• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What will be the timeline and outcome of the coronavirus?

What do you think will the be timeline for the corona virus in the U.S?

  • It will take at least another year for things to get much better

    Votes: 6 46.2%
  • Things will greatly improve sometime next year due to a vaccine

    Votes: 6 46.2%
  • Little change

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The virus will be with us indefinitely like the common cold but possibly less lethal.

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • Total voters
    13

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
23,237
Reaction score
17,611
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm sitting here lamenting a missed vacation this summer due to state and country restrictions. What do you think will be the timeline and outcome of the corona virus?
 
Last edited:
I'm sitting here lamenting a missed vacation this summer due to state and country restrictions. What do you think will be the timeline and outcome of the corona virus?

The most likely outcome should reflect historical precedents.

The Spanish Flu swept through the US back in 1918. It, and other subsequent iterations of various influenza viruses, have been with us ever since.

Spanish flu: the killer that still stalks us, 100 years on | World news | The Guardian

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

So I expect the same to hold true for Covid-19. We will simply adapt to it.

The issue is IMO how many government restrictions should we as a general population (the VAST majority of whom suffer little or no lasting effects) be forced to submit to simply to protect those who are at risk?
 
Last edited:
The most likely outcome should reflect historical precedents.

The Spanish Flu swept through the US back in 1918. It, and other subsequent iterations of various influenza viruses, have been with us ever since.

Spanish flu: the killer that still stalks us, 100 years on | World news | The Guardian

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

So I expect the same to hold true for Covid-19. We will simply adapt to it.

The issue is IMO how many government restrictions should we as a general population (the VAST majority of whom suffer little or no lasting effects) be forced to submit to simply to protect those who are at risk?
You cannot possibly know that the vast majority of people who contract COVID-19 suffer "no lasting effects." Enough time hasn't passed to determine that. Moreover, that does not discount the fact that a significant number of people do become severely ill, straining our medical resources, and many do die, particularly the elderly. As far as the 1918 pandemic, cities across the country shut down then too...

And I read the articles you quoted - the articles aren't actually saying the 1918 flu virus is still with us. Their point is that descendants of that flu are with us, as over time the virus evolved into a less deadly flu strain. To your point though, we can hope that COVID-19 ends up behaving similarly, with the original strain falling away and becoming replaced with less deadly descendants. I'm not sure that will be the case, as COVID-19 seems to evolve more slowly than most other viruses. But that also means we have more time to develop a vaccine that works before the virus changes.

I think the general population should continue to value the lives of their neighbors over the inconveniences of wearing a mask and avoiding large crowds. Most places have already reopened to some degree, and it makes sense to do so as conditions improve. As long as people continue to practice social distancing, businesses can keep reopening and we can get back to something closer to normal. But restrictions are likely to be in place until a substantial percentage of the population has been vaccinated.
 
Hate to say it but we are in for the long haul.
 
The most likely outcome should reflect historical precedents.

The Spanish Flu swept through the US back in 1918. It, and other subsequent iterations of various influenza viruses, have been with us ever since.

Spanish flu: the killer that still stalks us, 100 years on | World news | The Guardian

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

So I expect the same to hold true for Covid-19. We will simply adapt to it.

The issue is IMO how many government restrictions should we as a general population (the VAST majority of whom suffer little or no lasting effects) be forced to submit to simply to protect those who are at risk?

That's the defeatist view, which I refuse to capitulate to. I refuse to believe that the most powerful nation on Earth, with some absolutely brilliant minds in it, cannot come up with a way to beat back this enemy.

But CA is right about just one thing: We should adapt. We should stop being so selfish. We should put up with the tiny inconvenience of wearing our masks so that other human beings will not get horribly sick or die.

And if we refuse to do so voluntarily, well, that's why we have to have the rule of law.
 
You cannot possibly know that the vast majority of people who contract COVID-19 suffer "no lasting effects." Enough time hasn't passed to determine that. Moreover, that does not discount the fact that a significant number of people do become severely ill, straining our medical resources, and many do die, particularly the elderly. As far as the 1918 pandemic, cities across the country shut down then too...

And I read the articles you quoted - the articles aren't actually saying the 1918 flu virus is still with us. Their point is that descendants of that flu are with us, as over time the virus evolved into a less deadly flu strain. To your point though, we can hope that COVID-19 ends up behaving similarly, with the original strain falling away and becoming replaced with less deadly descendants. I'm not sure that will be the case, as COVID-19 seems to evolve more slowly than most other viruses. But that also means we have more time to develop a vaccine that works before the virus changes.

I think the general population should continue to value the lives of their neighbors over the inconveniences of wearing a mask and avoiding large crowds. Most places have already reopened to some degree, and it makes sense to do so as conditions improve. As long as people continue to practice social distancing, businesses can keep reopening and we can get back to something closer to normal. But restrictions are likely to be in place until a substantial percentage of the population has been vaccinated.

1. I can "possibly know" because the information provided shows it is so. Posted in various threads I've presented with CDC and other data, and threads other's have posted. MOST people under 65 (per case data to date) catch it and either suffer NO symptoms, or mild symptoms. MOST of those over 65 who've died so far (94%) had 2 or more co-morbidities which made them more susceptible. Then we have an average life-span of 76, and those who die that age and older may have already been "on the way out."

2. NO, I should not have MY freedoms limited simply because there might be some small chance someone, somewhere MIGHT suffer. We know now who the most at risk are, those over 65 AND typically with 2 or more pre-existing co-morbidities. So if I need to work or otherwise be in contact with the very elderly, then maybe PPE is called for. Otherwise? You do YOU, and I'll do ME. Your authoritarian suggestions are rejected.
 
Unless the warmongers in the republican party and democrat party try to use this covid-19 to **** China or use this to suppress our rights I think things will return to normal shortly after the election. Right now this is being blown way the **** out of proportion to **** the economy.A sitting president doesn't do well in the polls when the economy goes to **** and the media overall is owned by a handful of people.
 
Unless the warmongers in the republican party and democrat party try to use this covid-19 to **** China or use this to suppress our rights I think things will return to normal shortly after the election. Right now this is being blown way the **** out of proportion to **** the economy.A sitting president doesn't do well in the polls when the economy goes to **** and the media overall is owned by a handful of people.

Wow so you think the entire health profession and the media are all exaggerating this? Seriously?
 
The most likely outcome should reflect historical precedents.

The Spanish Flu swept through the US back in 1918. It, and other subsequent iterations of various influenza viruses, have been with us ever since.

Spanish flu: the killer that still stalks us, 100 years on | World news | The Guardian

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

So I expect the same to hold true for Covid-19. We will simply adapt to it.

The issue is IMO how many government restrictions should we as a general population (the VAST majority of whom suffer little or no lasting effects) be forced to submit to simply to protect those who are at risk?

majority have no long term effects? First we know that near 4% die...and from there up to 70% have long term damage to their lung tissue

What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing
 
1. I can "possibly know" because the information provided shows it is so. Posted in various threads I've presented with CDC and other data, and threads other's have posted. MOST people under 65 (per case data to date) catch it and either suffer NO symptoms, or mild symptoms. MOST of those over 65 who've died so far (94%) had 2 or more co-morbidities which made them more susceptible. Then we have an average life-span of 76, and those who die that age and older may have already been "on the way out."

2. NO, I should not have MY freedoms limited simply because there might be some small chance someone, somewhere MIGHT suffer. We know now who the most at risk are, those over 65 AND typically with 2 or more pre-existing co-morbidities. So if I need to work or otherwise be in contact with the very elderly, then maybe PPE is called for. Otherwise? You do YOU, and I'll do ME. Your authoritarian suggestions are rejected.

Nobody cares about your opinion on your right to infect me with a disease.
 
majority have no long term effects? First we know that near 4% die...and from there up to 70% have long term damage to their lung tissue

What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing

1. You are citing a report that is months old. Yet even IT says:

Currently, it's estimated as few as 5% and as many as 80% of Covid-19-positive patients are asymptomatic or have mild cases of the illness that take days or weeks for symptoms to emerge—and many have no symptoms after two weeks, Parshley reports. A smaller percentage of patients have severe cases of Covid-19, which the World Health Organization estimates can take three to six weeks to fully recover from...Research shows some patients experience lung symptoms such as pain and a dry cough, weeks after recovering from the virus.
What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing

Yet our own CDC has been more specific when it comes to US Covid-19 cases. As reported elsewhere at the time of that recent report only 6% of Covid-19 cases had no other co-morbidities, i.e. clearly died solely due to Covid-19. Moreover, that the other 94% had an average of 2.6 co-morbidities. This is not even taking into account that the average life expectancy in the USA is 76 years old. The data also indicates over 90% of all deaths occur in those 55 and older and 83% are those 65 and older with the largest figures in those 70+ years of age.

2. That report does NOT say "up to 70% have long-term damages to their lung tissue." What it did say was:

While it's too soon to tell whether the lung damage in Covid-19 patients will be permanent, research shows that about one third of survivors of similar coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS had long-term lung damage.
What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing

Don't editorialize your data.

So as I stated, the MAJORITY of cases in general neither die, nor suffer long term effects. Meanwhile, there is nothing in your evidence which declares "over 70%" will suffer long term lung damages.
 
There will be a cure for Covid.There is no cure for liberalism.
 
MY coronavirus prediction is that we're going to see an uptick in cases over the next few weeks, ramping up right towards the end of October. It's obvious why: we've sent kids back to school and a lot of schools just aren't equipped to deal with a pandemic. We've all seen the pictures of students crammed into hallways with nobody wearing a mask. On top of that, October is usually where viruses like this start to increase. "Flu season," we call it, but really the same aspects apply to lots of viruses that spread through close contact, sneezing, coughing, etc.

But right wingers are going to see it as a conspiracy. JUST BEFORE THE ELECTION HUH HOW CONVENIENT LIBS? I can think of a dozen right wing posters off the top of my head who will buy into this immediately.
 
There will be a cure for Covid.There is no cure for liberalism.

You can't cure us because there's nothing wrong with us.

The cure for conservatism is empathy. Unfortunately it's borderline impossible to actually instill that into someone who doesn't have it.
 
1. You are citing a report that is months old. Yet even IT says:

What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing

Yet our own CDC has been more specific when it comes to US Covid-19 cases. As reported elsewhere at the time of that recent report only 6% of Covid-19 cases had no other co-morbidities, i.e. clearly died solely due to Covid-19. Moreover, that the other 94% had an average of 2.6 co-morbidities. This is not even taking into account that the average life expectancy in the USA is 76 years old. The data also indicates over 90% of all deaths occur in those 55 and older and 83% are those 65 and older with the largest figures in those 70+ years of age.

2. That report does NOT say "up to 70% have long-term damages to their lung tissue." What it did say was:

What we know (so far) about the long-term health effects of Covid-19 | Advisory Board Daily Briefing

Don't editorialize your data.

So as I stated, the MAJORITY of cases in general neither die, nor suffer long term effects. Meanwhile, there is nothing in your evidence which declares "over 70%" will suffer long term lung damages.

so, do you think that months old reports mean that suddenly those long term disabilities, just disappeared?
 
Wow so you think the entire health profession and the media are all exaggerating this? Seriously?

Around 270,000 people die each year of Sepsis.
Around 606,520 people die each year of cancer.
Around 99,000 people die each year of health care acquired infections each year.

Yes. Seeing how hospitals get paid from the government for Covid-19 deaths I seriously doubt all those deaths are actually the result of Covid-19.
 
so, do you think that months old reports mean that suddenly those long term disabilities, just disappeared?

What part of "it did not say what you claimed" did you fail to understand? :unsure13:
 
What part of "it did not say what you claimed" did you fail to understand? :unsure13:

oh, but it did...you ignoring it, does not change that...you have a habit of ignoring things. I won't waste my time arguing with you. Read the article, get back to us when you comprehend it.
 
I'm sitting here lamenting a missed vacation this summer due to state and country restrictions. What do you think will be the timeline and outcome of the corona virus?

If the vaccine works and you could talk people into getting it, this could be over by the end of the year.

But people won't take the vaccine, so I'm thinking the end of 2022.
 
Around 270,000 people die each year of Sepsis.
Around 606,520 people die each year of cancer.
Around 99,000 people die each year of health care acquired infections each year.

Yes. Seeing how hospitals get paid from the government for Covid-19 deaths I seriously doubt all those deaths are actually the result of Covid-19.

At its peak of ~2000 deaths per day, coronavirus was beating all of those... and that was with unprecedented mitigation efforts.
 
Back
Top Bottom