Coronavirus - How can people be so incredibly stupid?

[GreenSheep]

chippies (chips in a bag, crisps)

Not having been to New Zealand (someday, I hope!), I had no idea you called them chippies. Here in the US, "chippy" is an old-fashioned slang term for a promiscuous woman, usually used in the phrase "chippy on the side." As in, "His poor wife sits at home while he runs around town with one of his chippies on the side." I suppose if you order a sandwich in NZ and they ask if you want chippies on the side, it's a different thing entirely! :-)

I've been to Iceland, but not Norway/Sweden/Finland/Denmark. I do think I'd enjoy the culture there. I'm sure they're all slightly different, but I liked the fact that Icelanders were polite but a little standoffish at first, then very friendly once they got to know you. A bit like the French, in the sense that you know that when they're friendly, it's genuine. And no saccharine hugs like we have here.

Back on the topic of "how can people be so incredibly stupid," I have a quasi-friend (one of those saccharine huggers) who revealed that she's been going to the grocery store every 2-3 days. I made no judgement and offered no opinion on what I thought she should be doing, but when I mentioned that I haven't been out since March 31st and don't plan to go anywhere anytime soon, she completely flipped out and couldn't believe that I'm "living in fear" since there aren't many cases (ha, that we know of) here. Uh, yeah, that's the whole point. You have to take precautions before things get bad if you don't want things to get bad.

Also, she, like many, is entirely focused on the fact that she and I are relatively young and healthy, so our chance of dying from this is very low. But death isn't the only bad outcome. I don't want to have a miserable week like Paula Pant ( https://affordanything.com/i-tested-positive-for-coronavirus/ ), and we don't know what the long-term health consequences might be. And of course, I don't want to participate in spreading this to others.

[former player]

Also a newcomer to the NZ use of "chippy": here in the UK it would usually mean the local fish and chip shop, as in "I'm going down the chippy, do you want  anything?" - a phrase I now know not to use in the US.

[T-Money$]

So my town just had a big "end the shutdown" protest rally yesterday (and more planned for this weekend). Big unmasked group shoulder to shoulder ranting in everyone's faces. Sigh...idiots. I don't care which side of the "open up or stay closed down" debate you are on. Just recognize that people are sick and dying and this is a highly contagious disease so keep your distance!

I'm suppose to be in Sweden right now instead of the US but of course my multi-months long trip was cancelled. My grandparents are Swedish and I've spent a lot of time there and I agree with the discussion above about Swedish social culture. It is very different then some other places in Europe, especially southern European countries where everyone hugs and kisses you. My Mom is German and didn't come to the US until in her 30s and also is very standoffish compared to most in the US. If I could live in Sweden or Germany I'd be a happy camper. I was born in the UK and have a UK passport so maybe I can! Time to google.

For all your know the protesters could have already had and recovered from COVID-19.  Perhaps they are not in risk categories where COVID-19 is likely to cause a significant health issue.   Perhaps emphasizing with the protesters and what has happened in their lives since the COVID reaction unfolded might be a good exercise.

I understand there are many concerned people out there, but they can isolate themselves from any risk if they so choose.  Destroying and massively restricting the lives of others does not create a "safe space".

The great thing about personal responsibility and decision making is if you are concerned about COVID-19 you can make the decision to avoid the protesters and therefore easily bypass any theoretical risk. 

Seems idiotic to shut down society and cause trillions of dollars in economic and social damage in what amounts to mostly futile attempts to stop a virus that causes at most mild symptoms in 80% of those it infects.  It also seems idiotic that state Governors are apparently allowed make sweeping social changes and a one-size fits all policy to a virus that is harmless to the overwhelming majority of the population.

I think it would be a good idea to Constitutionally institute additional restrictions on governmental power so we can avoid such a hysterical and irrational response in the future.

[Bloop Bloop]

As I understand the epidemiology, the virus causes only mild symptoms in most healthy people <35 with a death rate of less than 0.1%.

The death rate goes up exponentially for those over 65, or with pre-existing health conditions.

I would have thought therefore that it is up to those who are in the most at-risk sectors, or who anticipate having contact (family/friends) with the most at-risk sectors, to take the most precautions.

[centwise]

So my town just had a big "end the shutdown" protest rally yesterday (and more planned for this weekend). Big unmasked group shoulder to shoulder ranting in everyone's faces. Sigh...idiots. I don't care which side of the "open up or stay closed down" debate you are on. Just recognize that people are sick and dying and this is a highly contagious disease so keep your distance!

I'm suppose to be in Sweden right now instead of the US but of course my multi-months long trip was cancelled. My grandparents are Swedish and I've spent a lot of time there and I agree with the discussion above about Swedish social culture. It is very different then some other places in Europe, especially southern European countries where everyone hugs and kisses you. My Mom is German and didn't come to the US until in her 30s and also is very standoffish compared to most in the US. If I could live in Sweden or Germany I'd be a happy camper. I was born in the UK and have a UK passport so maybe I can! Time to google.

For all your know the protesters could have already had and recovered from COVID-19.  Perhaps they are not in risk categories where COVID-19 is likely to cause a significant health issue.   Perhaps emphasizing with the protesters and what has happened in their lives since the COVID reaction unfolded might be a good exercise.

I understand there are many concerned people out there, but they can isolate themselves from any risk if they so choose.  Destroying and massively restricting the lives of others does not create a "safe space".

The great thing about personal responsibility and decision making is if you are concerned about COVID-19 you can make the decision to avoid the protesters and therefore easily bypass any theoretical risk. 

Seems idiotic to shut down society and cause trillions of dollars in economic and social damage in what amounts to mostly futile attempts to stop a virus that causes at most mild symptoms in 80% of those it infects.  It also seems idiotic that state Governors are apparently allowed make sweeping social changes and a one-size fits all policy to a virus that is harmless to the overwhelming majority of the population.

I think it would be a good idea to Constitutionally institute additional restrictions on governmental power so we can avoid such a hysterical and irrational response in the future.

Sigh. This reply is an excellent answer to the question posed in the OP: egillespie demonstrates EXACTLY how people can be so incredibly stupid.

Maintaining intelligent public health policy is not accomplished by having every "rugged individual" make their own ill-informed and self-serving decisions based on their perception of their own personal risk, everyone else be damned.

[Kris]

So my town just had a big "end the shutdown" protest rally yesterday (and more planned for this weekend). Big unmasked group shoulder to shoulder ranting in everyone's faces. Sigh...idiots. I don't care which side of the "open up or stay closed down" debate you are on. Just recognize that people are sick and dying and this is a highly contagious disease so keep your distance!

I'm suppose to be in Sweden right now instead of the US but of course my multi-months long trip was cancelled. My grandparents are Swedish and I've spent a lot of time there and I agree with the discussion above about Swedish social culture. It is very different then some other places in Europe, especially southern European countries where everyone hugs and kisses you. My Mom is German and didn't come to the US until in her 30s and also is very standoffish compared to most in the US. If I could live in Sweden or Germany I'd be a happy camper. I was born in the UK and have a UK passport so maybe I can! Time to google.

For all your know the protesters could have already had and recovered from COVID-19.  Perhaps they are not in risk categories where COVID-19 is likely to cause a significant health issue.   Perhaps emphasizing with the protesters and what has happened in their lives since the COVID reaction unfolded might be a good exercise.

Yes. Perhaps every single one of the protesters has already had and recovered from Covid-19.

In which case, perhaps for them, empathizing with all of the other people who have not yet had it and would be negatively affected by a premature reopening of “life as usual” — maybe to the point of illness or even death — might be a good exercise. Especially those who, for job or other reasons, do not have the option of self-isolating.

[Imma]

As I understand the epidemiology, the virus causes only mild symptoms in most healthy people <35 with a death rate of less than 0.1%.

The death rate goes up exponentially for those over 65, or with pre-existing health conditions.

I would have thought therefore that it is up to those who are in the most at-risk sectors, or who anticipate having contact (family/friends) with the most at-risk sectors, to take the most precautions.

From what I see around me: even for the young and healthy it's not like the cold, but rather feels like having influenza and norovirus together, it's not over in a few days. People need 2-3 weeks with lots of ups and downs before they feel healthy again and these are the "mild" cases that don't require hospitalisation. While chances of hospitalisation are low for healthy people, the hospital and death rate is still a LOT higher (likely as much as 10x) than in the common flu. Many people also require a pretty long hospital stay.

Even though the vast majority of people will eventually get it, you don't want all of us to get it at the same time, because we don't want an overburdened healthsystem and the mass panic it would create. And even a healthy person without Covid-19 needs to have a hospital bed available when they fall off a roof when they are doing DIY, and I'm sure they also want a bed available when one of their vulnerable parents has a stroke. These kind of decisions cannot be left to the individual but only work if the whole community works together. Kind of like vaccination. When a person is taking risks, they are not just exposing themselves to a risk (unless they otherwise live in isolation on top of a mountain) but also their family, the people they interact with in the grocery store, the people who live in the same apartment building, their coworkers if they are still going into work, etc etc.

 It's nearly impossible for vulnerable people to completely self-isolate. First of all because many have to go into work. Secondly because they still need to get groceries and go to the hospital. I still have medically necessary hospital treatment that I need to go through. It's still happening in these circumstances which says something about how badly I need this treatment. As the hospital is 50 km away I have no choice but to take the train. I just hope I don't run into idiots taking risks.

Now, if everyone used their common sense we wouldn't have mandatory closings, but it seems like a lot of people are lacking that.

[ixtap]

So my town just had a big "end the shutdown" protest rally yesterday (and more planned for this weekend). Big unmasked group shoulder to shoulder ranting in everyone's faces. Sigh...idiots. I don't care which side of the "open up or stay closed down" debate you are on. Just recognize that people are sick and dying and this is a highly contagious disease so keep your distance!

I'm suppose to be in Sweden right now instead of the US but of course my multi-months long trip was cancelled. My grandparents are Swedish and I've spent a lot of time there and I agree with the discussion above about Swedish social culture. It is very different then some other places in Europe, especially southern European countries where everyone hugs and kisses you. My Mom is German and didn't come to the US until in her 30s and also is very standoffish compared to most in the US. If I could live in Sweden or Germany I'd be a happy camper. I was born in the UK and have a UK passport so maybe I can! Time to google.

For all your know the protesters could have already had and recovered from COVID-19.  Perhaps they are not in risk categories where COVID-19 is likely to cause a significant health issue.   Perhaps emphasizing with the protesters and what has happened in their lives since the COVID reaction unfolded might be a good exercise.

I understand there are many concerned people out there, but they can isolate themselves from any risk if they so choose.  Destroying and massively restricting the lives of others does not create a "safe space".

The great thing about personal responsibility and decision making is if you are concerned about COVID-19 you can make the decision to avoid the protesters and therefore easily bypass any theoretical risk. 

Seems idiotic to shut down society and cause trillions of dollars in economic and social damage in what amounts to mostly futile attempts to stop a virus that causes at most mild symptoms in 80% of those it infects.  It also seems idiotic that state Governors are apparently allowed make sweeping social changes and a one-size fits all policy to a virus that is harmless to the overwhelming majority of the population.

I think it would be a good idea to Constitutionally institute additional restrictions on governmental power so we can avoid such a hysterical and irrational response in the future.

The protesters in my town are flying Trump flags and like you think that scientifically recommended precautions are hysterical because they haven't gotten sick.

[Dancin'Dog]

I find it interesting that Trump is encouraging his voters to engage in risks that could easily prevent large numbers of them from being able to vote for him.  That doesn't seem like something a really smart guy would do.  Obviously, I'm just not that smart.

[T-Money$]

I find it interesting that Trump is encouraging his voters to engage in risks that could easily prevent large numbers of them from being able to vote for him.  That doesn't seem like something a really smart guy would do.  Obviously, I'm just not that smart.

Or, he could realize that the fatality rate for the virus is 0.37%, mostly elderly and obese people.  I don't know how many 80-year-olds vote at all (let alone for Trump), but the fatality rate is insignificant when compared to the vastness of the voting block.  There are likely many, many more who have legitimate grievances regarding the draconian public policy decisions currently in effect.  Millions upon millions of people have been directly and significantly hurt by the government response.  Poverty, hunger and foreclosure have more of a long term sting than a cough and fever.  Dead people do not vote, those that lost their jobs and are in financial ruin will certainly vote. 

There were 2 studies from Boston this week that show the virus may already be endemic there, as of early this week 30-50% have already been infected.  With the high R0 value of COVID-19, there are probably more than even those numbers indicate, especially in a place like NYC.

You are likely pretty smart to be on this website, but we all have a tendency to incorrectly assess risk. 

Regarding Trump, well, a broken clock is still correct twice per day.

[Davnasty]

I find it interesting that Trump is encouraging his voters to engage in risks that could easily prevent large numbers of them from being able to vote for him.  That doesn't seem like something a really smart guy would do.  Obviously, I'm just not that smart.

Or, he could realize that the fatality rate for the virus is 0.37%, mostly elderly and obese people.  I don't know how many 80-year-olds vote at all (let alone for Trump), but the fatality rate is insignificant when compared to the vastness of the voting block.  There are likely many, many more who have legitimate grievances regarding the draconian public policy decisions currently in effect.  Millions upon millions of people have been directly and significantly hurt by the government response.  Poverty, hunger and foreclosure have more of a long term sting than a cough and fever.

Presenting this as factual is dishonest and irresponsible. No one knows the fatality rate of this virus.

There were 2 studies from Boston this week that show the virus may already be endemic there,

It seems likely that it will become endemic but calling the virus endemic during the initial outbreak doesn't make sense.

as of early this week 30-50% have already been infected. 

Do not believe numbers and data presented by this poster. They are consistently untrue.

Here are the two studies they referenced and posted in another thread.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/17/business/nearly-third-200-blood-samples-taken-chelsea-show-exposure-coronavirus/

https://www.masslive.com/coronavirus/2020/04/coronavirus-spread-testing-shows-stunning-asymptomatic-covid-19-rate-at-boston-homeless-shelter.html

They do not make the claim that 30-50% of Boston has contracted the virus.

With the high R0 value of COVID-19, there are probably more than even those numbers indicate, especially in a place like NYC.

This assertion doesn't make sense. The numbers you're referring to are the actual test results which are a direct result of the high R0 value.

[former player]

I don't know how many 80-year-olds vote at all (let alone for Trump),

Voting rates are highest among the over 60s in both the USA and UK, and by a significant amount.  All the 80+ people I've known who weren't suffering dementia have voted every chance they've had, including the two centenarians.  I've wheeled a couple of them to the polls in wheelchairs myself, for that matter.  So if you don't know many 80+ year olds I feel sorry for you as all the ones I've known have been pretty awesome and definitely took what they regarded as their civic duty to vote seriously.

And while I wouldn't be so impolite as to enquire of anyone who they voted for, statistics in both the USA and UK say that 60+ and 70+ are more likely to vote Republican/conservative by 60:40.

To be perfectly frank, you seem somewhat lacking in a broader perspective on life and it comes across as a sort of uninformed callousness.

[T-Money$]

I find it interesting that Trump is encouraging his voters to engage in risks that could easily prevent large numbers of them from being able to vote for him.  That doesn't seem like something a really smart guy would do.  Obviously, I'm just not that smart.

Or, he could realize that the fatality rate for the virus is 0.37%, mostly elderly and obese people.  I don't know how many 80-year-olds vote at all (let alone for Trump), but the fatality rate is insignificant when compared to the vastness of the voting block.  There are likely many, many more who have legitimate grievances regarding the draconian public policy decisions currently in effect.  Millions upon millions of people have been directly and significantly hurt by the government response.  Poverty, hunger and foreclosure have more of a long term sting than a cough and fever.

Presenting this as factual is dishonest and irresponsible. No one knows the fatality rate of this virus.

There were 2 studies from Boston this week that show the virus may already be endemic there,

It seems likely that it will become endemic but calling the virus endemic during the initial outbreak doesn't make sense.

as of early this week 30-50% have already been infected. 

Do not believe numbers and data presented by this poster. They are consistently untrue.

Here are the two studies they referenced and posted in another thread.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/17/business/nearly-third-200-blood-samples-taken-chelsea-show-exposure-coronavirus/

https://www.masslive.com/coronavirus/2020/04/coronavirus-spread-testing-shows-stunning-asymptomatic-covid-19-rate-at-boston-homeless-shelter.html

They do not make the claim that 30-50% of Boston has contracted the virus.

With the high R0 value of COVID-19, there are probably more than even those numbers indicate, especially in a place like NYC.

This assertion doesn't make sense. The numbers you're referring to are the actual test results which are a direct result of the high R0 value.

The most recent iFR estimate of COVID-19 (0.37%) was presented in this research paper:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

The paper was updated as of Friday.  I quote:

"Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR somewhere between 0.1% and 0.36%.*"

As a pandemic continues it's likely death rates drop.  We know damn well what the iFR is for this disease, but I'm sorry that is doesn't fit the nonsense in your mind.

The preliminary data from Boston did not make any claim on infectious rate.   I did.  Perhaps we can come back to this post in a month and see what the peer reviewed data shows?  Or, we can defend dysfunctional public policy based on emotion, hysteria and fear and say to hell with the scientific method.

[deborah]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

[OtherJen]

I don't know how many 80-year-olds vote at all (let alone for Trump),

Voting rates are highest among the over 60s in both the USA and UK, and by a significant amount.  All the 80+ people I've known who weren't suffering dementia have voted every chance they've had, including the two centenarians.  I've wheeled a couple of them to the polls in wheelchairs myself, for that matter.  So if you don't know many 80+ year olds I feel sorry for you as all the ones I've known have been pretty awesome and definitely took what they regarded as their civic duty to vote seriously.

And while I wouldn't be so impolite as to enquire of anyone who they voted for, statistics in both the USA and UK say that 60+ and 70+ are more likely to vote Republican/conservative by 60:40.

To be perfectly frank, you seem somewhat lacking in a broader perspective on life and it comes across as a sort of uninformed callousness.

God, same. My friends in their 70s and 80’s put me to shame with their high level of political activism and engagement. I learn so much from them.

[T-Money$]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

There is no argument.

It is now within the scientific realm of possibility that COVID-19 is not significantly more deadly than a typical influenza strain. 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

Estimating COVID-19 Infection Fatality  Rates (IFR)
The current COVID outbreak seems to be following previous pandemics: initial CFRs start high and trend downwards. For example, In Wuhan, the CFR  has gone down from 17% in the initial phase to near 1% in the late stage. It is increasingly clear that current testing strategies are not capturing everybody.  In South Korea, considerable numbers who tested positive were also asymptomatics-  likely driving the rapid worldwide spread.

CFR rates are subject to selection bias as more severe cases are tested – generally those in the hospital settings or those with more severe symptoms. The number of currently infected asymptomatics is uncertain: estimates put it at least a half are asymptomatic; the proportion not coming forward for testing is also highly doubtful (i.e. you are symptomatic, but you do not present for testing). Therefore we can assume the IFR is significantly lower than the CFR.

Emerging evidence suggests many more people are infected. than tested. In Vo Italy, at the time the first symptomatic case was diagnosed, about 3%, had already been infected –  most were completely asymptomatic.

We could make a simple estimation of the IFR as 0.36%, based on halving the lowest boundary of the CFR prediction interval. However, the considerable uncertainty over how many people have the disease,  the proportion asymptomatic (and the demographics of those affected) means this IFR is likely an overestimate.

In Swine flu, the IFR ended up as 0.02%, fivefold less than the lowest estimate during the outbreak (the lowest estimate was 0.1% in the 1st ten weeks of the outbreak). In Iceland, where the most testing per capita has occurred, the IFR lies somewhere between 0.01% and 0.19%.

Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR somewhere between 0.1% and 0.36%.*

Data from COVID deaths in Gangelt, Germany, suggests an IFR of 0.37%.  A random sample of 1,000 residents of  Gangelt found that 14% were carrying antibodies (2% were detected  cases), which led to  the lowering of the IFR estimates

*Demographic changes in the population could vary the IFR  significantly. If younger populations are infected more the IFR will be lower. Comorbidities will have a significant impact to increase the IFR: the elderly and those with ≥ 3 comorbidities are at much higher risk.

Modelling the data on the prevalence of comorbidities is essential to understand the CFR and IFR by age (the prevalence of comorbidities is highly age-dependent and is higher in socially deprived populations). It is also not clear if the presence of other circulating influenza illnesses acts to increase the IFR (testing for co-pathogens is not occurring). And whether certain populations (e.g., those with heart conditions) are more at risk.

In those without pre-existing health conditions, and over 70, the data suggests the IFR will likely not exceed 1%.
Mortality in children seems to be near zero (unlike flu) which is also reassuring and will act to drive down the IFR significantly.
It is now essential to understand whether individuals are dying with or from the disease. Understanding this issue is critical. If, for instance, 80% of those over 80 die with the disease then the CFR  would be near 3% in this age group as opposed to 15%. Cause of death information from death certificates is often inaccurate and incomplete, particularly for conditions such as pneumonia. These factors would act to lower the IFR.

Antibody testing will provide an accurate understanding of how many people have been infected so far, and permit a more accurate estimate of the IFR.

We do not currently have a good understanding of  What proportion are asymptomatic?

We are tracking excess mortality (Assessment of Mortality in the Covid-19 outbreak to understand this phenomenon)  to determine how many excess deaths occur during the pandemic. Accurate data on deaths and cause of death (which is not forthcoming) is vital to determine the effect of the COVID pandemic.

*Estimating CFR and IFR in the early stage of outbreaks is subject to considerable uncertainties, the estimates are likely to change as more data emerges.

See Lancet report:  CFRs on mortality rate estimates can be misleading if the CFR is based on the number of deaths per number of confirmed cases at the same time.  Using the denominator of the mortality rate as the total number of patients infected at the same time as those who died would lead to much higher CFRs. However, they report the full denominator remains unknown as asymptomatic with mild symptoms might not be tested and will not be identified, particularly in the early stages of an outbreak.

[Davnasty]

The most recent iFR estimate of COVID-19 (0.37%) was presented in this research paper:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

The paper was updated as of Friday.  I quote:

"Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR somewhere between 0.1% and 0.36%.*"

As a pandemic continues it's likely death rates drop.  We know damn well what the iFR is for this disease, but I'm sorry that is doesn't fit the nonsense in your mind.

You see that asterisk in the passage you quoted? Here's the explanation it references:

*Estimating CFR and IFR in the early stage of outbreaks is subject to considerable uncertainties, the estimates are likely to change as more data emerges.

And yet again, your cited source disagrees with your claim. We do not know the IFR, we have estimates of the IFR. Call an estimate an estimate and there's no issue. Call  an estimate a fact and you're going to get called out

The preliminary data from Boston did not make any claim on infectious rate.   I did.  Perhaps we can come back to this post in a month and see what the peer reviewed data shows?  Or, we can defend dysfunctional public policy based on emotion, hysteria and fear and say to hell with the scientific method.

I don't care what we know a month from now. It's entirely possible that 30-50% of the population is infected, but you don't know that right now. Presenting your wild guesses as factual information is irresponsible. If you're making a guess call it a guess.

[Dicey]

I have no problem with the protests and support that right. But it would be just as effective done 6 ft apart while wearing a mask. They may, or may not be immune. They may, or may not be be asymptomatic. They may, or may not become infected by a fellow protester. But in any case they will likely be around others after the protest who may more readily become ill or die from the disease. A nurse or doctor or first responder who can't avoid them or those they may infect.

I have yet to see egillespie add much of value to any conversation on this forum in all of their whopping 86 posts. I think you're being trolled, @spartana. I saw the news of those protesters, too. Unbelievably clueless and fucking inconsiderate too boot. Example: my brother is deathly allergic to eggs. Most vaccinations contain egg whites, ergo, he can't have them. We need to develop herd mentality to protect the vulnerable among us. It's not just old people who are at risk.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

There is no argument.

It is now within the scientific realm of possibility that COVID-19 is not significantly more deadly than a typical influenza strain. 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

Estimating COVID-19 Infection Fatality  Rates (IFR)
The current COVID outbreak seems to be following previous pandemics: initial CFRs start high and trend downwards. For example, In Wuhan, the CFR  has gone down from 17% in the initial phase to near 1% in the late stage. It is increasingly clear that current testing strategies are not capturing everybody.  In South Korea, considerable numbers who tested positive were also asymptomatics-  likely driving the rapid worldwide spread.

CFR rates are subject to selection bias as more severe cases are tested – generally those in the hospital settings or those with more severe symptoms. The number of currently infected asymptomatics is uncertain: estimates put it at least a half are asymptomatic; the proportion not coming forward for testing is also highly doubtful (i.e. you are symptomatic, but you do not present for testing). Therefore we can assume the IFR is significantly lower than the CFR.

Emerging evidence suggests many more people are infected. than tested. In Vo Italy, at the time the first symptomatic case was diagnosed, about 3%, had already been infected –  most were completely asymptomatic.

We could make a simple estimation of the IFR as 0.36%, based on halving the lowest boundary of the CFR prediction interval. However, the considerable uncertainty over how many people have the disease,  the proportion asymptomatic (and the demographics of those affected) means this IFR is likely an overestimate.

In Swine flu, the IFR ended up as 0.02%, fivefold less than the lowest estimate during the outbreak (the lowest estimate was 0.1% in the 1st ten weeks of the outbreak). In Iceland, where the most testing per capita has occurred, the IFR lies somewhere between 0.01% and 0.19%.

Taking account of historical experience, trends in the data, increased number of infections in the population at largest, and potential impact of misclassification of deaths gives a presumed estimate for the COVID-19 IFR somewhere between 0.1% and 0.36%.*

Data from COVID deaths in Gangelt, Germany, suggests an IFR of 0.37%.  A random sample of 1,000 residents of  Gangelt found that 14% were carrying antibodies (2% were detected  cases), which led to  the lowering of the IFR estimates

*Demographic changes in the population could vary the IFR  significantly. If younger populations are infected more the IFR will be lower. Comorbidities will have a significant impact to increase the IFR: the elderly and those with ≥ 3 comorbidities are at much higher risk.

Modelling the data on the prevalence of comorbidities is essential to understand the CFR and IFR by age (the prevalence of comorbidities is highly age-dependent and is higher in socially deprived populations). It is also not clear if the presence of other circulating influenza illnesses acts to increase the IFR (testing for co-pathogens is not occurring). And whether certain populations (e.g., those with heart conditions) are more at risk.

In those without pre-existing health conditions, and over 70, the data suggests the IFR will likely not exceed 1%.
Mortality in children seems to be near zero (unlike flu) which is also reassuring and will act to drive down the IFR significantly.
It is now essential to understand whether individuals are dying with or from the disease. Understanding this issue is critical. If, for instance, 80% of those over 80 die with the disease then the CFR  would be near 3% in this age group as opposed to 15%. Cause of death information from death certificates is often inaccurate and incomplete, particularly for conditions such as pneumonia. These factors would act to lower the IFR.

Antibody testing will provide an accurate understanding of how many people have been infected so far, and permit a more accurate estimate of the IFR.

We do not currently have a good understanding of  What proportion are asymptomatic?

We are tracking excess mortality (Assessment of Mortality in the Covid-19 outbreak to understand this phenomenon)  to determine how many excess deaths occur during the pandemic. Accurate data on deaths and cause of death (which is not forthcoming) is vital to determine the effect of the COVID pandemic.

*Estimating CFR and IFR in the early stage of outbreaks is subject to considerable uncertainties, the estimates are likely to change as more data emerges.

See Lancet report:  CFRs on mortality rate estimates can be misleading if the CFR is based on the number of deaths per number of confirmed cases at the same time.  Using the denominator of the mortality rate as the total number of patients infected at the same time as those who died would lead to much higher CFRs. However, they report the full denominator remains unknown as asymptomatic with mild symptoms might not be tested and will not be identified, particularly in the early stages of an outbreak.

And yet, despite all your determined copy pasta, people in your neighbourhood continue to drop like flies. Maybe you should spend less time on the internet and more time looking out your window.

[Abe]

Using the lowest IFR mentioned, we’re looking at 330m x 0.5 infection rate (low end of predicted exposure) x 0.001 = 165k deaths in the US. For comparison, about 40k people die of the flu per year. I guess we will see how well the parts of the country that open up before this peaks fare. If the country as a whole does as poorly as NYC/NJ we’re looking at several hundred thousand deaths (330m US population /16m NY/Nj population= 20, multiplied by 21,000 deaths = 420,000 deaths nationwide). My guess is it’ll be somewhere in between. That’s a lot of deaths just to avoid a few months of economic distress.

[scottish]

I find it interesting that Trump is encouraging his voters to engage in risks that could easily prevent large numbers of them from being able to vote for him.  That doesn't seem like something a really smart guy would do.  Obviously, I'm just not that smart.

Trump's genius doesn't lie in mathematics.

[Kyle Schuant]

Presenting this as factual is dishonest and irresponsible. No one knows the fatality rate of this virus.

There's the virus itself, and then there's the medical care.

In my state of Victoria here in Australia, we've had about 1,400 cases and 15 deaths. An international study has said our testing is catching at least 84% of the infected, maybe up to 92%. So the death rate is a bit under 1%. But... we're talking about, for example this weekend, 30 people in hospital, 12 of whom in intensive care. And the state had ~500 ICU beds before this, we're building 4,500 more. And we're looking at ~10 new cases a day.

In other words, every covid-19 patient in my state can get early access to medical care, and if they need critical or intensive care, they get it, the staff aren't overwhelmed, no medicines are running out, and so on. If it's physically possible to stop that person getting really sick, or physically possible to stop that really sick person dying, they'll manage it. Contrast this with this ICU nurse's story from NYC.

https://kristenfmartins.wordpress.com/2020/04/17/shit-is-real/

It's like saying, "What's the death rate of someone who has a cardiac arrest?" Well, if there is just me with first aid and one casualty we get one figure. Now we add an AED and the figure improves. Now we add paramedics within 10 minutes and the figure improves more, still. Okay, now we add a second person having a heart attack, and there's still just me, the AED and the single pair of paramedics. Now let's add a third. And so on.

What's the death rate of someone who has covid-19? Well, it depends. Is there one patient, or 10,000? And that's why Australia did the lockdown: not only so there'd be less people infected, but so that more of those who are infected will survive.

Now, obviously we can talk about particular lockdown measures (my state has closed playgrounds but keeps park water fountains open, which is the wrong way around), and we can talk about their other costs (suicides rise with unemployment, marriages break up, substance abuse increases). But it keeps the number of infected down, and it improves the survival rate of the infected, because the medical system doesn't get overwhelmed.

[bigblock440]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

What I'm wondering is why we haven't heard a thing about Belgium being a hotspot.  I didn't realize it was so bad there until today.

[ixtap]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

What I'm wondering is why we haven't heard a thing about Belgium being a hotspot.  I didn't realize it was so bad there until today.

We pretty much only hear about places where either the health or mortuary system gets overwhelmed. Also, in raw numbers, those coming out of Belgium aren't staggering, even if the per capita numbers are.

[deborah]

It’s fairly obvious that reporters aren’t mathematically inclined. I’m continually surprised at which countries each reporter is singling out as successful. Generally there are others which are far better.

[Bloop Bloop]

As I understand the epidemiology, the virus causes only mild symptoms in most healthy people <35 with a death rate of less than 0.1%.

The death rate goes up exponentially for those over 65, or with pre-existing health conditions.

I would have thought therefore that it is up to those who are in the most at-risk sectors, or who anticipate having contact (family/friends) with the most at-risk sectors, to take the most precautions.

Yes like all those old now-dead people in the nursi g homes who were dependent on the younger staff to care for them. Some who might not wish to follow distancing rules when out in public. Who may even join close large unmasked gatherings to protest covid safety measures. Or who's spouse or children or friends they are in close contact with do. But hey, WTF not? I mean THEY won't get too sick if they get it and who the hell cares how their actions may affect a bunch of old or immune compromised people.

Bit different if you're working in a nursing home as opposed to, say, being a young healthy person like me who's been ordered to stay in his flat, alone, with literally no human contact (other than when buying groceries), for 6 weeks at a time despite having no ordinary contact with elderly people in my everyday life.

[SwordGuy]

As I understand the epidemiology, the virus causes only mild symptoms in most healthy people <35 with a death rate of less than 0.1%.

The death rate goes up exponentially for those over 65, or with pre-existing health conditions.

I would have thought therefore that it is up to those who are in the most at-risk sectors, or who anticipate having contact (family/friends) with the most at-risk sectors, to take the most precautions.

Yes like all those old now-dead people in the nursi g homes who were dependent on the younger staff to care for them. Some who might not wish to follow distancing rules when out in public. Who may even join close large unmasked gatherings to protest covid safety measures. Or who's spouse or children or friends they are in close contact with do. But hey, WTF not? I mean THEY won't get too sick if they get it and who the hell cares how their actions may affect a bunch of old or immune compromised people.

Bit different if you're working in a nursing home as opposed to, say, being a young healthy person like me who's been ordered to stay in his flat, alone, with literally no human contact (other than when buying groceries), for 6 weeks at a time despite having no ordinary contact with elderly people in my everyday life.

The people you would be hanging out with do have those contacts.  Jeesh, haven't you heard of 6 degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon?

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

[frugalnacho]

Coronavirus is coming for Kevin Bacon.  Breaking news clip of him luring a coronavirus into a trap:



This is how we beat this thing.

[Davnasty]

As I understand the epidemiology, the virus causes only mild symptoms in most healthy people <35 with a death rate of less than 0.1%.

The death rate goes up exponentially for those over 65, or with pre-existing health conditions.

I would have thought therefore that it is up to those who are in the most at-risk sectors, or who anticipate having contact (family/friends) with the most at-risk sectors, to take the most precautions.

Yes like all those old now-dead people in the nursi g homes who were dependent on the younger staff to care for them. Some who might not wish to follow distancing rules when out in public. Who may even join close large unmasked gatherings to protest covid safety measures. Or who's spouse or children or friends they are in close contact with do. But hey, WTF not? I mean THEY won't get too sick if they get it and who the hell cares how their actions may affect a bunch of old or immune compromised people.

Bit different if you're working in a nursing home as opposed to, say, being a young healthy person like me who's been ordered to stay in his flat, alone, with literally no human contact (other than when buying groceries), for 6 weeks at a time despite having no ordinary contact with elderly people in my everyday life.

The people you would be hanging out with do have those contacts.  Jeesh, haven't you heard of 6 degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon?

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

And it's 6 degrees between most of the planet. How many degrees between you and a healthcare worker?

[Polaria]

What I'm wondering is why we haven't heard a thing about Belgium being a hotspot.  I didn't realize it was so bad there until today.

My understanding is that suspected deaths and cases are included as well, not only deaths and cases that tested positive. The number of beds in ICU is now diminishing (see attached file).

At this stage about half of deaths is occurring in care homes. They’re currently massively testing in care homes to control the pandemic there.

The lockdown situation here seems similar as elsewhere. I am starting my 6th week of working from home.

That said, a good school friend of my sibling passed away at 40 from COVID.

[Imma]

What I'm wondering is why we haven't heard a thing about Belgium being a hotspot.  I didn't realize it was so bad there until today.

My understanding is that suspected deaths and cases are included as well, not only deaths and cases that tested positive. The number of beds in ICU is now diminishing (see attached file).

At this stage about half of deaths is occurring in care homes. They’re currently massively testing in care homes to control the pandemic there.

The lockdown situation here seems similar as elsewhere. I am starting my 6th week of working from home.

That said, a good school friend of my sibling passed away at 40 from COVID.

Yes, and to nuance the figures in NL (and I think in Belgium too) we generally only test those who are ill enough to be admitted to hospital. Our healthcare system can still cope, so we're really talking about a 10% mortality rate in severe cases.

The mortality rate is a lot worse than during flu season. In my hometown about 5 people die every week under normal circumstances. Maybe 8 or to 10 during flu season or a heatwave. It had been 35-40 a week since early March. The local catholic church is doing 3 to 4 funerals a day, 6 days a week. The last remaining members of the Greatest and Silent generations are being wiped out. But younger, healthy people are dying or getting seriously ill too. A lower percentage of them, sure, but I can't remember ever hearing about a young person on the ICU for flu (it happens, sure, but it's extremely rare) but I've heard about quite a few in that situation because of Covid-19. The youngest person I know on ICU is 30 and healthy.

[Michael in ABQ]

I don’t understand your argument, when your country has the highest death toll from this virus of anywhere in the world.

What I'm wondering is why we haven't heard a thing about Belgium being a hotspot.  I didn't realize it was so bad there until today.

At least in the US it's a combination of 1. Nobody cares about Belgium (or the Netherlands) 2. The absolute numbers are relatively low 3. It doesn't fit any preferred narratives.

What will get more clicks a story about tens of thousands of deaths in Spain, Italy, France, or the US. Or one about thousands of deaths in Belgium? One that blames Trump for everything or one that makes a nuanced comparison between how other countries have tried to handle the pandemic? The media knows what sells and they're working overtime to pump it out.

[Polaria]

To complete my post above about the Belgian situation:

What happened is that Italy started to get hit during the carnival holidays in Belgium (the week of 24th February), and lot of Belgians were on ski holiday there. There were also a lot of students as traditionally students go to ski just after their exam sessions of the first semester.

Everyone went back to Belgium at the same time at the end of the holidays, and that led to multiple hotspots appearing simultaneously everywhere in Belgium.

This was our mistake I guess, everyone coming back from Italy should have been quarantined but we were still underestimating the consequences of the pandemic at that time.

[former player]

To complete my post above about the Belgian situation:

What happened is that Italy started to get hit during the carnival holidays in Belgium (the week of 24th February), and lot of Belgians were on ski holiday there. There were also a lot of students as traditionally students go to ski just after their exam sessions of the first semester.

Everyone went back to Belgium at the same time at the end of the holidays, and that led to multiple hotspots appearing simultaneously everywhere in Belgium.

This was our mistake I guess, everyone coming back from Italy should have been quarantined but we were still underestimating the consequences of the pandemic at that time.

We saw a similar pattern in my rural part of the UK where a cluster of cases from a school skiing trip to Northern Italy in February was dealt with fairly easily and after that it was mostly refugees coming down from London before the lockdown started (25 of 28 cases were "out of county" at one point).  Locally we are now down to only 5 ICU cases in ICU beds created for 80.  Much of the UK is doing similarly OK, the big problem is London which has the same issues as New York: high levels of international transit, crowded public transport, large social gatherings and politicians who delayed putting social distancing in place.

[marty998]

Presenting this as factual is dishonest and irresponsible. No one knows the fatality rate of this virus.

There's the virus itself, and then there's the medical care.

In my state of Victoria here in Australia, we've had about 1,400 cases and 15 deaths. An international study has said our testing is catching at least 84% of the infected, maybe up to 92%. So the death rate is a bit under 1%. But... we're talking about, for example this weekend, 30 people in hospital, 12 of whom in intensive care. And the state had ~500 ICU beds before this, we're building 4,500 more. And we're looking at ~10 new cases a day.

In other words, every covid-19 patient in my state can get early access to medical care, and if they need critical or intensive care, they get it, the staff aren't overwhelmed, no medicines are running out, and so on. If it's physically possible to stop that person getting really sick, or physically possible to stop that really sick person dying, they'll manage it. Contrast this with this ICU nurse's story from NYC.

https://kristenfmartins.wordpress.com/2020/04/17/shit-is-real/

It's like saying, "What's the death rate of someone who has a cardiac arrest?" Well, if there is just me with first aid and one casualty we get one figure. Now we add an AED and the figure improves. Now we add paramedics within 10 minutes and the figure improves more, still. Okay, now we add a second person having a heart attack, and there's still just me, the AED and the single pair of paramedics. Now let's add a third. And so on.

What's the death rate of someone who has covid-19? Well, it depends. Is there one patient, or 10,000? And that's why Australia did the lockdown: not only so there'd be less people infected, but so that more of those who are infected will survive.

Now, obviously we can talk about particular lockdown measures (my state has closed playgrounds but keeps park water fountains open, which is the wrong way around), and we can talk about their other costs (suicides rise with unemployment, marriages break up, substance abuse increases). But it keeps the number of infected down, and it improves the survival rate of the infected, because the medical system doesn't get overwhelmed.

This man gets it. Thank you Kyle.

I've tried to refrain from commenting here as much as I can but there is so much nonsense being spouted.

I'm a healthy young man. If I get Covid-19, I'm statistically unlikely to notice it. But in 14 days I'll be in contact with the little old lady down the hallway who likes to have a chat, 300 people at work, 2000 people on the train into work, a couple of hundred people at my running club, however many at the grocery store. And I'm a friggin introvert who shies away from people.

Those people at work and those people on the train live all over Sydney, and come into contact with the full range of demographics.

Italy started with 2 cases. Two fucking cases.

This needs to be zeroed out completely for two weeks. Then you can start lifting lockdowns. At least until the virus mutates into something less deadly.  (viruses are smart like that. A dead host isn't any good to it, they learn quickly).

And for fucks sake herd immunity takes generations to develop naturally without vaccinations. It's called natural selection. It randomly determines which offspring are resistant and which are not. But some of you were obviously not taught evolution in school so you wouldn't know that would you?

Letting her rip and assuming anti-bodies will save you is irresponsible unscientifically proven garbage against this virus.

[partgypsy]

Unfortunately, herd immunity is not "the way to go". As others point out it will take years for say in the US to reach levels that instill herd immunity. If you want to open it up and let herd immunity take care of it, our healthcare system will be overwhelmed, we will lose doctors, nurses, respiratory techs either from illness or burnout, which will increase morbidity and mortality from all other causes. I do think that various parts of the country will partially open up, and whether things will stay open, or go back to closures will be based on changing data. This going to take at least a year and a half to go through. I just want the decisions to open or partially open or remain close be based on epidemiological information than political or pressure from individuals agitating. Some of the negative effects of isolation, particularly economic, can be ameliorated by the gov. Government can't bring people back to life.

[Dicey]

Unfortunately, herd immunity is not "the way to go". As others point out it will take years for say in the US to reach levels that instill herd immunity. If you want to open it up and let herd immunity take care of it, our healthcare system will be overwhelmed, we will lose doctors, nurses, respiratory techs either from illness or burnout, which will increase morbidity and mortality from all other causes. I do think that various parts of the country will partially open up, and whether things will stay open, or go back to closures will be based on changing data. This going to take at least a year and a half to go through. I just want the decisions to open or partially open or remain close be based on epidemiological information than political or pressure from individuals agitating. Some of the negative effects of isolation, particularly economic, can be ameliorated by the gov. Government can't bring people back to life.

Amen to every word of this.

[OtherJen]

I have no problem with the protests and support that right. But it would be just as effective done 6 ft apart while wearing a mask. They may, or may not be immune. They may, or may not be be asymptomatic. They may, or may not become infected by a fellow protester. But in any case they will likely be around others after the protest who may more readily become ill or die from the disease. A nurse or doctor or first responder who can't avoid them or those they may infect.

I have yet to see egillespie add much of value to any conversation on this forum in all of their whopping 86 posts. I think you're being trolled, @spartana. I saw the news of those protesters, too. Unbelievably clueless and fucking inconsiderate too boot. Example: my brother is deathly allergic to eggs. Most vaccinations contain egg whites, ergo, he can't have them. We need to develop herd mentality to protect the vulnerable among us. It's not just old people who are at risk.

You are probably right. I get peeved that people don't care that their actions, while not harmful to themselves (although I wouldn't count on that), can be deadly to even a young healthy person or child - or be transmitted to multiples of young healthy people who then can transmit it to other more vulnerable people. Or first responders (several young healthy and very very dead nurses, doctors, firefighters, and police in my state) who interact with many others.

Some people are just inherently selfish and self-centered and bristle at the slightest notion that they might be inconvenienced to protect others. And yes, I agree that we are being trolled by someone who is not arguing in good faith.

[Imma]

To complete my post above about the Belgian situation:

What happened is that Italy started to get hit during the carnival holidays in Belgium (the week of 24th February), and lot of Belgians were on ski holiday there. There were also a lot of students as traditionally students go to ski just after their exam sessions of the first semester.

Everyone went back to Belgium at the same time at the end of the holidays, and that led to multiple hotspots appearing simultaneously everywhere in Belgium.

This was our mistake I guess, everyone coming back from Italy should have been quarantined but we were still underestimating the consequences of the pandemic at that time.

We saw a similar pattern in my rural part of the UK where a cluster of cases from a school skiing trip to Northern Italy in February was dealt with fairly easily and after that it was mostly refugees coming down from London before the lockdown started (25 of 28 cases were "out of county" at one point).  Locally we are now down to only 5 ICU cases in ICU beds created for 80.  Much of the UK is doing similarly OK, the big problem is London which has the same issues as New York: high levels of international transit, crowded public transport, large social gatherings and politicians who delayed putting social distancing in place.

Funny, in NL it's a bit different. The worst affected places are all rural, not urban. My hometown and a few other towns were hit pretty early on - likely Covid-19 came to the country early to mid-February. Likely through people coming back from skiing in Italy. During the carnival week the virus spread like wildfire through the community - everyone is in close contact with each other, zero awareness of the potential risks because at that point there are no known cases in our country at all. My relative was likely infected at a carnival party. But for the virus to spread so very fast at that point it must have already arrived 1-2 weeks earlier. The first official case in the country happened on the Thursday of that week but it must have been around for weeks. It's easy to miss if you're not looking for it. The symptoms are a lot like the flu and elderly people dying from pneumonia is something that isn't uncommon in February.

But ever since that week and still up to this day, the virus is spreading fast in villages and much slower in the city. My theory it's because villages are so close-knit and people in the city have less social contacts. According to village gossip one of the sources of the virus is the local dentist who came back from Italy in the first week of February. No idea if that's true but it does explain why the virus was able to spread so quickly. And we know several carnival parties (one especially for the elderly) and a church choir rehearsal were big catalysts.

[TomTX]

Yeah I don't think so. This virus has caused a minuscule number of deaths outside China. The death rate for healthy people under 40 is 0.2%. It does not worry me in the slightest.

This comment did not age well at all.

[js82]

I have no problem with the protests and support that right. But it would be just as effective done 6 ft apart while wearing a mask. They may, or may not be immune. They may, or may not be be asymptomatic. They may, or may not become infected by a fellow protester. But in any case they will likely be around others after the protest who may more readily become ill or die from the disease. A nurse or doctor or first responder who can't avoid them or those they may infect.

I have yet to see egillespie add much of value to any conversation on this forum in all of their whopping 86 posts. I think you're being trolled, @spartana. I saw the news of those protesters, too. Unbelievably clueless and fucking inconsiderate too boot. Example: my brother is deathly allergic to eggs. Most vaccinations contain egg whites, ergo, he can't have them. We need to develop herd mentality to protect the vulnerable among us. It's not just old people who are at risk.

You are probably right. I get peeved that people don't care that their actions, while not harmful to themselves (although I wouldn't count on that), can be deadly to even a young healthy person or child - or be transmitted to multiples of young healthy people who then can transmit it to other more vulnerable people. Or first responders (several young healthy and very very dead nurses, doctors, firefighters, and police in my state) who interact with many others.

I 100% share this view.

I empathize with people that have been put in a bad spot by the shutdown - their concerns/fears/struggles are completely legitimate and we shouldn't downplay them at all.  I acknowledge that what we're currently doing is not practically sustainable for more than a few additional weeks due to the economic cascade that will happen.  I recognize that social distancing is tough in a multitude of different ways - whether you're a newly-unemployed single person living alone who's not getting enough human contact right now, or whether you're a parent asked to take on the impossible task of working and teaching your kids simultaneously.  The view that at some point the costs of keeping things closed will exceed the costs of opening things up is something that I acknowledge, and something that merits detailed study to understand what the different paths forward might look like.

What I will not accept is cavalier attitudes towards transmitting the disease(i.e. closely spaced public gatherings without protection) - while we're going to have to reopen some locations sooner than we want from a public health perspective, that doesn't give us license to be careless on a personal level while doing so.  While we're opening things up, we still need to be taking steps to minimize disease transmission. Because while some of our personal odds may be pretty good due to our age and health, most(all) of us have older coworkers, neighbors, and/or relatives whose odds are firmly in the "not worth risking it" territory.

This is where we need to treat this situation with nuance.   Even if you believe that we need to start reopening things right now because the costs of not doing so are unacceptably high, there are still a lot of little things we need to do to protect each other (particularly the most vulnerable) while we're trying to keep our economy afloat.  Things that don't require us to close down businesses, and don't cost much in the way of time/money, but just might help cut transmission.  But with all the bluster in the political scene, I worry that this gets lost and some who have pushed to one edge of the debate will let their desire to get back to normal stop them from taking some pretty basic precautions while doing so.

[bacchi]

Using the lowest IFR mentioned, we’re looking at 330m x 0.5 infection rate (low end of predicted exposure) x 0.001 = 165k deaths in the US. For comparison, about 40k people die of the flu per year. I guess we will see how well the parts of the country that open up before this peaks fare. If the country as a whole does as poorly as NYC/NJ we’re looking at several hundred thousand deaths (330m US population /16m NY/Nj population= 20, multiplied by 21,000 deaths = 420,000 deaths nationwide). My guess is it’ll be somewhere in between. That’s a lot of deaths just to avoid a few months of economic distress.

An older neighbor (~70 years) commented to me yesterday about the protestors, "I've never felt so sacrificial."

[Dicey]

Yeah I don't think so. This virus has caused a minuscule number of deaths outside China. The death rate for healthy people under 40 is 0.2%. It does not worry me in the slightest.

This comment did not age well at all.

Yeah, that one and the one I mentioned above are like the Obama birthers. No amount of evidence is going to convince them they're not correct. Ultimately they're just...oh, nevermind, it's just not worth the energy...

[John Galt incarnate!]

I think it would be a good idea to Constitutionally institute additional restrictions on governmental power so we can avoid such a hysterical and irrational response in the future.

I'm supportive of the vast majority of restrictions imposed pursuant to the police power.

However, there are  instances of abuse of the police power by some governors and officials.

Would that the abusers'  sovereign immunity could be undone and they  could be sued  for money damages.

[Dicey]

OMG, you guys. Grab a kleenex (if you have one) before reading this:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hear-dad-daughter-stays-phone-120345094.html

[Gremlin]

Yeah I don't think so. This virus has caused a minuscule number of deaths outside China. The death rate for healthy people under 40 is 0.2%. It does not worry me in the slightest.

This comment did not age well at all.

I completely disagree with your assertion that this comment did not age well.  Bloop Bloop continues to show that it does not worry him in the slightest.

...or do you mean the bit about only causing a miniscule number of deaths outside of China? 

[Bloop Bloop]

Yeah I don't think so. This virus has caused a minuscule number of deaths outside China. The death rate for healthy people under 40 is 0.2%. It does not worry me in the slightest.

This comment did not age well at all.

Yeah, that one and the one I mentioned above are like the Obama birthers. No amount of evidence is going to convince them they're not correct. Ultimately they're just...oh, nevermind, it's just not worth the energy...

It still doesn't worry me in the slightest.

I was wrong about it causing a minuscule number of deaths. I guess some countries didn't handle it so well.

Death toll in my country of 25 million is 70 (youngest victim is 40 years old, majority of deaths were either former cancer patients, nursing home residents or were stuck on a stricken cruise liner) so I think we have done well to get through it.

Three more weeks then lockdown ends and the sun continues to shine.

Hopefully other countries get their act together.

[Dicey]

Yeah I don't think so. This virus has caused a minuscule number of deaths outside China. The death rate for healthy people under 40 is 0.2%. It does not worry me in the slightest.

This comment did not age well at all.

Yeah, that one and the one I mentioned above are like the Obama birthers. No amount of evidence is going to convince them they're not correct. Ultimately they're just...oh, nevermind, it's just not worth the energy...

It still doesn't worry me in the slightest.

I was wrong about it causing a minuscule number of deaths. I guess some countries didn't handle it so well.

Death toll in my country of 25 million is 70 (youngest victim is 40 years old, majority of deaths were either former cancer patients, nursing home residents or were stuck on a stricken cruise liner) so I think we have done well to get through it.

Three more weeks then lockdown ends and the sun continues to shine.

Hopefully other countries get their act together.

Sure, but your country's experience isn't everybody else's experience. Some of us have to play the cards we're dealt and having people from other places tell us our fears are ridiculously unfounded despite factual evidence to the contrary is not helpful in the least. If you're not posting to be helpful, then perhaps you're just posting to hear yourself talk. How is that helpful? <--- Rhetorical question, no need to answer. You are by far not the worst offender on this topic.

[Bloop Bloop]

That's all true. I posted my own thoughts on it then got called out on it so I responded with my own further thoughts. If I hadn't been called out I wouldn't have responded.

No doubt my initial impressions were coloured by the fact that I live in a country with excellent universal healthcare and a responsible government which has mitigated the health impact of the virus.

[BNgarden]

Interesting economist research outlined here about approaches to rule-following for greater good:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/covid-19-rule-breakers-elinor-ostrom-1.5536099