381–390 of 568 posts
This is like picking up an astronomy journal that has ads in the back for psychics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On a per capita basis sweden isn't really more worse off than many other countries that have shutdown. This is so untrue. Norway and Denmark had initially many more cases then Sweden but since their curves flattened. As of yesterday Norway - 26 deaths / milion Sweden - 102 deaths / million Denmark - 52 deaths / milion
U.K. 166 deaths per million with a full lockdown in place
Why has no one developed a news subscription service yet? I want to be able to pay 50¢ here or $1 there for an interesting article from NYT, WSJ, WaPo, Bloomberg, The Guardian, The New Yorker etc., without paying for a subscription. I can't afford to subscribe to all of them. There are not enough hours in the day for getting a return on my investment. New York Times $50/yr Wall Street Journal $100 Bloomberg $420 LA T…
Why has no one developed a news subscription service yet? I want to be able to pay 50¢ here or $1 there for an interesting article from NYT, WSJ, WaPo, Bloomberg, The Guardian, The New Yorker etc., without paying for a subscription. I can't afford to subscribe to all of them. There are not enough hours in the day for getting a return on my investment. New York Times $50/yr Wall Street Journal $100 Bloomberg $420 LA T…
The issue is you're looking at the value from journalism wrong. If you were to actually pay the cost of producing 1 article, it would be significantly more than you would be willing to pay to read it. What you are paying for when you pay for journalism is not the value you perceive from reading the individual articles, but of supporting the entire organization's on-going production of journalism. You are a patron mor…
To be quite frank, I'd rather just have an associated press subscription that includes access to all newspapers who are part of the associated press.
Is there a good news site worth paying for today that actually has ALL news. It infuriates me that when I go to CNN.com's "news" site, there are ads at the bottom with things like "Before you review Amazon Prime, read this" and "America's #1 Stock Picker: 'Must buy now'" How can anyone be okay with this? This is like picking up an astronomy journal that has ads in the back for psychics.
Would gladly pay a reasonable amount of money for a news site.
Why has no one developed a news subscription service yet? I want to be able to pay 50¢ here or $1 there for an interesting article from NYT, WSJ, WaPo, Bloomberg, The Guardian, The New Yorker etc., without paying for a subscription. I can't afford to subscribe to all of them. There are not enough hours in the day for getting a return on my investment. New York Times $50/yr Wall Street Journal $100 Bloomberg $420 LA T…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> other countries haven't locked down hard and aren't seeing a big spread Let’s be precise. Some other countries haven’t locked down hard and aren’t seeing a big spread yet . You mentioned Sweden. Here was Time a few days ago: > A head doctor at a major hospital in Sweden says the current approach will “probably end in a historical massacre.” He says healthcare workers at his hospital who have tested positive for the…
Stockholm (the worst hit part of Sweden) has about half the deaths per capita of the state New York (26 deaths per 100k vs 56 deaths per 100k) despite Sweden having laxer restrictions. And Stockholm is generally more densely populated. So while I too am a bit skeptical of the Swedish policies it is doing pretty average on a global scale. Worse than some countries with harsh lockdown but also better than some countrie…
So far. It's way too early into this unfolding disaster to be making pronouncements like this while the figures are still increasing exponentially. NYC has had shelter-in-place for several weeks now while Stockholm has not. If you'd done this analysis a week ago, and then two weeks ago, you'd see Stockholm looking progressively better and better in comparison to NYC the more you go back in time. In other words, they're catching up, because here in NY we're sheltering in place and it's working, and in Sweden they aren't (yet) and thus their spread is higher.
> And Stockholm is generally more densely populated.
Not in comparison to NYC it's not, which is the fair comparison for Stockholm because Stockholm is a city whereas all of New York is a much much larger state that amounts to 1/3rd of the land area of the entirety of Sweden. NYC's density is 10,715/km2 vs Stockholm's 4,200/km2.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My fear is that 2-3 months of lockdown isn't a cure, it turns into on-and-off lockdown, herd immunity is never established because immunity wears off in 2 years, and a vaccine is 2-5 years out. I wonder if any models take into account the availability of drugs. I wonder because (perhaps because I studied pharmacology back in the days) while not effective as a vaccine, proper clinical management of this disease with…
Are there specific drugs you think would be helpful in treating COVID?
Currently, there are a number being tested by WHO and other trials, I list the ones that come to mind:
- remedisivir (repurposed anti-Ebola drug): several trials to end by May-June
- lopinavir/ritonavir (anti-HIV drugs): those delivered bad results in a recent study, but those so far were (a limitation noted by the study authors) on patients with rather severe sympthoms, so it's still undecided whether they're effective or not
- Chloroquine family (chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin): some preliminary studies may have shown interesting effects, but there were small sample sizes (also in another study which apparently was not very successful). U of Minnesota started a largish (3000 people) trial to see if it's prophylactic for immediate post-exposure to the virus. Another one started a couple of days ago to test the combination with the antibiotic (whose reported purpose is to fight off secondary infections)
There are others with less spotlight such as favipiravir, which provided a (modest) improvement in a small trial in China, and it's now part of a Phase 3 trial in Japan, or whole classes of drugs to combat the secondary but clinically important sympthoms like overinflammation (which occurs in some patients) like tocilizumab.
A lot of eyes are pointed on the chloroquines because they are already available (although they do present significant side-effects).
Neither of these drugs (or many others, see for example https://biocentury.com/coronavirus for some lists) will likely provide miracles. What the trials will do (hopefully!) is to help understanding how early they must be taken, and how effective they are in clinical management. An advantage, however, is that they will be available faster than a vaccine (modulo some non trivial issues like mass production).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm surprised. I'd think online news would be one of the industries benefitting from this crisis. Is the revenue tied to lack of conversions on online ads?
maybe the advertisers are hurting and pulling their money? idk probably not but just a guess