health care professionals to be laid off, many smaller hospitals to consider bankruptcy. Michigan ranks number 3 for covid cases. Way over a million Michigan workers laid off. Michigan still in quarantine.


----------



## Miguel Martinez (Mar 5, 2020)

On generac generators, they're really not meant for long term energy production. For long term energy, look at solar or some of the diesel generators. In either case, think like a submarine. Big battery banks that you "surface to charge" and then re-submerge. Generators shouldn't be ran for extended periods of time.

As far as opening things back up... People should make their own choices, but be willing to live with the consequences. As for us, we don't get to town but once a week anyways. So nothing big will change. We just might skip the weekly trip to the cafe for chicken fried steak and gravy.

A friend and I were talking this out a couple weeks ago. The mortality rate is say 3%. If we never shut things down we would have apx 3,850,000 deaths across the u.s. but the economy would have kept moving, you wouldn't have lost jobs, etc. By shutting things down, we prevent the huge loss, but then tank the economy. We probably needed to do something in between. Protect the weakest populations and continue working. It would be a higher death toll, but less impact on the economy. Question is, who gets to make the tough call on who has to die. Politically speaking, the right choice was made. Economically speaking, the wrong choice was made. When the cards are down in the table though, we all have to make our own decisions.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

barnbilder said:


> Probably not many. Aids is not a viral respiratory disease, transmission is not nearly as easy.


There was plenty of unprotected sex going on at Woodstock, as well as rape. You bet people came home pregnant or with every STD known to man at the time.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

thesedays said:


> There was plenty of unprotected sex going on at Woodstock, as well as rape. You bet people came home pregnant or with every STD known to man at the time.


Well, out of every 10,000 instances of "normal" unprotected sex you would be looking at 4 to 8 transmissions, depending on which partner you were. With slightly less normal unprotected sex that same 10,000 would net 11 to 138 cases depending on which partner you were. Out of 10,000 instances of sharing a needle with an HIV infected person, there would be 63 transmissions. 0.3 % of people are infected by HIV right now. 400,000 people were at Woodstock for three days, so we will assume that 1,200 could have been infected with HIV. If they all engaged in a sex act with the highest rate of transmission each day that would net 50 cases. If they all shared a needle once a day that would be 22 cases. So you come up with 70 cases, at the very most. Factor in that some of the people were already infected, especially in the populations that engaged in some of these activities, that cuts the number of newly infected. Then consider that some of the people that were there didn't engage in risky activities, and some of the sex acts (probably most) were in a lower transmission category, factor in statistical margin for error, and realistically you could be looking at somewhere between none and a handful.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

thesedays said:


> There was plenty of unprotected sex going on at Woodstock, as well as rape. You bet people came home pregnant or with every STD known to man at the time.


And those people came home and had unprotected sex with five more people, and they had unprotected, and on and on and on. Woodstock could have the hotspot of the AIDs epidemic. I'm certainly glad the free love era was the 60s and not the 80s. 

It's kinda like Covid, except the rate of transmission is higher with Covid, but the rate of mortality is lower.


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

I kinda think herd immunity might wreck the economy, too. Two hundred million people getting sick--and from some of the descriptions....any volunteers? Anyone....? Anyone...?. "C'mon, men, over the hill. My only wish is that I could go with you....."

geo


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Already went over the hill months ok and currently running through the valley


----------

