• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

COVID overwhelmes Montgomery, Alabama

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
This could become more widespread if we reopen too quickly. And it's not just the US. China totally locked down some areas because of a surge of cases. And other nations have seen clusters of cases and have had to back off their reopening.

With just one ICU bed available, Montgomery, Alabama, is sending sick patients to Birmingham

"Right now, if you are from Montgomery, and you need an ICU bed, you are in trouble," .... "If you're from central Alabama, and you need an ICU bed, you may not be able to get one."

The health care system is the state's capital is "maxed out," ...
...
coronavirus cases have more than doubled since May 4 in the four counties that make up metropolitan Montgomery.
...
In Birmingham, the most populous city in Alabama, coronavirus cases are also increasing sharply.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
It will be even more tragic when such clumps form nationwide.
The virus takes time to spread from region to region but it does so very persistently.

The less dense the population the longer it takes to jump from place to place.
but it only slows to a stop when the movement of people is slower than the incubation period.
When it creates clumps of infection it is at its most dangerous, and spreads the quickest

If it takes you longer than two weeks to get somewhere, you are unlikely to take it directly with you, but you might spread it into the populations that you pass through, it slows but does not stop the spread.

But like osmosis it will spread to the entire population eventually.
if you slow the spread down, much the same number of people will die, but over a longer period.
Only an effective vaccination can reduce the death toll and the number of serious hospitalised cases.

Eventually you reach the stage where the number of deaths from the virus are limited by deaths from other causes. (you can not die twice) it is a matter of what gets to you first.....
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
This could become more widespread if we reopen too quickly. And it's not just the US. China totally locked down some areas because of a surge of cases. And other nations have seen clusters of cases and have had to back off their reopening.
We are far away from a medical disaster but we have a compliance problem. As a condition to reopen the economy the Bundestag and the states agree that any county in which more than 50 new cases per day per 100,000 citizens, averaged over a week were detected, should go back to full lock down.
Three out of four counties where that happened refused to do so. They argued that "it was only in that one meat processing plant / nursing home not the whole county". These kind of excuses, setting precedents, worries me that a second wave may not get contained as fast as possible.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
We've created a culture and an economy wherein we have to engage in commerce, to live. And because we have allowed greed to motivate all our decisions, we have made no plans in anticipation of a commercial shutdown. Now a lot of people are going to die unnecessarily because we couldn't be bothered to even consider how to suspend or minimize commerce in an emergency, and because our decision-makers are all still so motivated by greed and selfishness that they will simply not care abut that loss of life. As long as it's someone else's loved ones dying, we will continue to engage in non-essential commerce because that's who we have become.
 
Last edited:

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
This could become more widespread if we reopen too quickly. And it's not just the US. China totally locked down some areas because of a surge of cases. And other nations have seen clusters of cases and have had to back off their reopening.

With just one ICU bed available, Montgomery, Alabama, is sending sick patients to Birmingham

"Right now, if you are from Montgomery, and you need an ICU bed, you are in trouble," .... "If you're from central Alabama, and you need an ICU bed, you may not be able to get one."

The health care system is the state's capital is "maxed out," ...
...
coronavirus cases have more than doubled since May 4 in the four counties that make up metropolitan Montgomery.
...
In Birmingham, the most populous city in Alabama, coronavirus cases are also increasing sharply.
Just a Democrat hoax, remember? By April it will all go away like magic, remember?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
This could become more widespread if we reopen too quickly. And it's not just the US. China totally locked down some areas because of a surge of cases. And other nations have seen clusters of cases and have had to back off their reopening.

With just one ICU bed available, Montgomery, Alabama, is sending sick patients to Birmingham

"Right now, if you are from Montgomery, and you need an ICU bed, you are in trouble," .... "If you're from central Alabama, and you need an ICU bed, you may not be able to get one."

The health care system is the state's capital is "maxed out," ...
...
coronavirus cases have more than doubled since May 4 in the four counties that make up metropolitan Montgomery.
...
In Birmingham, the most populous city in Alabama, coronavirus cases are also increasing sharply.

What strikes me about this is how much money Americans have spent on healthcare, insurance, co-pays, medications, and other expenses - leading to obscenely huge salaries and profits for the healthcare industry - yet they have nothing to show for it. There's obviously been no investment, no expansion, no improvements in the quality of service.

It just goes to show that the private sector can never be trusted with anything as important as healthcare.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
I'm not a scientist, but a question of I'd had was if slowing it down might give it a chance to mutate
it might, but that's a speculation, rather than a pressing concern. People are dying now, and health systems are collapsing under the strain. Better to deal with that than worry about something that may happen in future.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
But like osmosis it will spread to the entire population eventually.
if you slow the spread down, much the same number of people will die, but over a longer period.
Actually, the flattening the curve theory means fewer people die. The same number may eventually be infected, but because there's less receiving care at any given time, that means more resources can be expended on each patient, improving their odds.

That's the theory, any way.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
What strikes me about this is how much money Americans have spent on healthcare, insurance, co-pays, medications, and other expenses - leading to obscenely huge salaries and profits for the healthcare industry - yet they have nothing to show for it. There's obviously been no investment, no expansion, no improvements in the quality of service.

It just goes to show that the private sector can never be trusted with anything as important as healthcare.


The healthcare industry is like any other business, it does as little that it can to generate the greatest profit.
It has no interest in keeping people healthy. it only makes money from either sickness or the fear of sickness.

It's inbuilt self interest, is to maximise fear and minimise the true cost of treatments, and by doing the minimum possible.
The real money is made in health insurance and pharmaceuticals.

There is not profit in unused capacity or unused facilities or staffing. the only obscene salaries for those who "Own" a piece of the Action. front line workers are paid the minimum that they the "Owners" can get away with.
A salaried doctor is only paid a fraction of the money that he can generate in services.
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Actually, the flattening the curve theory means fewer people die. The same number may eventually be infected, but because there's less receiving care at any given time, that means more resources can be expended on each patient, improving their odds.

That's the theory, any way.

It seems from the data that the death tole of those needing serious intervention is near 50%. and in the UK at least the health service has always had some spare capacity to treat them. The death rate of the total of those affected seems to be a near constant...

However for those people in any sort of care homes, the death rate seems to be considerably higher than similar people living at home. ( resources do not seem to be expended on them to the same extent to those in hospital)
Flattening the Curve only spreads the resources over time, it does not "Ration" it. The eventual death ratio remains the same.
It would only increase if the needs could not be met. it would show up in the figures showing the death rate of the seriously ill, not so much in the overall figures.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'm not a scientist, but a question of I'd had was if slowing it down might give it a chance to mutate
Easy answer, no. The chance of a mutation goes up with the number of infections. Each new infection could lead to a mutation. Time doesn't play a role.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Actually, the flattening the curve theory means fewer people die. The same number may eventually be infected, but because there's less receiving care at any given time, that means more resources can be expended on each patient, improving their odds.

That's the theory, any way.
That and the hope that we will have a vaccine or treatment before we all get the virus.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Eventually you reach the stage where the number of deaths from the virus are limited by deaths from other causes. (you can not die twice) it is a matter of what gets to you first.....
Covid does not have a 100% kill rate. This is not a "matter of what gets you first."
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Covid does not have a 100% kill rate. This is not a "matter of what gets you first."
Of course it wont I never suggested that it would. but it seems that many people are susceptible to it in a very bad fashion and even with hospital treatment on a ventilator some 50% of those will die.
If you are one of those, eventually it will get to you in the same way that it will eventually get to over 90% of the population ( though some will have it so mildly that they never will know it.

The virus in the wild remains a potential killer. If you are one of the susceptible ones Then my statement applies to you.
But it is a very small percentage of the population. it will probably end up as a similar value as are killed by flue each year. but for now it has some catching up to do...so will seem a higher rate.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Of course it wont I never suggested that it would. but it seems that many people are susceptible to it in a very bad fashion and even with hospital treatment on a ventilator some 50% of those will die.
Covid is extremely contagious. However, for most people who get it they will have no symptoms or symptoms so mild they wont think of going to a doctor. After that a chunk get sick. A smaller part get very sick. A smaller part of them die. Basically, it's just bad enough to make it a serious problem, largely because it's new, its just bad enough to flood healthcare systems, and other than age and health we really don't knkw whos at risk. Even healthy kids and teens, though rarely, have fallen critically ill and died. We don't know why.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
Of course it wont I never suggested that it would. but it seems that many people are susceptible to it in a very bad fashion and even with hospital treatment on a ventilator some 50% of those will die.
If you are one of those, eventually it will get to you in the same way that it will eventually get to over 90% of the population ( though some will have it so mildly that they never will know it.

The virus in the wild remains a potential killer. If you are one of the susceptible ones Then my statement applies to you.
But it is a very small percentage of the population. it will probably end up as a similar value as are killed by flue each year. but for now it has some catching up to do...so will seem a higher rate.

Herd immunity can be achieved by exposing 60 to 80% of the population to the virus. Assuming that the 60% number will do it, let's have a look at the math.

America's population today is about 331 million. Sixty percent of that is 198 million.

If we take the mantra that this is no worse than a bad flu year, with a case mortality of 0.16% (2017-2018), that means 322,000 Americans will die from this virus.

Not exactly like a bad flu year is it. The worst flu season in the last 20 years (2017-2018) killed about 79,000 Americans.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
It seems from the data that the death tole of those needing serious intervention is near 50%. and in the UK at least the health service has always had some spare capacity to treat them. The death rate of the total of those affected seems to be a near constant...

However for those people in any sort of care homes, the death rate seems to be considerably higher than similar people living at home. ( resources do not seem to be expended on them to the same extent to those in hospital)
Flattening the Curve only spreads the resources over time, it does not "Ration" it. The eventual death ratio remains the same.
It would only increase if the needs could not be met. it would show up in the figures showing the death rate of the seriously ill, not so much in the overall figures.
No one mentioned rationing it. It's about general availability. A flattened curve means less deaths because there's less strain on healthcare, scary buzzwords notwithstanding.
 
Top