Author Topic: Coronavirus preparedness  (Read 75149 times)

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #200 on: February 26, 2020, 01:38:30 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

This is ridiculous. They walk into an emergency room at a public hospital and will receive care regardless fo whether or not they have health insurance. People need to stop spreading this lie.

Sure. People who suspect they *might* be sick, but who don't have insurance, are gonna immediately go to the emergency room, wait 6 hours to be tested to make sure they are quarantined if necessary before they get *too* sick -- because they're gonna be completely confident they'll never have to pay a resulting exorbitant emergency bill that will dog them for years.

THOSE PEOPLE ALREADY DO THIS!!! Holy guacamole

Yeah. All of them.

Before theyíre super duper sick.

They all go to the emergency room just as a precaution.

And of course, the emergency rooms will have the capacity to handle them all during this, too.

ONCE AGAIN WHAT DOES NOT HAVING UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS? They are going to the emergency room no matter what. With or without health insurance......how are you not grasping this? Hell I would venture that the people without are more likely to go to the ER than people with FFS.

Kris doesnít seem to lack reading comprehension.

I will echo BlueHouseís question: who exactly are ďTHOSE PEOPLEĒ?

People without insurance? Is it that hard to understand? Are you trying to box me in on some discrimination or bigot BS? I used to be one of THOSE PEOPLE when I was younger. Whats the God damn problem?

It really isn't hard to understand. Yet, you seem to have ignored most of the previous responses to your post and seem to be escalating in hostility.

I posted earlier that both private hospital ERs and the contract companies that staff them can and do sue uninsured patients for lack of payment. Others have posted that the current laws do not obligate ERs to provide anything beyond basic stabilizing care to people without the means to pay. Still others have noted that in the absence of laws ensuring a basic universal level of healthcare (beyond extremely basic stabilizing care) and worker protections such as sick days, we are likely to have a large population of underinsured people in the US who will continue to work while sick until they are forced to stop, thus spreading the virus further. (In fact, this already happens with influenza and other transmissible illnesses.)

From a personal perspective, my husband is paid hourly and our insurance via his employer is contingent on his continued status as a full-time employee. If his 4-week hourly average drops below the set limit for full-time status, we will lose our insurance. If his employer is forced to close, we will be uninsured until we can get a healthcare marketplace plan set up. Worst-case scenario: if we're both sick, what is the likelihood that we will have the mental capacity to do so?

Sick people in other developed countries don't have to worry about this. THAT's the point that many of us are making.

Thats not the point that kris was making...but you do you. Keep straw manning.

It was indeed.

Sorry, you are incorrect.

cowpuncher10

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #201 on: February 26, 2020, 01:39:23 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #202 on: February 26, 2020, 01:43:38 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Cowpuncher: OtherJen and FrugalToque seemed to have no problem understanding my point. (SimpleCycle, too, for that matter.)

The fact that you misunderstood, or only partially understood, does not change the fact of what my point was.

cowpuncher10

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #203 on: February 26, 2020, 01:44:44 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Cowpuncher: OtherJen and FrugalToque seemed to have no problem understanding my point.

The fact that you misunderstood, or only partially understood, does not change the fact of what my point was.

Are you incapable of reading your original post? Like seriously? Can you not read your original post? Are you ok?

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4426
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #204 on: February 26, 2020, 01:45:23 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Cowpuncher: OtherJen and FrugalToque seemed to have no problem understanding my point.

The fact that you misunderstood, or only partially understood, does not change the fact of what my point was.

One really cannot argue further with what appears to be a deliberate misunderstanding.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #205 on: February 26, 2020, 01:46:00 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Cowpuncher: OtherJen and FrugalToque seemed to have no problem understanding my point.

The fact that you misunderstood, or only partially understood, does not change the fact of what my point was.

One really cannot argue further with what appears to be a deliberate misunderstanding.

Truth.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4426
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #206 on: February 26, 2020, 01:46:16 PM »
Nah Kris. Your original statement was people were not seeking healthcare because they don't have health insurance. That is a lie. Period. That was my point. Anyone making any other point is straw manning. Period.

Cowpuncher: OtherJen and FrugalToque seemed to have no problem understanding my point.

The fact that you misunderstood, or only partially understood, does not change the fact of what my point was.

Are you incapable of reading your original post? Like seriously? Can you not read your original post? Are you ok?

The rest of us read and understood her post. Insults aren't helping your case.

cowpuncher10

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #207 on: February 26, 2020, 01:47:37 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #208 on: February 26, 2020, 01:48:29 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Okay, at this point, I'm just starting to feel sorry for you.

cowpuncher10

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #209 on: February 26, 2020, 01:49:01 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Okay, at this point, I'm just starting to feel sorry for you.

I'm getting trolled here. Enjoy your straw mans and echo chamber.

SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #210 on: February 26, 2020, 01:49:09 PM »
People who are sick, WITHOUT INSURANCE, go to the ER every freaking day. EVERY. DAY. They don't wait until it is critical. They go when they get the damn sniffles.

People WITH INSURANCE are LESS LIKELY to go because of costs.

People WITHOUT INSURANCE are LESS LIKELY to care about cost because they are already WITHOUT INSURANCE.

I hate to bring data to a screaming incoherently fight, but that's actually not true.  In 2017, 17.1% of people 18-64 who were insured for 12 months went to the ER at least once.  16.5% of people who were continuously uninsured for 12 months or more went to the ER at least once.  Once you adjust for socioeconomic status, the persistently uninsured are less likely to use the ER than the persistently insured.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus/contents2018.htm?search=Emergency_department_visits,
Table 036

SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #211 on: February 26, 2020, 01:50:43 PM »
This thread is weird lol.

brandon1827

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #212 on: February 26, 2020, 01:50:51 PM »
Do you have any data @cowpuncher10 or are these anecdotal instances and/or personal interactions where you can be certain the uninsured are automatically seeking care? I'm curious why you're so adamant that this is the case

Capsu78

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 737
  • Location: Chicagoland
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #213 on: February 26, 2020, 02:06:30 PM »
Trying to pull back to OP's discussion.
Having had some communication with someone self "holed up" in Shanghai for the past 3 weeks, I have decide to double down on most of the consumables we usually keep in stock.  We usually have more than a months worth of paper products etc, so I'm going to make a second cache in my basement until hopefully the threat levels start to taper off.  It's mostly the stuff we usually rotate anyway, so it will get used.
Filled the wine rack, check!  Bought a second big bottle of Grey Goose for my wife's martini, check! Filled my pasta cabinet, added pouches and cans of protein (tuna, chicken) enough for 2-4 weeks if we wanted to "shelter in place".  Assuming most utilities would be available so this is not a zombie preparedness plan but rather a better pantry plan.

Contact in Shanghai says he and his young wife are battling with boredom... I'm looking around my house for tasks I could handle if we were stuck in the house.  Wife has a month of puzzles. 

Geographer

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 236
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Italy
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #214 on: February 26, 2020, 02:07:31 PM »
I'm an American living in Northern Italy and I'm not worried. The media (as always) likes to make things sound more horrific than they really are. I don't mean to downplay the seriousness of this and I'll definitely be taking precautions -- but there's deadlier things out there to be worried about IMHO.

Papa bear

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #215 on: February 26, 2020, 02:25:33 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

This is ridiculous. They walk into an emergency room at a public hospital and will receive care regardless fo whether or not they have health insurance. People need to stop spreading this lie.

Sure. People who suspect they *might* be sick, but who don't have insurance, are gonna immediately go to the emergency room, wait 6 hours to be tested to make sure they are quarantined if necessary before they get *too* sick -- because they're gonna be completely confident they'll never have to pay a resulting exorbitant emergency bill that will dog them for years.

THOSE PEOPLE ALREADY DO THIS!!! Holy guacamole

Yeah. All of them.

Before theyíre super duper sick.

They all go to the emergency room just as a precaution.

And of course, the emergency rooms will have the capacity to handle them all during this, too.

ONCE AGAIN WHAT DOES NOT HAVING UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS? They are going to the emergency room no matter what. With or without health insurance......how are you not grasping this? Hell I would venture that the people without are more likely to go to the ER than people with FFS.

I'm not sure what the communication issue here is:

People without health insurance don't go to a doctor when they get sick, because they can't afford it.
People are afraid to go to the ER because they will get an even larger bill from the hospital
People will not got to the ER until they are desperately sick.
By the time they go, it's too late for quarantine.

If you had universal healthcare and a good sick day policy, the moment you realize you're getting ill, you'd stop going to work, hit the doctor's office, find out what disease you have an quarantine yourself.

Poverty and lack of universal healthcare will contribute to the spread of disease.

Toque.

People who are sick, WITHOUT INSURANCE, go to the ER every freaking day. EVERY. DAY. They don't wait until it is critical. They go when they get the damn sniffles.

People WITH INSURANCE are LESS LIKELY to go because of costs.

People WITHOUT INSURANCE are LESS LIKELY to care about cost because they are already WITHOUT INSURANCE.
Yeah, so I work with a lot of contractors.  Like hit shit with a hammer contractors. Most are self employed, without insurance.  They donít go to a doctor.  Because they donít have insurance.  Put a nail through your hand? Pull it out, wash it, Hope for the best.  A simple trip for some antibiotics would prevent a lot of problems.  But they wonít show to the ER until they canít physically get back to work. Like half dead.  Hell, It took one guy a damn week to go for a broken ankle. Really fucked him up because he tried to ďwalk it off.Ē 

So, my anecdotal experience is opposite of what you have noticed.  They donít show, because they donít have insurance. And then they get rear ended with a huge ass bill to keep them from dying when they are basically forced to go.  Then I have to cover their asses for buying shit for the job because they canít pay for basic materials.  God damn is it annoying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8877
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #216 on: February 26, 2020, 02:31:41 PM »
For the record, I 100% understood Kris' first post, just like the others here.

Your location and experience may be different, but where I live, sick people without insurance don't go to the doctor.  They don't even go to the urgent care clinic - until they are really really sick.

To be honest, people WITH insurance may WANT to go to the doctor, but the wait times are often 3-4 months to get an appointment, if you already have a doctor, or 6-8 months if you NEED a doctor.

Emergency rooms here, for the most part, are full of people who are acutely injured or very very sick.


Edited to add:
My good friend is a nurse who has predominantly worked with poor people.  When the ACA passed, they were FINALLY seeing poor people with illnesses and long term health issues, in their office - because they were finally insured.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2020, 02:34:22 PM by mm1970 »

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • Location: Canada
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #217 on: February 26, 2020, 02:51:26 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Okay, at this point, I'm just starting to feel sorry for you.

I'm getting trolled here. Enjoy your straw mans and echo chamber.

[MOD NOTE:  Well, I tried.  cowpuncher10 was not trying to communicate.  Banned.]

brandon1827

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 211
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #218 on: February 26, 2020, 02:54:03 PM »
Similar to Papa Bear, I live in an area with lots of manual laborers (construction workers, farm hands, etc.) in addition to many self-employed hvac and electrical contractors who don't carry health insurance because they don't have employees, and what I've personally witnessed is very much like what he described...they just don't go to the ER unless they feel like it's their last resort. Many haven't been in a doctor's office for years; even decades in some cases, short of something they feel is life threatening or that they just physically can't go on anymore. Even then, they'll only go if its something so severe that it prevents them from bringing home a paycheck. I've got family members in these professions (my older brother is an electrician, my younger brother is a roofer) and they just simply aren't going to the ER for anything short of a catastrophic injury

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2860
  • Location: Europe
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #219 on: February 26, 2020, 03:10:17 PM »
@OtherJen I was just scrolling through the last couple of pages and something you wrote stood out to me. You said your husband's health insurance through work was contingent upon him working a minimum amount of hours over a 4-week period, otherwise you would lose insurance.

I'm from Europe so I don't really understand. Does that literally mean that if he gets an illness that results in a long-term absence from work, like cancer or bypass surgery or a stroke, that would result in his insurance being cancelled?

I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.

lutorm

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • Location: A large island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #220 on: February 26, 2020, 03:32:22 PM »
I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.
Welcome to American employer-sponsored healthcare, where health insurance is a benefit that your employer may or may not offer. As of ACA/Obamacare, it is required that "large" companies offer some form of health insurance to their "full-time" employees. It appears that the definition of "large" is at least 50 full-time employees. There is no requirement whatsoever to offer anything to less-than-full-time employees.

Now if they offered only to men, but not women, that would not be legal because gender is a protected class. Likewise you may not discriminate based on race, or a few other protected characteristics. But just like you may offer different salaries to full time vs part time employees, so you may offer them different benefits.

As for canceling insurance because of illness, I'm pretty sure the insurance company can't cancel coverage based on that. But if you can't work, you're not entitled to keep your job. In that situation, I'm also pretty sure you can keep your insurance for a year, but you'll of course have to pay the entire premium yourself, including the part that your employer used to pay.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2020, 03:36:16 PM by lutorm »

Cranky

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2953
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #221 on: February 26, 2020, 03:39:51 PM »
And here I will offer up our Science Fair project from the Year of Anthrax - if you put paper, like mail, in a canning jar and pressure cook it in the canner, it comes out sterile.

Thank you - my tip jar is on the piano. ;-)

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4426
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #222 on: February 26, 2020, 03:40:23 PM »
@OtherJen I was just scrolling through the last couple of pages and something you wrote stood out to me. You said your husband's health insurance through work was contingent upon him working a minimum amount of hours over a 4-week period, otherwise you would lose insurance.

I'm from Europe so I don't really understand. Does that literally mean that if he gets an illness that results in a long-term absence from work, like cancer or bypass surgery or a stroke, that would result in his insurance being cancelled?

I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.

As far as we can tell, even his manager refusing to schedule him for full-time hours for a few weeks in a row would automatically cancel his insurance. So yes, prolonged absence due to illness would cause a loss of insurance for both of us (until we could sign up for an insurance marketplace plan), as well as the loss of his job. Welcome to America.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #223 on: February 26, 2020, 03:45:27 PM »
@OtherJen I was just scrolling through the last couple of pages and something you wrote stood out to me. You said your husband's health insurance through work was contingent upon him working a minimum amount of hours over a 4-week period, otherwise you would lose insurance.

I'm from Europe so I don't really understand. Does that literally mean that if he gets an illness that results in a long-term absence from work, like cancer or bypass surgery or a stroke, that would result in his insurance being cancelled?

I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.

As far as we can tell, even his manager refusing to schedule him for full-time hours for a few weeks in a row would automatically cancel his insurance. So yes, prolonged absence due to illness would cause a loss of insurance for both of us (until we could sign up for an insurance marketplace plan), as well as the loss of his job. Welcome to America.

This is my understanding as well, based on friends and a family member who went through something like this.

SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #224 on: February 26, 2020, 03:50:09 PM »
@OtherJen I was just scrolling through the last couple of pages and something you wrote stood out to me. You said your husband's health insurance through work was contingent upon him working a minimum amount of hours over a 4-week period, otherwise you would lose insurance.

I'm from Europe so I don't really understand. Does that literally mean that if he gets an illness that results in a long-term absence from work, like cancer or bypass surgery or a stroke, that would result in his insurance being cancelled?

I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.

We have some equal protection requirements for employer-sponsored health insurance, but part-time status is not protected.

Technically the Family and Medical Leave Act allows you to keep your job and insurance for 12 weeks, although it is unpaid and you are responsible for the full premiums.  In practice, only about 50% of U.S. employees are eligible for FMLA protections, either because their company is too small or they do not have enough time in service.

After FMLA, if you lose your job because you can't work due to illness, you are eligible for COBRA for varying periods of time (usually 18 months) depending on the circumstances, but you pay the full premiums for your coverage.  Alternately, losing your job is a qualifying event for ACA/Obamacare coverage.

I've run out FMLA due to illness and my employer allowed me to take a leave of absence (so my job was protected) for six months, but my health insurance was terminated during that time.  I was lucky to have a spouse's policy to fall back on.

Being sick, especially chronically ill, is very expensive in the U.S., and fraught with uncertainty about how legal changes will impact future coverage options.

Papa bear

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1709
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #225 on: February 26, 2020, 04:05:33 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Okay, at this point, I'm just starting to feel sorry for you.

I'm getting trolled here. Enjoy your straw mans and echo chamber.

[MOD NOTE:  Well, I tried.  cowpuncher10 was not trying to communicate.  Banned.]
As much as I disagreed with his core assertion, I didnít think he got THAT bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

honeybbq

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1426
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #226 on: February 26, 2020, 04:33:45 PM »
@OtherJen I was just scrolling through the last couple of pages and something you wrote stood out to me. You said your husband's health insurance through work was contingent upon him working a minimum amount of hours over a 4-week period, otherwise you would lose insurance.

I'm from Europe so I don't really understand. Does that literally mean that if he gets an illness that results in a long-term absence from work, like cancer or bypass surgery or a stroke, that would result in his insurance being cancelled?

I already struggle to understand how in the world it can be legal to offer benefits only to fulltime employees. In here you either offer benefits or not - to offer them only to a certain category of workers, for example fulltime workers or high income or men only, that would be unlawful, because it's unequal treatment.

As far as we can tell, even his manager refusing to schedule him for full-time hours for a few weeks in a row would automatically cancel his insurance. So yes, prolonged absence due to illness would cause a loss of insurance for both of us (until we could sign up for an insurance marketplace plan), as well as the loss of his job. Welcome to America.

Ugh, definitely look into COBRA coverage if this happens. It's expensive but it's an alternative at least.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #227 on: February 26, 2020, 05:16:56 PM »
Oh, look. Trump has put Pence in charge of the coronavirus response.

So that when it all goes to hell, Trump can absolve himself of the blame.

Kids, I think this tells you all you need to know about how prepared the Trump administration is for whatís to come.

frugaldrummer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #228 on: February 26, 2020, 05:20:26 PM »
Quote
So that when it all goes to hell, Trump can absolve himself of the blame.

That was my first thought!  And once he ditches Pence he's free to pick Nikki Haley as his running mate.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5971
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #229 on: February 26, 2020, 05:26:44 PM »
Quote
So that when it all goes to hell, Trump can absolve himself of the blame.

That was my first thought!  And once he ditches Pence he's free to pick Nikki Haley as his running mate.

Or Ivanka. Which is my belief of what he really wants to do.

frugaldrummer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #230 on: February 26, 2020, 06:02:52 PM »
Quote
In an adjusted analysis of compliant subjects, masks as a group had protective efficacy in excess of 80% against clinical influenza-like illness.
 

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)01008-4/fulltext


frugaldrummer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #231 on: February 26, 2020, 06:04:05 PM »
And yes of course I would be washing the masks in hot water, with detergent, in a washing machine and a hot dryer. Not some idiot who's going to rinse them and hang dry them.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14510
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #232 on: February 26, 2020, 06:21:30 PM »
Quote
In an adjusted analysis of compliant subjects, masks as a group had protective efficacy in excess of 80% against clinical influenza-like illness.
 

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)01008-4/fulltext

What this tells me is that their study had very low statistical power. The authors even say as much.
And yes of course I would be washing the masks in hot water, with detergent, in a washing machine and a hot dryer. Not some idiot who's going to rinse them and hang dry them.
You certainly are not making yourself very clear, and that matters for anyone who might be reading along and thinking of following your advice.

Most surgical masks are NOT intended to be machine washed and tumbled dry. In all likelihood that will destroy their efficacy, as virus particles are at the sub-Ķm level. Check with the manufacturer for guidelines. Telling people to do so is irresponsible, unless you are referring to a specific kind of machine-washable mask that Iím unaware of, and in which case you need to make that crystal clear for other readers.

Under some circumstances reuse of a mask is acceptable, but it should be discarded whenever it is in an aerosol environment, whenever it comes into contact with blood or nasal secretions, and whenever it has been used in close proximity to those infected by the virus.

The CDC has further guidelines here:
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hcwcontrols/recommendedguidanceextuse.html

SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #233 on: February 26, 2020, 06:37:27 PM »
Quote
In an adjusted analysis of compliant subjects, masks as a group had protective efficacy in excess of 80% against clinical influenza-like illness.
 

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(08)01008-4/fulltext

This is a poster presentation, not a peer reviewed article.  The peer reviewed article backed off that conclusion substantially, because ITT is the gold standard and subgroup "compliant" analysis basically undoes randomization as there is likely recall bias among people who got sick vs. those who didn't:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19193267

Same author, found significant results only for fit tested N95 respirators but was underpowered to detect most outcomes:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21477136

Another (underpowered) study on procedure masks found masks plus handwashing was somewhat effective, kinda sorta:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0029744

That article reviews the research pretty well - there's some research that masks reduce infection among household members, but not any high quality evidence of the efficacy of mask use in a community setting.

Anyway, none of these studies used reusable cloth masks, which seem likely to be inferior for a number of fairly obvious reasons - permeability, possibility of microbial build up on the masks, etc.

No one (I don't think) is arguing that N95 respirators are ineffective, just impractical at scale in the community.  I have a stack of them in the closet at the behest of my old boss who used to work in pandemic preparedness.  But I don't think masks are a big part of the strategy here - handwashing and limiting contact with sick individuals seems much more effective and simpler.

Taran Wanderer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #234 on: February 26, 2020, 06:59:34 PM »
I've been reading this thread after following the news about COVID-19 for the last month or so. It's a pretty interesting situation, and I've been working to understand how concerned I should be.  With China being the center of the outbreak, it is difficult to get real numbers, and therefore it is trust the numbers we do have.

The broad conclusions I've been able to draw on COVID-19 are:
  • It hits the elderly and infirm worse than the young and healthy
  • It hits men slightly worse than women
  • In rough numbers...
  • 81% have mild to no symptoms
  • 14% have significant systems requiring treatment
  • 4-5% require hospitalization and ICU-level care
  • 1-2% die

Now, frugaldrummer has been hammered for taking these numbers and saying this could be a big deal and a lot of people could die.  But hey, 2.8 million people die each year in the USA from something, and over 1.5 million die from pre-existing conditions that could make them more likely to have a strong reaction to COVID-19.  See attachment from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm.

Taran Wanderer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #235 on: February 26, 2020, 07:07:50 PM »
So, if COVID-19 spreads widely, it is reasonable that it could infect many of these people, accelerating their deaths.  There are more people with these conditions who would presumably die in coming years.  COVID-19 could accelerate their deaths also.  If these people die prematurely from COVID-19, was it coronavirus that killed them?  Or was it heart disease, cancer, diabetes, kidney disease, lung disease, or one of the other pathologies listed above?

If COVID-19 spreads widely, ultimately infecting 40% to 70% of the population, it seems very reasonable to me that it could kill more than a million people.  Some of those will be otherwise healthy people, but most are likely to be people who are old, infirm, or have other chronic diseases that might have resulted in their premature death without COVID-19.  So, we could see very big numbers from COVID-19, but they might just represent acceleration of pathologies that already exist.

Note also in the graphic above that 55,672 people died last year from influenza and pneumonia.  This dwarfs deaths so far from COVID-19.  I know a couple of people who died from the flu.  Get your flu shots!

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 715
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #236 on: February 26, 2020, 07:13:40 PM »
  • 1-2% die


There's a correlation to age.

Study of 72,000 COVID-19 patients finds 2.3% death rate

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/study-72000-covid-19-patients-finds-23-death-rate

    39 or yonger, the death rate 0.2%.
    in their 40s, it is 0.4%
    in their 50s, it is 1.3%,
    in their 60s, it is 3.6%
    in their 70s, it is 8%.
    80 and older, it is 14.8%.

    Men are more likely to die (2.8%) than women (1.7%).

Taran Wanderer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 925
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #237 on: February 26, 2020, 07:18:43 PM »
Yes, the death rate are misleading if not broken out by age. Thanks for adding this.

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #238 on: February 26, 2020, 07:34:38 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....

I can tell you from personal experience that I DID NOT seek out help when I should have, because my COBRA insurance didn't kick in for a month (which in 2001 cost me 500 a month as a single, young 20 something non smoker female that had been phased out while in college for parental health insurance hence COBRA).  It was a simple infection I thought.  End result...I almost died of a septic blood infection, hospitalized for 3 weeks, daily MRIs due to the potential for internal bleeding from the meds they had me on, congestive heart failure, dual lobe pneumonia and a YEAR long process to try and regrow the nerves in my lungs.  Oh, and after that, I got dropped from my insurance and couldn't get reinsured because of the pre existing conditions clauses.

 You REALLY need to start on reading comprehension, and perhaps try to seek out a soul or moral compass.

 

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • Location: Canada
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #239 on: February 26, 2020, 08:16:19 PM »
So, Iím not particularly concerned about coronavirus yet, though I could be wrong. But.... those of you who lean away from providing health insurance for all, think about the implications of large numbers of our population not being financially able to seek health care when they have a communicable disease.

Be selfish if you must. But recognize your selfishness might come back to bite you.

Thats the original post. People not seeking health care because of finances.......PEOPLE SEEK HELP REGARDLESS. People wihtout health insurance even more likely because they don't care about cost because they dont pay, can't pay, for health insurance already....


Okay, at this point, I'm just starting to feel sorry for you.

I'm getting trolled here. Enjoy your straw mans and echo chamber.

[MOD NOTE:  Well, I tried.  cowpuncher10 was not trying to communicate.  Banned.]
As much as I disagreed with his core assertion, I didnít think he got THAT bad.

Sometimes it's a tough call. 

Other times, someone shows up and starts shouting at everyone in ALL CAPS.

I can naught but shrug and go about the rest of my day.

Toque.

lutorm

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • Location: A large island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #240 on: February 26, 2020, 08:21:20 PM »
This is my understanding as well, based on friends and a family member who went through something like this.
If you've had employer-sponsored insurance and you lose it because of a termination or a reduction in hours, you should be eligible for continuation under COBRA if your plan is eligible (which it seems to be if your employer had at least 20 people.) COBRA can be quite expensive though.

https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/faqs/cobra-continuation-health-coverage-consumer.pdf has the details, there seems to be some fine print.


SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #242 on: February 26, 2020, 08:47:54 PM »
Listen @frugaldrummer, it's obvious you think you have all the answers and anyone whose opinion differs from yours, in either substance or intensity, is wrong.  I don't think you're proving anything to anyone, but if this thread is an outlet for your anxiety, so be it.  It seems possible to me that sane people can both be concerned about coronavirus and not completely flip out about coronavirus.

SimpleCycle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1201
  • Location: Chicago
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #243 on: February 26, 2020, 08:49:47 PM »

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #244 on: February 27, 2020, 06:00:40 AM »
I'm actually thinking of booking a holiday while flights are cheap.

If I avoid China and parts of South Korea, I should be OK. :)

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14510
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #245 on: February 27, 2020, 06:17:23 AM »
For the people who have implied hospitals wonít be needing the N95 masks at the hardware store:

Oh for Peteís sake.  Youíve missed the point again entirely. No one is doubting that thereís a current shortage of masks right now.  Weíre merely pointing out that these are not PPE used solely by the medical profession. Thatís why they are *also* sold at hardware stores - because they are recommended and even required for all sorts of tasks which have nothing to do with COVID-19.

Your advice on PPE has crossed the line into being more dangerous than helpful.  One should never machine wash and dry a typical N95 mask.  Extended or improper wear of masks by healthy people will increase their risk of infection.

The guidelines for reducing the spread of this and other pathogens are steps we all know and can and should follow:  wash your hands frequently, donít go out if you are sick, keep a social distance from others.  Itís all in the CDC guidances Iíve linked above.

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 807
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #246 on: February 27, 2020, 06:37:36 AM »
Not doing anything. We have plenty of food in the house and as long as electricity is provided it won't go bad (stuff in the freezers). Not done the maths but prob have food for a month for the family if really forced to. We always have a resonable supply of flour/rice/pasta etc in the house due to bulk shopping.

Our health authorties advice against facial masks btw. They say if you wear one and don't know how to use those you end up touching your mouth region a lot more often to adjust it etc and you are more likely to increase the risk of getting infected rather than reduce it. In general our health officials tend to be quite chill about these things. They did freak out a bit too much during the swine flu and have regretted that since.

Btw the overall mortality rate is heavily skewed towards the elderly boosting the average. For the younger cohorts its at 0.2-0.3%, but obv the numbers are quite debatable at this early stage. Numbers out of China and the WHO does not have full confidence in these.

80+ years old 14.8%
70-79 years old 8.0%
60-69 years old 3.6%
50-59 years old 1.3%
40-49 years old 0.4%
30-39 years old 0.2%
20-29 years old 0.2%
10-19 years old 0.2%

rockstache

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6845
  • Age: 2017
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #247 on: February 27, 2020, 06:38:45 AM »
the cloth roll towel dispensers in the most busy train station in the country that you need to touch after washing your hands.

I have seen these once or twice in my travels but never ever touched them, because that is just the grossest thing (not just with coronavirus but always, ick!). If I were you, I would carry my own small cloth in my purse or backpack for drying my hands.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4426
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #248 on: February 27, 2020, 06:47:13 AM »
the cloth roll towel dispensers in the most busy train station in the country that you need to touch after washing your hands.

I have seen these once or twice in my travels but never ever touched them, because that is just the grossest thing (not just with coronavirus but always, ick!). If I were you, I would carry my own small cloth in my purse or backpack for drying my hands.

They used to be a lot more common here when I was a kid (1980s). I havenít seen one in years. I agree that a personal cloth seems like a much more sanitary option.

American GenX

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 715
Re: Coronavirus preparedness
« Reply #249 on: February 27, 2020, 07:50:49 AM »
We have a disease that is 40x more deadly than the flu, has an incubation period of two to three weeks, and can spread when people are asymptotic.  That it only has a 2 or 3% mortality rate makes it way more dangerous than if it were higher...that means more mild cases that go around spreading it.

Indeed it's a pretty nasty recipe!  And that mortality rate goes way up with age.  I've also read that people don't build long term resistance to this like they do the regular flu, so if it doesn't get you the first time around, it might take you down the second go-around.

Here's some evidence of reoccurrence of COVID-19 after a short time frame.

Quote
Japanese woman tests positive for coronavirus again

A Japanese woman who was treated for coronavirus and then recovered has now tested positive again, say local media reports quoting government officials.

The woman is reportedly a tour guide in her 40s, from the city of Osaka.

She first tested positive in late January but was discharged from hospital after recovering on 1 February.

She later developed a sore throat and chest pains and then tested positive again.

This is the first case in Japan where a patient has tested positive after being discharged.

However, there have been reports of patients in China testing positive again.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-51655133

Also, it looks like we may now have community spread in the U.S.

CDC confirms the first US coronavirus case of 'unknown' origin.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/27/health/us-cases-coronavirus-community-transmission/index.html