Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 261 posts

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#231

Post by chimprich »

roenxi wrote: post #59
gzer0 wrote: post #32

Around 99% of the patients developed a high temperature, while more than half experienced fatigue and a dry cough. About a third also experienced muscle pain and difficulty breathing. Research from the Chinese Center for Disease Control suggests that around 80% of coronavirus cases are mild. Around 15% of patients have gotten severe cases, and 5% have become critically ill. Here's how symptoms progress among typical…

> Stay vigilant, stay careful, but most importantly, do not spread mass hysteria and panic. In the last month almost 1% of the current population of the earth quarantined in China [0]. What exactly worries you about mass hysteria and panic? Why would that be worse than what is likely to happen as Covid-19 spreads outside of China? I'm all in favor of not overselling the danger; but this virus is a real concern. I mea…

> If 2% of the people I know died this year, that would be the worst disaster in my country in my lifetime.

Given most people don't live to be 100, I would guess the world death rate is well over 1%.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just something to think about when considering mortality rates.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#232

Post by pbourke »

microcolonel wrote: post #140

I've seen speculation that the virus in Iran has mutated (or the environment is somehow different), and is producing extremely aggressive complications, killing patients within hours of their hospitalization. At this time of year, there will be even more mass face-kissing and hand-shaking going on than usual. There are entire communities of travelling super-spreaders in Iran right now, this is extremely serious.

Probably not. Most likely it's just become widespread there and they haven't been containing or testing. The deaths and serious cases are the tip of the iceberg.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#233

Post by tree3 »

jarmitage wrote: post #41

Reminder that WHO publishes a daily situation report about COVID-19, which is calmer and more informative than most headlines/media stories: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...

Reminder that China has not allowed WHO to observe the outbreak closely. WHO is simply repeating China's likely fake numbers.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#234

Post by radicalbyte »

ryan_j_naughton wrote: post #212
radicalbyte wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. However it's not possible: she's a pharmacist and because of the flu they're both really busy and low staffed. As long as she can just about handle it she works. They all get it every year anyway because they're constantly coming into contact with sick people so there's less benefit for staying at home.

Pharmacists clearly seem like a huge potential vector for disease transmission. The pharmacy itself should have policies preventing sick employees from attending work and have generous paid sick leave. We could reduce disease transmission and thus social cost dramatically if we reduced transmission in medical contexts (e.g. hospitals are one of the main places people GET sick -- from other patients). It would ultimat…

They do have generous sick leave, that's why there are so many people ill at the moment. Sure they could have more staff, but someone has to pay for that. In her situation her staffing levels are above the norms used by Den Haag (we put patient service above profit).

I really wish that the situation could be better but unfortunately the huge cuts made since the financial crisis have made that impossible.

Doctors have the same problem.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#235

Post by [deleted] »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #117
jlokier wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's an option. I lot of people cannot call in sick. Being sick means being unpaid, and many people cannot afford to go unpaid.

Not working while ill is a fundamental human right, and as such is implemented in all European jurisdictions. There are very, very few cases when you can't exercise this right. Not wanting to is another issue though, but it's often irrational.

[deleted]

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#236

Post by jlokier »

jlokier wrote: post #100
tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My wife is, after 3 weeks, still really ill. Probably because she's working full time In my opinion it’s high time to call in sick. She is neither helping herself nor her coworkers by going to work.

If that's an option. I lot of people cannot call in sick. Being sick means being unpaid, and many people cannot afford to go unpaid.

I was surprised to find this downvoted, as it's a harsh fact of life for many people, but not the majority of people. I should have said "For some people, being sick means...". The gist of the argument still applies: It is incorrect to assume everyone can afford to take a month off work when they are sick.

I'm in a European juristiction - the UK. We have reasonable labour protections here. But they don't protect everyone.

If you are self-employed, then taking time off means going unpaid. It's that simple. Zero income. I have been in that position. Took a month off due to flu once (not the current flu). Lost 1 month income.

There is a government system called "Statutory Sick Pay" (SSP), but it is not paid to the self-employed, and if it did it would only start after a few weeks.

If you are a "casual" worker, then taking time off also means going unpaid because you don't have a contract of employment or regular hours to refer to. Sucks to be you, but it's harsh reality for many.

For salaried workers, the employer pays salary for a while. But it's time limited, depending on the employer. Some are more generous than others. The less generous will switch over to Statuory Sick Pay, which is not much money. It is rarely enough to cover rent or mortgage, for example, let alone food and bills.

A lot of people are self-employed, casual workers, or have household bills exceeding SSP. Taking a few weeks off due to sickness has a serious financial impact for those people, unfortunately, and it is wrong to assume everyone can afford to do so.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#237

Post by hurricanetc »

WA wrote: post #183
hurricanetc wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could have stopped it completely with total travel bans but the WHO advised against it because it could be damaging to the world economy. Why is the WHO concerned about the economy? Well I have no idea. And is this virus going pandemic going to be more or less economically painful than the travel bans might have been? My guess would be we will feel significantly more pain from a pandemic.

> "Why is the WHO concerned about the economy?" Don't you see that this is always a tradeoff? If the economy tanks, people lose their jobs, which could result in a lot more social unrest than if a virus spreads around the world. I think it's tough to contain a virus like that with such a long incubation time. But the early efforts might have slowed the virus down somewhat at first, giving us more time to develop vacc…

I find that argument fundamentally flawed. Travel bans are momentarily painful and the unrest is localized. The world economy would feel the pain but most nations would be spared.

Compare that to what might happen when this virus hits NYC. There will be a run on cash and groceries. People will stop commuting. Schools will close. Restaurants and shops will be empty. Now consider the same thing happening in Seoul, Berlin, London, San Francisco, etc. The economic impacts from this could be catastrophic.

And the most ironic thing is that if this truly does get out of hand we will get travel bans. Nations will close their borders. People will willingly (and forcefully) stop traveling via boat or air. We'll circle back to needing travel bans and the only price we'll have paid is millions of lives and a global economic catastrophe. All so that we could avoid some minor short term economic pain.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#238

Post by celdon25 »

pbourke wrote: post #225
celdon25 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before implying that Canada has the final answer to health care, note the other side of the tradeoff from a recent report published Dec 2019: "Fraser Institute has—for over two decades—surveyed specialist physicians across 12 specialties and 10 provinces. This edition of Waiting Your Turn indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have increased since last year. Specialist physicians sur…

1. the Fraser institute is a right-wing think tank. They very much have an axe to grind here. 2. "medically necessary" does not tell you anything about the severity of illness or appropriateness of waiting. There are many medically necessary things for which it's okay to wait some time. In the Canadian system, things are dealt with at the level of urgency appropriate to the severity of the issue. Yes, it's not perfec…

> the Fraser institute is a right-wing think tank.

That's very much an ad hominem fallacy, and unless you have specific evidence that they falsified the data in question, I'm just going to leave it at that (similarly to how you conclude that 'right wing' is enough of a reason to dismiss something). Last I checked, science doesn't care who you voted for. Once we start dismissing research based on the opinions of the researchers, we've essentially implemented thought crime. All research is motivated by prior opinion. We call it a hypothesis. Whether it happens to align with a political ideology doesn't invalidate it. If the research is somehow wrong, then there will be a way to disprove it through science. Using politics to argue against science isn't appropriate.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#239

Post by jacquesm »

celdon25 wrote: post #223
jacquesm wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't spread misinformation. This single comment is doing more damage than 10 comments based on facts.

> more damage than 10 comments based on facts This is implying that fact-based comments do damage. Reminds me of Biden's "truth over facts" gaffe.

'can correct' was sort of implied there. But kudos for the correction I see that it is ambiguous as written.

Re: Iran lawmaker says 50 dead from coronavirus in city of Qom

#240

Post by jacquesm »

usrusr wrote: post #229
jacquesm wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand diseases don’t reach 100% of the population on the same day. That's absolutely true, even in Wuhan the %age of infected people on the total population is relatively small, but much larger than the # of ICU beds that existed. And the virus had a long time to spread around there before any countermeasures were taken. Even so, ventilators and ICU beds are not normally all available either. > Quaranti…

> It would have been a lot more effective if they had done it sooner. China startet radical measures after a rather low number of mystery lung issues. I really doubt that any other government would have taken decisive action much earlier. What would you expect, martial law whenever a doctor isn't quite sure about a diagnosis? The initial silencing of the first public reports is very unfortunate and puts the governmen…

> China startet radical measures after a rather low number of mystery lung issues.

After SARS a month of inaction is too long.

Post reply on HN