COVID-19 Talk

[Wonderdog]

21 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

I’ve said this before but IMO the biggest risk to our economy is opening too soon, wave 1 never really ends through the summer, then wave 2 comes roaring back in the fall. Then it’s back to full lockdowns. 

Eh, wave two is debatable as is waiting for it and doing nothing. 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

Just now, Wonderdog said:

Eh, wave two is debatable as is waiting for it and doing nothing. 

It is debatable, but if a large % of the population doesn’t have immunity, which seems to be the case even if you take the highest estimates of prevalence, there doesn’t seem to be a good reason why it wouldn’t occur if it’s still present in the fall.  Maybe we get lucky and the severity of the virus decreases over time but I wouldn’t count on that. 

[jaydreb]

30 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

It is debatable, but if a large % of the population doesn’t have immunity, which seems to be the case even if you take the highest estimates of prevalence, there doesn’t seem to be a good reason why it wouldn’t occur if it’s still present in the fall.  Maybe we get lucky and the severity of the virus decreases over time but I wouldn’t count on that. 

Correct.  The virus will be endemic to the US until there is a vaccine.  Our ability to prevent another major outbreak will be dependent on our efforts to contact trace.

[ErinInTheSky]

1,910 deaths and lots left to report evening numbers.

I see no way we stop at 60,000.... we’d have to pull back hard on deaths fast.

[ErinInTheSky]

People keep saying it’s killed 45k in 2 months. What’s more shocking is it killed 44k in 1 month. A month ago there were only 1k dead.

[jaydreb]

It’s not an easy read, but Harvard scientists have put together a detailed plan for reopening.  

"Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience: Massive Scale Testing, Tracing, and Supported Isolation (TTSI) as the Path to Pandemic Resilience for a Free Society," lays out how a massive scale-up of testing, paired with contact tracing and supported isolation, can rebuild trust in our personal safety and re-mobilize the U.S. economy. 

Among the report’s top recommendations is the need to deliver at least 5 million tests per day by early June to help ensure a safe social opening. This number will need to increase to 20 million tests per day by mid-summer to fully re-mobilize the economy.

For a video explanation of the Roadmap, see Vi Hart's video "How We Reopen" on YouTube.

https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/center-for-ethics/files/roadmaptopandemicresilience_updated_4.20.20_0.pdf

 

[Fozz]

11 minutes ago, jaydreb said:

It’s not an easy read, but Harvard scientists have put together a detailed plan for reopening.  

"Roadmap to Pandemic Resilience: Massive Scale Testing, Tracing, and Supported Isolation (TTSI) as the Path to Pandemic Resilience for a Free Society," lays out how a massive scale-up of testing, paired with contact tracing and supported isolation, can rebuild trust in our personal safety and re-mobilize the U.S. economy. 

Among the report’s top recommendations is the need to deliver at least 5 million tests per day by early June to help ensure a safe social opening. This number will need to increase to 20 million tests per day by mid-summer to fully re-mobilize the economy.

For a video explanation of the Roadmap, see Vi Hart's video "How We Reopen" on YouTube.

https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/center-for-ethics/files/roadmaptopandemicresilience_updated_4.20.20_0.pdf

 

If all of our leading politicians got on board with those goals 5M per day to 20M per day, I’d feel so much better about our ability to overcome the pandemic and return to something close to normal life.

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

5 minutes ago, Fozz said:

If all of our leading politicians got on board with those goals 5M per day to 20M per day, I’d feel so much better about our ability to overcome the pandemic and return to something close to normal life.

Yeah it’s really unforgivable that they’re going to try to shortcut this. 

[Baltimorewx]

Maybe I’m making it the way I want to see it and it’s nothing to really read that much into but it kind of seems like the consistently warmer/southern states are dealing with the virus currently a bit better than the northern/cooler states...

[ErinInTheSky]

 

[40westwx]

2 hours ago, C.A.P.E. said:

Yeah, it was a total holy F**k.

“This isn’t China. This is Las Vegas, Nevada.”

[40westwx]

6 hours ago, wxtrix said:

34,200 per the CDC.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

 

why would you make up a number when the correct info is readily available?

Because that year we had 12,000 more people dying every week than any of the previous/ recent years.  

Thats every week..

[Eskimo Joe]

39 minutes ago, Baltimorewx said:

Maybe I’m making it the way I want to see it and it’s nothing to really read that much into but it kind of seems like the consistently warmer/southern states are dealing with the virus currently a bit better than the northern/cooler states...

They really aren't testing as aggressively and doing some funky math with their reporting.  For example, Florida is not reporting cases from snow birds or others who have anything less than fulltime residency in the state.  This is different from every other state in the US.  South Carolina is only pushing their tests through one state lab and one private sector lab that's our of state, which has lead to a substantial backlog.

[Hoosier]

37 minutes ago, Baltimorewx said:

Maybe I’m making it the way I want to see it and it’s nothing to really read that much into but it kind of seems like the consistently warmer/southern states are dealing with the virus currently a bit better than the northern/cooler states...

Here are a couple maps showing cases per million and tests per million (from https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com). 

Based on watching trends around the globe and reading some of the studies that have come out, it's not unreasonable to think that hotter weather (or more specifically, people being outside in the sun more as the weather warms up) could reduce the spread to some degree.  But I think any possible benefit we could get from that could be undone if social distancing is relaxed. 

 

 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

17 minutes ago, wxtrix said:

 

from my link:

if you have facts to back up your ridiculous assertion, I'd like to see them.

He doesn’t.  There’s been a few people in here pushing the flu = covid fantasy for a while now.  Not sure what they’re trying to accomplish. 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

10 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

He doesn’t.  There’s been a few people in here pushing the flu = covid fantasy for a while now.  Not sure what they’re trying to accomplish. 

Or for that matter, arguing that car accident deaths = covid, or shark attacks, or whatever. Which of course totally misses the point. 

[Chris78]

46 minutes ago, wxtrix said:

 

from my link:

if you have facts to back up your ridiculous assertion, I'd like to see them.

Yep. Not sure where he is getting those numbers but generally its 30 thousand or so deaths each year from the flu and thats from 10's of millions of actual cases yearly. 

Dont understand why some are pushing "it's just the flu" narrative. 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

19 minutes ago, Always in Zugzwang said:

Or for that matter, arguing that car accident deaths = covid, or shark attacks, or whatever. Which of course totally misses the point. 

It’s not relevant.  Some other bad thing that happens doesn’t make the current bad thing that’s happening any better.  It’s just another form of whataboutism. 

[Baltimorewx]

The number of critical/serious patients is still going up slowly...the rate of increase has slacked off but it’s still going up so I’m not sure we can say we’re at peak in terms of death yet anyway. 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

smh....offering up her citizens in a potentially deadly science experiment

[Maestrobjwa]

1 hour ago, Chris78 said:

Yep. Not sure where he is getting those numbers but generally its 30 thousand or so deaths each year from the flu and thats from 10's of millions of actual cases yearly. 

Dont understand why some are pushing "it's just the flu" narrative. 

It's a cop-out, really...and it's an argument that is has lost credence by the day!

[SnowGolfBro]

20 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

It's a cop-out, really...and it's an argument that is has lost credence by the day!

The point of those arguments is not necessarily to compare the number of deaths from viruses (flu deaths) or activities (car accident deaths). It’s to compare our tolerance to risk, specifically risk of death from our actions.  People engage in all kinds of risky behaviors.  Sometimes for thrills, sometimes to make a living and various other reasons.  In the case of Covid, because it is particularly deadly and brand new the appetite for risk is very low. That is completely understandable.  We are all dealing with the same reality.  On March 15 my fear level of Covid was high and i supported all of the measures that i now support repealing. Not because the reality of Covid has changed, but because I’ve had time to understand the virus and steps i can take to limit my risk, while continuing to live my life close to normal.  Others feel there is no safe way for society to continue until they have a better understanding of the virus and the risk associated with the virus.  No one is wrong in my opinion, we just have a different calculation of the risk in our minds.  

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

9 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said:

The point of those arguments is not necessarily to compare the number of deaths from viruses (flu deaths) or activities (car accident deaths). It’s to compare our tolerance to risk, specifically risk of death from our actions.  People engage in all kinds of risky behaviors.  Sometimes for thrills, sometimes to make a living and various other reasons.  In the case of Covid, because it is particularly deadly and brand new the appetite for risk is very low. That is completely understandable.  We are all dealing with the same reality.  On March 15 my fear level of Covid was high and i supported all of the measures that i now support repealing. Not because the reality of Covid has changed, but because I’ve had time to understand the virus and steps i can take to limit my risk, while continuing to live my life close to normal.  Others feel there is no safe way for society to continue until they have a better understanding of the virus and the risk associated with the virus.  No one is wrong in my opinion, we just have a different calculation of the risk in our minds.  

If all this “open up now” energy could be redirected to “open up smart” and push for a national plan of testing and contact tracing it would work out a lot better for public health and the economy. 

[psuhoffman]

9 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said:

The point of those arguments is not necessarily to compare the number of deaths from viruses (flu deaths) or activities (car accident deaths). It’s to compare our tolerance to risk, specifically risk of death from our actions.  People engage in all kinds of risky behaviors.  Sometimes for thrills, sometimes to make a living and various other reasons.  

But that comparison is flawed because most of those risks are to oneself.  I ski but if I screw up doing some off piste run it’s only me that suffers. Sometimes it’s a risk involving a few others like driving. But in almost no cases does society allow individuals to accept risk for everyone or large populations.  Where exactly the line is becomes murky and a huge debate sometimes but this is most definitely on the “not an individual choice” side.  One person being a clown could infect 50 people. Those 50 people could then infect 500.  This isn’t an individual risk/choice situation. 

[Inverted_Trough]

If you want to understand how one person can lead to 1000 infections, read this story about Patient 31 in South Korea.

https://graphics.reuters.com/CHINA-HEALTH-SOUTHKOREA-CLUSTERS/0100B5G33SB/index.html

[Maestrobjwa]

21 minutes ago, SnowGolfBro said:

The point of those arguments is not necessarily to compare the number of deaths from viruses (flu deaths) or activities (car accident deaths). It’s to compare our tolerance to risk, specifically risk of death from our actions.  People engage in all kinds of risky behaviors.  Sometimes for thrills, sometimes to make a living and various other reasons.  In the case of Covid, because it is particularly deadly and brand new the appetite for risk is very low. That is completely understandable.  We are all dealing with the same reality.  On March 15 my fear level of Covid was high and i supported all of the measures that i now support repealing. Not because the reality of Covid has changed, but because I’ve had time to understand the virus and steps i can take to limit my risk, while continuing to live my life close to normal.  Others feel there is no safe way for society to continue until they have a better understanding of the virus and the risk associated with the virus.  No one is wrong in my opinion, we just have a different calculation of the risk in our minds.  

But are you also calculating the risk of others? See what I'm hearing in the argument you and some others presented is one of "well, I personally will be okay". But in a pandemic, that isn't the only factor here. You don't know who around you is vulnerable. Or who around you will be in contact with someone who is (and that infection "tree" can go on and on). 

That's why it's not just a "me" thing with pandemics.

[SnowGolfBro]

25 minutes ago, Maestrobjwa said:

But are you also calculating the risk of others? See what I'm hearing in the argument you and some others presented is one of "well, I personally will be okay". But in a pandemic, that isn't the only factor here. You don't know who around you is vulnerable. Or who around you will be in contact with someone who is (and that infection "tree" can go on and on). 

That's why it's not just a "me" thing with pandemics.

I am calculating the risks of the situation as I understand it.  The virus is a factor.  How deadly it is, how quickly it spreads, are some more at risk than others, etc.  The damage to people’s lives through Great Depression level unemployment, mental health, suicide, etc is the other factor.  I offer this solution.  Quarantine the elderly and immune compromised for 30 days.  During that 30 days, incrementally begin opening parts of society that have been shutdown.  Start with activities deemed the least risky.  During that 30 days and then the following 30 days encourage good hygiene, hand washing, social distancing wherever possible and masks when using any essential services (because even the elderly and immune compromised will need to use essential services).  After 30 days reassess if it is safe for the elderly and immune compromised.  After 60 days reassess social distancing, etc.  During this time continue to improve testing capabilities.

[SnowGolfBro]

24 minutes ago, wxtrix said:

in the absence of widespread testing, how do we know when it's safe enough to relax the shelter in place restrictions?

how do people isolate if someone who lives with a vulnerable person has to go to work because you're bored and has no PPE or ability to completely isolate the vulnerable person?

 

We won’t know for sure.  And we will never be able to protect everybody.  Who said I’m bored?  I work 50 hours a week from home.  I have twin five year olds that i am helping with home schooling, and trying to keep happy during a time of great unrest.  There is no perfect solution to this crisis.  But there is an optimal solution.  And lockdowns that destroy the lives of tens of millions of people is not the optimal solution in my opinion.  

[ErinInTheSky]

1 hour ago, SnowGolfBro said:

I am calculating the risks of the situation as I understand it.  The virus is a factor.  How deadly it is, how quickly it spreads, are some more at risk than others, etc.  The damage to people’s lives through Great Depression level unemployment, mental health, suicide, etc is the other factor.  I offer this solution.  Quarantine the elderly and immune compromised for 30 days.  During that 30 days, incrementally begin opening parts of society that have been shutdown.  Start with activities deemed the least risky.  During that 30 days and then the following 30 days encourage good hygiene, hand washing, social distancing wherever possible and masks when using any essential services (because even the elderly and immune compromised will need to use essential services).  After 30 days reassess if it is safe for the elderly and immune compromised.  After 60 days reassess social distancing, etc.  During this time continue to improve testing capabilities.

Dude our government can’t even get tests running, you think they will have an adequately phased in medical coding system where tiers of risky people can come back to work in tiers of different jobs?

[SnowGolfBro]

23 minutes ago, wxtrix said:

how can you advocate for something based on zero data?

 

We have tons of data.  A lot of it is jumbled and unclear.  I’ve made my recommendations and given my thoughts based on trying to put together a very complex puzzle.  What data are you basing your comments on? Covid Deaths? Cases? Economic turmoil? Risk assessment? All of the above and more I’m sure.  So your conclusions are just as valid as mine.  We aren’t going to know all the things we would like to know for a long time.  Scientific studies long into the future is the information we would all love to have right now.  But we aren’t going to get it.  We don’t know how many people have had Covid 19.  Could be 50 million people have been exposed.  Could be some other number.  We don’t know how many people will be depressed permanently by the response to the virus. It’s an inexact science trying to come up with a workable solution.  I’d say 100% back to normal is not workable right now.  And I’d say the lockdowns aren’t workable for much longer.  So the answer is somewhere in between and that is subjective.  There isn’t some perfect formula unfortunately.