I do know from personal experience that, if a visitor manages to get all of the several necessary approvals and comes over from Siquijor, and is not symptomatic and passed an RT-PCR test as “negative”, he/she must pass a 14 day quarantine in a government facility before being allowed to venture inside Valencia. There is no such thing as home quarantine. They government facility in this case was the temporary shelter you see on the basketball court at the East Balabag Barangay Hall. Those quarantined need to have friends because no food is supplied, only water. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This article has more information on the ban https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2020/09/26/2045195/no-home-isolation-asymptomatics One correction on what you wrote, not "government facilities" per se, but "government approved facilities" , so hotel will still work. However, there's a whole range of exceptions for "vulnerable patients" (minors, elderly, those with pre-existing conditions, etc.) Those can still isolate at home.
is is true that ths east balabag barangay hall in valencia has a big banner stating, "WE LOVE TOURISTS"
I am not sure how to deal with “cases”. That must be the worst parameter to use. #Cases has dependencies on what are the total number tested and #cases is proportional to number of tests. The parameter I think we should be primarily interested in is “mortalities” and perhaps “permanent injuries” and their associated rates over time. In some countries, treatment is getting much better so cases and mortality track at a much lower rate. Plus, this virus, is it getting more contagious? Is that the main reason increase for the cases or us the increased testing? Both, I suppose, making whatever the measurement implies less meaningful. And even with more “cases”, mortalities seem to be flat or showing a decreasing rate. Might the virus be getting less pathogenic even as it gets more contagious? None if this is very clear except that we don’t have people collapsing in the street and bodies falling off of packed-full delivery trucks on their way to the crematorium as we were led to believe would happen globally. At least that is what the media had us believing in March, and that promoted us to lockdown for 14 days, just to flatten the above curve provided by Dutchie. But if we are to use “number of cases” as our primary measurement upon which to respond with lockdowns, I think we must admit, it is not a pandemic that we are concerned about, it is a CASE-EDEMIC. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think deaths per cases on the basis of percentage of world figures is a clear indication of the seriousness on a country basis and to take the USA for example, running at around 20% of the world's figures for both deaths and number of recorded cases where it is only representative of 4.2% of the worlds population, should raise a few eyebrows and make one wonder what exactly is going on. I find the chart published above to be non-informative as to the true position in my opinion.
I disagree. Yes, the numbers of deaths per capita would be a better parameter to track, but since deaths trail the outbreak of new cases by about 20 days (and reported deaths trail by even longer) that is not really an alternative. No. As I already mentioned in another thread, Iceland, Denmark, Singapore and the United Kingdom all tested considerably more than the USA, yet have far fewer confirmed cases. Also, Italy and France tested a similar number as Canada, yet have double and triple the number of cases. Case numbers are NOT proportional to testing, that is a myth. Err, better treatment has no impact on the number of reported cases whatsoever. Yes luckily the mortality rate overall has come down quite a bit from the early days. I believe authorities are most concerned with balancing hospital and intensive care admissions with capacity on the one hand, and economic pressures on the other hand when deciding on relaxing or tightening lockdown measures. If confirmed cases were the deciding factor we'd have seen a renewed tightening of measures in much of the developed world much earlier.
I wouldn't expect most people (or politicians) to change their minds or approach to dealing COVID. It is a waste of time to try to get people to change their minds once they have firmly established their beliefs, especially when those beliefs are coming from a place of fear. Forget about politicians flip-floping or changing their mind on anything unless it will improve their chances of getting reelected. Has COVID became more contagious? Maybe. And I would argue it may be due to all the precautions that have been put in place to combat it. Like antibiotics and bacteria, if you don't kill them all the ones that survive could build a resistance to the antibiotic used. Perhaps the virus is evolving traits that help it survive longer on surfaces, reproduce/infect cells faster, etc.
