Hacker News Reader

Comment by jtdev | Hacker News Reader

To add a little context: I’m currently scheduled to attend a ~50000 attendee international conference in the U.S. My employer has sponsored - and I’m not in a position to refuse to attend (yet). The host org is standing firm on pushing forward as scheduled, but has released a bunch of PR B.S. communications about hand sanitizer, face masks, etc. being provided and quarantine of symptomatic individuals at the event (not sure how they’re going to swing that). I’m not in the age demographic for high mortality from COVID19, but I’m concerned that I might pick it up and bring it back to my home community - where there are people in the high mortality demo. It seems that a neutral third party (CDC???) should step in and say “we’re recommending that this event be canceled”. Which would make it much easier on all to simply not attend if the event does in fact go forward.

View on HN

I’ve been seeing quite a lot of major conferences being cancelled and/or large companies deciding not to attend. In many cases they’ve waited as long as possible before officially cancelling to see if things improve. I would think you have the right to express your concerns and decide not to attend - if enough people do the same, the event may be postponed or cancelled.

They (HIMSS PR) blocked me for asking about the preparedness plan (which is completely inadequate) on Twitter... maybe I should have asked via email, but it seemed like a conversation that the community would have interest in. They seem to be in complete “protect sunk costs at all measures” mode.

HIMSS is a healthcare conference? That’s rather ironic.

Health IT. Less about fixing broken humans and more about selling technology. But, your point stands.

Same conference, similar position. "45,000 healthcare professionals from 90 countries" Absolutely crazy. Might there be a public outcry if the citizens of Orlando were made aware of it?

Quarantine? A non-governmental person/entity doesn't have legal power to detain anyone in the U.S., including for the purpose of quarantining them. See https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantin...

The only way you could legally be physically detained in quarantine at a conference would be by a sworn offer (e.g. a police officer) acting on a government order.

HIMSS is using the word "isolated" [1]. HHS defines "isolation" and "quarantine" as the following [2]:

"Isolation is used to separate ill persons who have a communicable disease from those who are healthy. Isolation restricts the movement of ill persons to help stop the spread of certain diseases. For example, hospitals use isolation for patients with infectious tuberculosis.

Quarantine is used to separate and restrict the movement of well persons who may have been exposed to a communicable disease to see if they become ill. These people may have been exposed to a disease and do not know it, or they may have the disease but do not show symptoms. Quarantine can also help limit the spread of communicable disease."

Seems like the only real distinction is in terms of whether on not you're currently ill, but fundamentally they both restrict movement.

From HIMSS [1]: "Screening procedures established by the CDC will be conducted on site throughout the conference; HIMSS and the Orange County Convention Center will consult health teams at Orlando Health when necessary.

Should screening reveal an elevated risk for an attendee, the person will be isolated immediately to prevent exposure to conference participants."

[1] https://www.himssconference.org/updates/himss-update-coronav...

[2] https://www.hhs.gov/answers/public-health-and-safety/what-is...

My point is simply that without a directive from the government, it would be illegal for the conference organizers to physically detain you, even if it's to isolate or quarantine you. Even if they did have a directive, it would probably still have to be a sworn officer doing the detaining (there may be case law on this to the contrary). Hospitals obviously have such a directive, but I'm not sure that even a hospital security guard who isn't a sworn officer would have the power to detain you under the hospital's directive. In any event, it's not at all clear to me that HIMSS has a directive from a government agency, let alone that the detaining would be done by sworn officers and not some hired help with "guard cards".

Panic is unwarranted.

On the cruise ship, which is known for being full of old people, there were 3 deaths out of ~750 known cases. Almost everyone dying so far has had another medical issue or been very old. Reports now say that many people testing positive have no symptoms at all and aren't getting sick. There have been zero deaths of children so far, which is unlike the flu. The youngest death was in his mid 30s.

Everyone should chill. Visit with your parents or compromised friends on FaceTime for a few weeks. Wash your hands. Don't go to work sick. If you're pregnant take extra precautions. Otherwise live your normal life.

Quick fact check: first of all, 3 deaths out of 750 isn't relevant without knowing the timeline of transmission, as most deaths occur 3-4 weeks post infection.

Second, there have deaths of people in there 20's a casual google search of 'youngest death coronavirus' yields that information as the first result.

And if you believe every young death (or every death) in Hubei province is being publicized, you haven't been paying attention.

I do agree that it's important not to panic, but we absolutely should be taking social distancing measures to reduce the r0.

So... if we’re not in the high mortality demographic we should just engage in activities that could be a catalyst for pandemic and significant loss of life? Not sure I follow your thinking.

> Almost everyone dying so far has had another medical issue or been very old

I agree with not fomenting panic. However, "had another medical issue" means diabetes, which alone covers 11% of the US population, and has so far been associated with a mortality rate of about 8%. This likely includes at least one family member in more or less every US family.

It's entirely reasonable to view that as a compelling reason to avoid things like major conferences with significant inter- and trans-national mass transit.

Would be interesting to know how the level of your treatment to diabetes affects your chances to die. I'm type 1, A1c under 6% and I do constant exercise. Is it worse with bad control, I haven't found an answer yet.

My understanding is that high blood sugar impedes the immune system. So, the better your blood sugar is controlled, the better off you will be.

That's what I understood also. I've spent tremendous amount of time understanding my diabetes, and your comment here validated my assumption in the case of CoV.

It's still quite scary to see how diabetics have a very high risk with the virus. Luckily the treatment I get with my closed loop gives me an easy access to excellent control.

This is dead wrong. Please check your facts. 6 deaths. Many in bad shape. Most still sick. Honestly, people should be scared. Leadership is doing everything they can to prevent that.

I don’t think being scared should ever be a recommendation. Concerned, proactive, and calm are the way to go.

>3 deaths out of ~750 known cases

Actually it's 6 out of 705. [0][1] May seem like a small difference, but a 0.8% chance of dying is 8x more than the flu.

Never mind the fact that the data out of China, Italy, Japan and Iran is all trending around the 2-3% CFR calculated and published in multiple peer reviewed journals. [2][3]

(However, South Korea might be reason for hope.)

>or been very old

It bothers me immensely when people mention it's "just old people". I'm not sure why I should "chill" about my parents having an 8% chance of dying if they contract this. [3]

[0] https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/02/the-latest-coronavirus...

[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[2] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762130

[3] http://weekly.chinacdc.cn/en/article/id/e53946e2-c6c4-41e9-9...

>Actually it's 6 out of 705. [0][1] May seem like a small difference, but a 0.8% chance of dying is 8x more than the flu.

There's a good chance being confined to a cabin in a cruise ship and acquiring COVID-19 is more detrimental to someone than if they had a community acquired infection going about their normal life.

Being restricted like that implies they're getting significantly less exercise than they would normally, and the stress combined with lack of sun can do a number on someone's sleep cycle. That in turn can influence cognition, especially in the elderly, and I imagine increases the chances of being dehydrated/etc...

It's like being in a hospital, which tends to do a number on most people, but without supportive around the clock care.

While it may not kill many quickly, you might be underestimating the long term effects of permanent lung damage. [0]

[0]https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/02/here-is-w...

Cruise ship analysis is naive.

People from the cruise ship are still in the process of dieing. 2 more deaths occured today.

The number of recovered cases from the cruise ship is low, so naive inference on death rate so far is misleading.

Out of curiosity, what conference is that big? NAB?

HIMSS (Health Information and Management Systems Society), the irony is just...

I suggest dropping some of your concerns around social media to see if it picks up steam. If it gets the attention of enough people, they'll have to take it more seriously. The way you've described it irks me a little bit.

being blocked by HIMSS on twitter for asking and having a conversation should really ring alarm bells. hope some high follower accounts pick this up and RT it for more visibility.

You could call in sick?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com