Huge losses of life expected if Alaskans don’t stay home and away from others
youralaskalink.com/news/huge-losses-of-life-e...
youralaskalink.comPosted Mar 21, 2020, 8:28 PM UTC
6864
youralaskalink.com[deleted]
8
[deleted]
5
[deleted]
2
[deleted]
5
Tell command to limit people at the fucking visitors center at Jber. While I was there I saw an entire family fly in from New York with a layover in Portland. Unreal. That should of been stopped weeks ago.
4
Unfortunately, you can tell people to self-quarantine, but what about the poor people who might live with them? I know a case where a couple just got back and are self-quarantining, but they have their daughter and her three kids living with them. And they were in both Florida and Louisiana.
4
At the moment I think it would be sufficient to shut down pretty much every destination outside people’s homes. People could still go for walks and things, but the destination is always back to the house because no restaurants, coffee shops, stores are open besides grocery stores.
Lots of people have roommates or family living in their homes. I don’t see what the problem is. If you are in a house with someone who is sick, you are more than likely going to have to lock down too, that common sense has not changed. And it’s because of this that we probably need to all just lock down at the same time. Some people may be able to isolate by themselves because they live alone, but others will have to isolate as a family or household.
But at this point, the result is not really a hypothetical matter. There have been countries and regions that have been hit hard by the virus that have recovered we can point to and a mass lockdown with people leaving their homes only for necessities for a matter of weeks has worked.
3
Does anyone have a separate source?
EDIT: https://covidactnow.org/state/AK is a direct link. Also, this study is endorsed by our Lieutenant Governor.
3
And Valerie Davidson, former head of DHSS.
1
I feel like this is a little disingenuous . It's "scaled" to each state individually but seemingly without consideration of population density or preventive measures already taken. The red line worst case scenario isn't even viable anymore, at least not on the time scale they have listed here.
3
[deleted]
1
Is it federal housing? If so, I thought Trump put a temporary pause to evictions of federal housing.
1
[deleted]
1
That sucks! What are your options rn? You’re military I’m guessing so I can’t imagine they would kick you out without anywhere to stay right?
1
[deleted]
1
Crazy times right now.
1
[deleted]
-1†
[deleted]
-3
[deleted]
-5
Those vessels are completely inadequate for that purpose. They could not hold many patients and it would cost far too much money to retrofit them and clean them. Better to create temporary facilities from the ground up like they are doing in Washington state. This would be far more efficient and less expensive.
11
[deleted]
-5
The infrastructure is sitting there. I don't believe they would be inadequate for the purpose of housing in patients that are not in critical care.
That's the problem, it's ICU beds that are specifically going to be overwhelmed, which is why the death toll predicted is so high. Pneumonia inflicted by COVID-19 is going to overwhelm our existing facilities, and we cannot easily bolster that section of our hospitals in the short-term.
2
[deleted]
1
[deleted]
0
Better to just use any of the hotels in town. We have plenty of bed space.
7
[deleted]
-3
[deleted]
-12
[deleted]
5
[deleted]
-2
[deleted]
2
[deleted]
-1
You’re pretty stupid to not be understanding that if it’s not slowed, our hospitals will be overwhelmed and people will be dying in droves, just like Italy. I pray you arent obese, don’t have high blood pressure, don’t have heart disease or diabetes, or anyone you care about that does. Because I guarantee, you are going to lose some loved ones to this. It’s not a goddam flu. It’s a pneumonia. A pandemic pneumonia. Helluva lot worse than the flu.
2
Lol, I had someone say that about Italy a week ago when they were at 600 deaths.
2
[deleted]
0
No, it absolutely can. Italy's demographics aren't that different from the US, which instead of elderly has more obese. The US is likely to see similar numbers, so right now you're looking at about 25k dead in the US within the next month. And since obesity is a factor, you'll see younger people dying from it in the US. Last I checked, about 1/3rd of those in Italy weren't elderly either.
It's going to twist up the world economy regardless. Young people still get sick and they still need to go into ICUs. That will eventually overwhelm them. Once it does, the death rate will go up and hospitals won't be able to function normally, at which point your economy would be devastated anyway as sectors shut down with workers out sick for up to two weeks, and potentially unable to get the treatment they need. The point is to avoid the deaths, if we're going to suffer the economic hardships anyway.
Oh, but you'll probably get treatment. They'll just have to leave someone old and frail to die because you were too worried about the world economy.
7
Plus:
More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease.
The US is fucked.
And 2nd: Out of 2003 patients. That number has gone way up. Way too early to draw conclusions.
3
[deleted]
2
Or tell people who are coming back to actually stay home or use alternative ways to get food and groceries. Cause its those assholes who are spreading it up here.
They issued a health alert yesterday and said that.
Yeah as if anyone is actually going to listen lol
[deleted]
How do they enforce it? Put a tracking collar on them or something? Make them wear a biohazard bracelet? Honestly asking.
What is to stop me from leaving the airport after telling them I’ll “stay quarantined” And then going to Walmart an hour later? Who’s gonna know I left my house and who at Walmart is gonna know that I am supposed to be quarantined?
[deleted]
Yes, but every traveler who doesn't contribute means less infected people now. Meaning less doubling.
[deleted]
I mean if a new traveler gets to Ketchikan, they still need to quarantine. They can still spread it. That just adds to the numbers.
And? No one is debating this. The point is that limiting contact between people and following CDC recommendations will reduce the severity of the impending crisis.
[deleted]
why
“Tell” people? We need better controls than that, like mandatory closing of local destinations that can turn into hubs for infection.
The lockdown order in Anchorage is too weak. It is more of an advisory and it lists just about everything as an essential service.
If we shut down almost completely for a month or so we have a much better chance of eradicating it from Alaska, and from there we can control travel in. This is an advantage we have, but only if we can contain the cases already here
Yeah bring out the SS to patrol our neighborhoods to keep us safe please. 0/
What exactly is the libertarian solution to this then if you’re going to be so cynical?
I think the libertarian solution would be similar to the anti-vax movement.
“It’s my choice to put others at risk!”
There is no official "libertarian solution" to anything. Libertarians would simply say that nobody should be able to force anyone at gunpoint to do what they say.
If Anchorage was a libertarian community, we'd still have health care professionals, scientists and leaders who would be calling for certain actions. They just wouldn't be allowed to lock someone in a cell for not obeying.
Libertarian solution would be to have people voluntarily stay inside. Not that I’m a libertarian.
Hey dumbass, die on your own time. Don't bring other people with you because you're a stubborn shithead who doesn't know the difference between quarantine and Nazis.
[deleted]
I want to know what your intentions are clearly. Is your proposal to arrest anyone that’s outside their homes?