Why did God create Coronavirus (COVID-19)?

[Donray]

If you belive God create it, then God at least does nothing to stop it. Is God killing many humans again to be spiteful? To teach us a lesson? Just because he can?

OR

IS God testing us to make sure we still have faith as he kills your parents, spouse or kids?

[1213]

.... I think this whole pandemic is fake and the virus is no more dangerous than common influenza, it has just been shown in a way that would scare people and make it easier for governments to be more fascistic.

And you base these beliefs on what? Faith?
This new virus is much more easily transmitted.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/ ... vs-the-flu

If it is really more easily transmitted, most people already have or have had it and all the limitations and fascistic moves governments are making are unnecessary and evil. And I actually believe most people have it already, now governments are just using it as an excuse to make evil rules.

[1213]

…
The pandemic is not fake but rather the reactions to it are overblown. Covid-19 is certainly more contagious than the flu, but not deadlier. The flu is deadly to a greater age range than covid-19. Covid-19 is more deadly to the older population….

I agree with that. And for older people it looks bad, because this year normal influenza has not killed as many as in previous years.

[AgnosticBoy]

[center]Younger Adults Make Up Big Portion of Coronavirus Hospitalizations in U.S.[/center]
New C.D.C. data shows that nearly 40 percent of patients sick enough to be hospitalized were age 20 to 54.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/heal ... eople.html

The stats in your article are based on a CDC article that found that only 20 to 30% of all covid-19 cases required hospitalization. So that 40% stat you keep throwing around is only a stat within the minority of the cases. But if you look at all of the cases overall, instead of just focusing on a subset of the MINORITY of the cases, then you'd notice that 80% of the cases do not require hospitalization.

It's funny how your article included the age range 45 to 54. I don't consider that a young population but I guess they needed to include that to help them reach their "40%" . It seems that they failed to say anything about the 0-19 age range since the hospitalizations in that group was tiny. It doesn't fit their narrative!

And it's worth mentioning that it's possible for the rate of hospitalizations to go down as more covid-19 cases increase. The CDC article being used reported on data that was from early on in the pandemic, where most of the known people with covid-19 were in hospitals. But as testing become more available outside of the hospital, we'll find that many more people have covid-19 than what's known about now, and that many of them aren't in hospitals. That explains why a covid-19 hot spot like New York has only 21% of their cases requiring hospitalization (source - click on stats for hospitalizations). This means the OVERWHELMING number (80%) of their cases do NOT require hospitalizations.

[AgnosticBoy]

Under my plan, there would be little to no spreading to the high risk crowd since they would be the target of stay-at-home orders. Instead the low risk crowd would spread the virus to others in the low risk population and this would not be dangerous. Many would develop immunity.

I would additionally think volunteered controlled infection would be helpful.

Take the young who are not sick, infect them, and keep them away from others until they get better or die.

Even if the young are at some risk, the goal is to save the high-risk population, correct? This would do that.

The current shutdown is not stopping the virus from spreading. In places like New York, it's just out there, and nobody can do a thing about it.

Controlled infection could still save the high-risk population in many places. It's not too late.

I would even go a little further but for the most part we agree. It's only a pipe dream to think that there would never be any death. Just because there's one death then we have to shut down our lives and stay behind closed doors?! You see this is what watching too much CNN does to people! It makes many anxious and it shows in their thinking.

[AgnosticBoy]

The current shutdown is not stopping the virus from spreading. In places like New York, it's just out there, and nobody can do a thing about it.

That is simply not true. The main thing we can do is stay 2 meters apart, stay home, wash hands regularly.

If we did this scrupulously the virus would die out. It would either run its course or kill its host. In a month, it's gone, with no one left who can spread it. We adopt some half way measure designed by a non expert, it goes on indefinitely.

Which expert said that the virus could "die out" in a month's time? Has this happened in any of the countries impacted by covid-19? It seems some experts are saying this can last for even into next year. Here is some information on just that:

A top federal health official said Monday that the evolving coronavirus outbreak could persist in the United States into next year, while stressing that public health interventions could still reduce the spread of the virus and cases of illness and death.
…
Messonnier’s suggestion that the virus could last into next year fits with the predictions of some experts that the virus will circulate for a long time, given how difficult contagious respiratory illnesses are to halt. Some experts have said they see the virus becoming endemic, that is, spreading permanently in the human population like some viruses that cause colds and the flu.

Source: https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/09/cor ... cial-says/

Sounds like the experts are all over the place or simply don't know. So lets apply your standard Danmark. Do we stay shut down into next year so that way not one person more dies from this virus???
………………

I can understand how CDC guidelines would "slow" the spread, but without any treatments or vaccines in place, there is no guarantee that this virus would completely die off, especially in a months time. It may end up being like the flu.

Why not have a plan in place that would eventually end the pandemic while also restoring the economy? That's what the UK and Germany are planning to do with those who are immune to the virus. It seems quite unreasonable that you would prefer a plan that would "slow" the virus while damaging the economy over a plan that would stop the virus while helping the economy at the same time.

[Danmark]

Which expert said that the virus could "die out" in a month's time?

You should be able to tell from context that "a month" was just an approximation, but it was a good one.

Using available preliminary data, the median time from onset to clinical recovery for mild cases is approximately 2 weeks and is 3-6 weeks for patients with severe or critical disease. Preliminary data suggests that the time period from onset to the development of severe disease, including hypoxia, is 1 week. Among patients who have died, the time from symptom onset to outcome ranges from2-8 weeks.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... report.pdf

The virus either kills its host and then dies because it cannot live long outside a host (although how long depends on its environment); or the host recovers and is no longer contagious and likely to be immune.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/faq.html

Therefore IF social distancing and the other protocols are followed rigorously, the pandemic is resolved without drugs or vaccine. This is a big if, particularly considering the current horrible, misleading, and contradictory 'leadership' coming out of the WH.

Obviously the development of a vaccine and drugs that will kill the virus without killing the patient would help immensely. But for now, all we as individuals can do is stay home and follow the other protocols recommended by medical professionals, not politicians and debaters of religion.

[AgnosticBoy]

Which expert said that the virus could "die out" in a month's time?

You should be able to tell from context that "a month" was just an approximation, but it was a good one.

Using available preliminary data, the median time from onset to clinical recovery for mild cases is approximately 2 weeks and is 3-6 weeks for patients with severe or critical disease. Preliminary data suggests that the time period from onset to the development of severe disease, including hypoxia, is 1 week. Among patients who have died, the time from symptom onset to outcome ranges from2-8 weeks.

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... report.pdf

The virus either kills its host and then dies because it cannot live long outside a host (although how long depends on its environment); or the host recovers and is no longer contagious and likely to be immune.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/faq.html

Therefore IF social distancing and the other protocols are followed rigorously, the pandemic is resolved without drugs or vaccine. This is a big if, particularly considering the current horrible, misleading, and contradictory 'leadership' coming out of the WH.

Obviously the development of a vaccine and drugs that will kill the virus without killing the patient would help immensely. But for now, all we as individuals can do is stay home and follow the other protocols recommended by medical professionals, not politicians and debaters of religion.

You did not provide what I was looking for. I was not talking about the time the virus last in the individual but rather I was talking about the amount of time that the virus will be circulating throughout an entire population. The coronavirus wasn't just discovered in 2020; it has been circulating in humans for centuries. I posted a source that talked about this possibly lasting into the next year and you ignored it.

I can get over the flu in two weeks but that doesn't mean that the flu is not going to be impacting the rest of the population or that it will only do so for 2 weeks at a time.

[Purple Knight]

Therefore IF social distancing and the other protocols are followed rigorously, the pandemic is resolved without drugs or vaccine. This is a big if, particularly considering the current horrible, misleading, and contradictory 'leadership' coming out of the WH.

I still see this as a form of victim blaming.

If social distancing and other protocols are followed rigorously, the pandemic is resolved. Each of these measures is 100% effective at that point of contact.

Therefore everyone who got and transmitted the virus must not have followed these protocols.

Simple, normal soap & water is not only 100% effective, it is actually better than more caustic measures.
"Viruses can be active outside the body for hours, even days. Disinfectants, liquids, wipes, gels and creams containing alcohol are all useful at getting rid of them – but they are not quite as good as normal soap."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... infectants

If you read the rest of the article, you'll know why.

The two meter distance is just a recommendation from experts. There is no magic distance. Which is why I said the further the better. All of this suggests all the more than staying home is the smartest play.

I don't see why, if social distancing and hand-washing are each 100% effective at the point of contact.

Social distancing is 100% effective and preventing you from acquiring the airborne virus, right? And hand-washing is 100% effective at preventing you from acquiring it from touch? How else could you get it?

Nowhere in the article does it say that soap is 100% effective. It just says soap is just as good for breaking up viruses as harsher chemicals.

So why does soap work so well on the Sars-CoV-2, the coronavirus and indeed most viruses? The short story: because the virus is a self-assembled nanoparticle in which the weakest link is the lipid (fatty) bilayer. Soap dissolves the fat membrane and the virus falls apart like a house of cards and dies – or rather, we should say it becomes inactive as viruses aren’t really alive.

The slightly longer story is that most viruses consist of three key building blocks: ribonucleic acid (RNA), proteins and lipids. A virus-infected cell makes lots of these building blocks, which then spontaneously self-assemble to form the virus. Critically, there are no strong covalent bonds holding these units together, which means you do not necessarily need harsh chemicals to split those units apart. When an infected cell dies, all these new viruses escape and go on to infect other cells. Some end up also in the airways of lungs.

You can’t, for any price, get a drug for the coronavirus – but your grandmother’s bar of soap kills it
When you cough, or especially when you sneeze, tiny droplets from the airways can fly up to 10 metres.

And again, the harsher chemicals don't even claim 100% effectiveness. Nowhere in your article does it claim that soap is 100% effective. I don't care how long you wash your hands, you can't guarantee me that enough emulsifying molecules have touched every last virus to dissolve the lipid layer.

I happen to be married to a total germ freak. She never touches her face, makes sure everything she touches is sanitary, never stops wiping down everything with sanitizing wipes, washes her hands constantly, and she gets the flu every year and often gives it to me.

I've been imitating her in this crisis, because Reason forbid if I give it to someone who's high-risk and I could have avoided it, that equals murder.

But it's madness to just keep watching it spread and blame everyone in sight, when the truth is that with a highly contagious, airborne disease, you need real quarantines.

It's nigh-Christian, actually. Oh, you got the virus, did you? You must have sinned [read: not followed the protocols].

[Danmark]

Therefore IF social distancing and the other protocols are followed rigorously, the pandemic is resolved without drugs or vaccine. This is a big if, particularly considering the current horrible, misleading, and contradictory 'leadership' coming out of the WH.

I still see this as a form of victim blaming.

See it as you like, but the people partying on the beach, defying ALL the protocols, ARE more likely to get COVID-19 directly because of their behavior, ignoring medical advice.

Social distancing and hand washing are 100% effective whether you think so or not. Failure to practice these rigorously is the problem.
Medical personal and others providing essential services by necessity must compromise. They obviously cannot keep isolated. You'll notice I never once said the masks and other protective personal equipment works perfectly.

We are still learning about this unique virus. There are conditions where an infected person may be farther away then 10 feet, as much as 30 feet and the airborne virus, riding a particle of water and mucus can travel and remain viable. All we can do is reduce the risk.

But staying home and isolated from the virus and its carriers is 100% effective IF YOU DO IT. The virus does not travel 100 feet in the air, then go thru walls and enter your lungs. But I am done correcting your misunderstandings and false restatements.

[Purple Knight]

See it as you like, but the people partying on the beach, defying ALL the protocols, ARE more likely to get COVID-19 directly because of their behavior, ignoring medical advice.

Yes, they are more likely to get the disease. (Emphasis mine.)

Yes, those beach bums have an obligation not to go and do that, precisely because Mr HIV+ or Ms. 104-year-old Granny don't have the possibility to protect themselves 100%.

If HIV and Granny's hand-washing and social distancing were 100% effective, the solution is for them to do that and leave the rest of us alone.

It is because those beach bums can still give those hapless people the disease even if HIV and Granny do everything right that everyone has an obligation to decrease everyone else's risk as much as possible.

And you have the gall to blame the white house. Are you saying you wouldn't blame the white house if Trump, what, put all those beach bums in jail?

It's particularly easy when your president is basically Hitler to point at him, blame him, and be lauded for it, but you're still playing (and admittedly, winning) the blame game instead of looking at reality.

Reality is sadly that because he actually is evil, the president's hands are tied by people like you who would jump on him like a pack of velociraptors and tear him to shreds if he did anything remotely authoritarian, even if that's absolutely what needs to be done.

Reality is that we have a deadly disease that continues to spread like wildfire, and you're basically telling people that if they just brushed their teeth, they would never get a cavity. Got a cavity? You must not have brushed your teeth, then.

Social distancing and hand washing are 100% effective whether you think so or not. Failure to practice these rigorously is the problem.

You simply state this, you provide no evidence for it.

Your article says the virus can travel 10 meters in a droplet.

How do you reconcile this with 2 meters being 100% effective against the airborne contagion?