Implications of >900,000 ill in the Ukraine

If we look at the progression of of the epidemic from the 29th to the present we find this, rounded to nearest thousand for ill:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

# ill: 40K- 81K- 165K- 191K- 256K - 478K - 763K- 871K- 937K
#hospitalized: 951- 2341- 5239- 7524- 15,810- 24,003- 33,939- 39,603- 43,762
# dead: 30- 33- 39- 60- 70- 81- 109- 135- 144

By all reports, the form of flu they are experiencing is at least as bad as normal flu, so one could safely estimate that the course of the illness for most will last around two weeks or so. To be conservative let's say 12 days of illness, with 6 more as recovery to full strength. That means there will be at least eight more days of increasing numbers of people getting sick and being sick before the first ones noted here are recovered. If the epidemic progesses at anything like the same rate as it has over the last few days, some 60,000 to 100,000 new cases can be expected per day, if not more, until the virus burns out.

The population of the Ukraine is ~46 million. So at the moment, 1 person in 46 is either ill or recovering, mostly ill, with 1 in about 1,000 seriously so. In a week, it will be somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 in 24. In two weeks, maybe 1 in 20. Hopefully it will burn out by then, and that will be the worst of it.

But what will that do to the country's economy and psyche? How long will it take for them to recover? What will it really mean to have that many people ill all at once?

It bears thinking about, and pondering what would happen if the same ratio applied here in the US. 1 in 46 would mean around 7,000,000 sick all at once, 300,000 seriously so. How well would we cope with that?

reply to post by apacheman


S & F.

I can only think about the end times, when the plague is upon us.

I am desperately sorry for all those people.

Jesus, help us please.

Well, the world has seen many, many, many plagues before. IF this turns out to be something truly horrible (it very well might) then many of us will suffer and possibly die. Things will then go on. I'm curious as all hell to know what is really going on and can't take my eyes off of these Ukraine Flu threads for long but life will continue. There are no promises in life. Flu or no flu, any of us can go tomorrow.

The calculation is not based on sound assumptions. For example, the assumption is that the rate of infection will continue as it has, which may not be the case. Those who are more vulnerable to this strain of virus may already have fallen ill. Those who haven't may mostly be people who, for various reasons, have some sort of immunity.

Another consideration is that the disease was spreading for a while before quarantine efforts were put into effect. These efforts - closing of schools, public gatherings, etc. - may help to reduce the numbers of people infected.

Most important, however, is the possibility that the Ukrainian government is not being truthful, that they are inflating the numbers for political purposes. For example, there is an election of some sort that may be delayed as a result of this virus. Also, there are various economic problems that are now being ignored in light of this panic. This virus makes an excellent distraction from the other woes, while leaving the government free of blame. After all, it's a virus. Can't blame the government for that.

It seems we have now at least 3 threads on this.
This seems to be the longest running.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by chiron613


The points you make are valid.

But the infection rate shows no signs of diminishing yet, and the epidemic is still incubating the other parts of the Ukraine.

That still doesn't diminish the reality of the current situation. If the numbers are reasonably accurate, it is still really bad, and will likely have ramifications long after it passes.

It won't take long to see the trends.

I saw an estimate by the president of Ukraine to the effect that half the population will eventually be sick. That's pretty extreme, and very hopefully an exaggeration, but it is within the realm of possibility.

My point in bringing this up is to help people to prepare emotionally to deal with what may be coming, because the emotional impact of so much illness is bound to be devasting if you haven't really contemplated it much before it occurs, and especially when compounded by financial distress.

bla, bla, bla,....as long as you avoid all vaccines for the rest of your life, you will be healthy as an ox.

oxygen therapies and nutrition are all you need.

two cheap ones are mms, mms-2

hydrogen peroxide 35% is great too. these things will take care of anything in hours. if you got a cancer lump, maybe it will take a month or no more than 6 months, depending on your physical condition.

if you feel yourself getting sick, its so simple,...all you got to do is mix up 15 drops of mms and 1 teaspoon of activator, wait 3 minutes, add cup and a half of water, then down it. cured! do that again an hour later at the same dose or maybe half the dose.

i haven't tried the calcium hypochlorite yet. but i know it will purify the blood pretty quickly of anything and everything.

reply to post by born yesterday


Yes, as an individual each of us will most likely survive.

That's not the point.

I'm trying to explore the likely social and economic consequences of so many people ill all at once. I'm not talking about mortality rates or the end of the world or anything at all like that.

The numbers currently sick are far beyond what we are used to, and the flu season's barely begun. It's not like you can say "okay, we've filled this year's quota of illness, you can stop getting sick now". We have five more months of flu season to go. To assume that everyone who is likely to get sick already has is foolish. To assume that the worst is over in the Ukraine is doubly foolish: remember they had no vaccines a week ago, and it has undoubtedly spread to the regions lightly hit so far. If they vaccinated everyone tomorrow, it would still be a week before they'd be protected. So we can expect at least another week or two of increasing numbers.

Also remember that few, if any, have any immunity: the total number of sick at one time could reach 20-30% of the entire population. You don't need massive numbers of people to die to have a catastrophe on your hands, massive numbers of sick people, even if they recover eventually can have a disastrous effect upon an economy.

[edit on 8-11-2009 by apacheman]

reply to post by born yesterday


Wow I didn't know MMS2 had come out... Thanks so much for posting that..

*

To the rest of the posters........... A quick glance at a variety of news sources shows that less than 100 people have died so far and the Ukraine outbreak may have peaked.

As usual... ATSers are blowing this way out of proportion......analysisis good but rampant negative speculation doesn't help anyone.

Yes, I'm sure there's a lot of manipulation going on.



Google: Slippery Slope Fallacy







[edit on 011f20090amSun, 08 Nov 2009 06:28:43 -060043 by HiAliens]

Originally posted by chiron613
Most important, however, is the possibility that the Ukrainian government is not being truthful, that they are inflating the numbers for political purposes. For example, there is an election of some sort that may be delayed as a result of this virus. Also, there are various economic problems that are now being ignored in light of this panic. This virus makes an excellent distraction from the other woes, while leaving the government free of blame. After all, it's a virus. Can't blame the government for that.

I have to agree with this statement.

This would not have been the first time a goverment has done something like this

I had hoped that folks here would think through this a bit, after all the title does say IMPLICATIONS.

Ok, I guess I'll have to spell it out for you:

Over 900,000 of 46 million are sick, right?

In one region of the Ukraine, right?

They had no vaccines until Wednesday or Thursday, right?

It takes a week for the vaccines to be effective, right?

It'll take at least two days (at least) to get everyone vaccinated, or to run out of vaccines anyway, right?

So that means they are looking at at least nine more days of a highly virulent virus spreading before it begins to be checked, right?

Each sick person will be sick for around 12 days, and take another week or so to fully recover, based on 1st person reoprts here on ATS, right?

Each sick person will require the attention of one or more healthy people, depending upon how sick they are, but at least one to one, right?

So to gauge the economic effects, you have to double the number of sick to account for the diversion of time and energy to tend the sick, right?

That means that an additional 900,000 people, mostly working age adults, are currently diverted from productive economic work.

So, right now, nearly 2 million out of 46 million are not available for economic activity. Deduct children and you're still around 1.2-1.5 million diversions, at this time, will zero increase in caseload. If normal demographics apply here, about half the total population is in the workforce pool.

So that means, that right now some 5% of the entire workforce pool is either sick or treating the sick. If the virus proceeds in the other regions of the Ukraine as it has in the western part, then in another week we can expect at least another 5-15% diversion from the economy before this is over. I see no reason other than wishful thinking to assume it has peaked there.

So what happens to a country's economy under these circumstances? I don't think anyone in modern times has ever experienced this before, please correct me if I'm wrong (with citations, please).

I don't know enough about the patterns of work and production in the Ukraine to give an educated guess. Any economists here who can predict in general? Anyone familiar enough with the Ukraine's economy to know whether things like crops will go unharvested or undone that are time dependant, i.e., do it November or lose the opportunity?

That's what I was asking originally. I know most people will eventually recover, that the dead, while numerous, are not that many in the grand scheme of things, so please don't go there, that's stipulated. I'm looking at the economic consequences of a huge number of sick people at the same time.

Any answers, anyone?

Reasonable speculations?



[edit on 8-11-2009 by apacheman]

This isn't the first time the a part of the world has been hit by disease. I'm sure time and time again, people will always assume their generation or lifetime is the "end time".

If it is, why worry? You can't stop it, so why dwell on it? Because you're going to die? Your loved ones are going to die? Well if that freaks you out, then welcome to Earth, because you must be new here.

reply to post by Tomis_Nexis


Didn't I just say I know this isn't an end time scenario? And yes the world has gone through periods similar to this, but not in my lifetime that I'm aware of, and I'm pretty aware.

They are dealing with an extraordinary situation and I'm trying to figure out the consequences of that extraodinary situation. I'm not worried about my personal survival, I expect that the US will handle it better than the Ukraine, that western Europe has better medical systems...all stipulated.

Happy now?

Then please address the subject of the economic effects of 5-20% of a nation's workforce being ill at the same time rather than simply post another "what are you worried about, everything's cool, you'll survive" type comment. They aren't helpful to the discussion unless you provide a few facts with cites as to WHY you take that position.

Has there in fact been another country recently that had that many of its citizens sick at once? Where and when? If we can look at a prior example we can estimate the effects here, however crudely. We can compare economies and health systems and make projections. I'm not currently predicting or projecting anything because I don't have enough data to do so. This thread will help gather that data, I hope.

Now do you understand the questions?

Originally posted by apacheman
I had hoped that folks here would think through this a bit, after all the title does say IMPLICATIONS.

Ok, I guess I'll have to spell it out for you:

Over 900,000 of 46 million are sick, right?

In one region of the Ukraine, right?

They had no vaccines until Wednesday or Thursday, right?

It takes a week for the vaccines to be effective, right?

It'll take at least two days (at least) to get everyone vaccinated, or to run out of vaccines anyway, right?

So that means they are looking at at least nine more days of a highly virulent virus spreading before it begins to be checked, right?

Each sick person will be sick for around 12 days, and take another week or so to fully recover, based on 1st person reoprts here on ATS, right?

Each sick person will require the attention of one or more healthy people, depending upon how sick they are, but at least one to one, right?

So to gauge the economic effects, you have to double the number of sick to account for the diversion of time and energy to tend the sick, right?

That means that an additional 900,000 people, mostly working age adults, are currently diverted from productive economic work.

So, right now, nearly 2 million out of 46 million are not available for economic activity. Deduct children and you're still around 1.2-1.5 million diversions, at this time, will zero increase in caseload. If normal demographics apply here, about half the total population is in the workforce pool.

So that means, that right now some 5% of the entire workforce pool is either sick or treating the sick. If the virus proceeds in the other regions of the Ukraine as it has in the western part, then in another week we can expect at least another 5-15% diversion from the economy before this is over. I see no reason other than wishful thinking to assume it has peaked there.

So what happens to a country's economy under these circumstances? I don't think anyone in modern times has ever experienced this before, please correct me if I'm wrong (with citations, please).

I don't know enough about the patterns of work and production in the Ukraine to give an educated guess. Any economists here who can predict in general? Anyone familiar enough with the Ukraine's economy to know whether things like crops will go unharvested or undone that are time dependant, i.e., do it November or lose the opportunity?

That's what I was asking originally. I know most people will eventually recover, that the dead, while numerous, are not that many in the grand scheme of things, so please don't go there, that's stipulated. I'm looking at the economic consequences of a huge number of sick people at the same time.

Any answers, anyone?

Reasonable speculations?



[edit on 8-11-2009 by apacheman]

i bet this swine hypo is some sort of radioactive poisoning, don't you find this interesting - craze in ukraine, but nothing in the neighbouring countries, Ukraine has a log history of democide (remember Chernobyl etc),

they have those all nuclear factories, sure swine flu is radioactive poisoning !!!

There was a guy a few months back that said "Baxter" was going to release something in the Ukraine. He called into radio stations declaring this and they all thought he was crazy. From what I hear... he was actually one of the guys who helped engineer this bug, and wanted to clear his conscious. He was then arrested by a small army and sent back to his country Ill try to find the thing later on it,.

reply to post by Athin


You are referring to Joseph Moshe (or Moishe) who called into the Dr. Tru Ott radio show -- or something like that -- and said the vaccine being released in Ukraine was a bioweapon ... pneumonic plague plus who knows what. Definitely not simply aH1N1.

If that ratio were applied to Canada, I think we would be close to shutting down the nation with everyone ordered to shelter in place until further notice.

There are more and more whistleblowers trying to come forward and be heard ... that tells me we are close to a doomsday scenario and they have evaluated the risk to themselves against the likely destruction of us all. Perhaps there is a more cheerful assessment that one could make. But there is obviously a risk/threat analysis at work in these various disclosures.

All that is very interesting but not on topic.

If your going to post here please say something relevant.

I don't care too much about who may have done what for whatever reasons, except insofar as it pertains to the questions I've posed.

Thanks for paying attention.

reply to post by apacheman


I have no idea what you are talking about. These posts all have contextual elements that are important to fleshing out your OP.

If all you want is a narrow discussion of how this "flu" would relate to your country and its demographics, perhaps you should print a notice saying non-USAmericans are not welcome to post on this thread.

reply to post by Pellevoisin


What I'm talking about is not conspiracies, but effects: specifically, what are or will be the effect of having up to 20% of your workforce sick or caring for the sick at once. I'm not limiting it to the US, because we're all in the same boat.

I'm trying to figure out what will happen to the various economies as a result of massive illness. So in that context, conspiriacies are peripheral, and the numbers of dead are fairly irrelevant unless they begin to climb enormously.

I'm just being pragmatic about trying to determine economic fallout and how it will play into the world economy, while also trying to be fairly conservative about total numbers sick, dying and dead.

I'm sorry if you misunderstood my position and goals here, I'm trying as hard as I might to be clear about what I'm trying to figure out, looking beyond the epidemic itself and its causes to its economic consequences.

Latest reports show 969,247 ill; 48,972 hospitalized.

Caseload daily increase has dropped from 127,242 to 42,468. What is notable is that this is stated to be the first day the number of new cases hasn't increased from the day before. This is good news if sustained, and not just a temporary dip.

What does the Ukraine usually produce in November? Anyone know? Are things going unharvested because of this? Are mines or timber or anything else running at reduced capacity? Are any industries in particular more effected than others? Or is there enough slack that there is no particular disruption of the economy ?

We have any locals who can fill us in on the current economic fallout?