Author Topic: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?  (Read 248187 times)

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2800 on: July 01, 2020, 08:33:53 AM »
To be just a tad more specific, I guess what I'm saying is that, while the resulting opinions may vary on a spectrum, I can pretty quickly gauge where people get their news.
Where do you think DeSantis and Abbott are getting their news from? Have they suddenly switched to reading the New York Times in the past few days?

I live in a part of the country where the vast majority of the population don't know what the hell they're going to do when the stimulus expires this month, or how they will handle childcare if kids don't go back to school, etc.
Did the people in your part of the country happen to elect senators and a president who won't renew the stimulus? Whether or not they did, it's sad that they're going to be hurt by its lack. But it's, like, not an inherent problem? Like we could pass another stimulus bill, and there's only one of the two political parties that is currently opposed to that action.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 08:35:54 AM by obstinate »

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2801 on: July 01, 2020, 08:38:56 AM »
Brings up Kavanaugh, completely absent of context. Lots of words. I'm smarter than you. Lots more words. Why does everyone think I'm a right wing nutjob?

Re: economic collapse, the United States prints its own currency and can borrow it at zero percent.

My Kavenaugh comment is about the coverage, not necessarily the situation itself. If you don't think COVID is from the same playbook, that's on you.

media = bad is the most tired and lazy take of the past five years and I've lost all patience for it.

And your comment regarding economic collapse wreaks of socioeconomic privilege. Glad this isn't affecting you. I live in a part of the country where the vast majority of the population don't know what the hell they're going to do when the stimulus expires this month, or how they will handle childcare if kids don't go back to school, etc.

The United States prints its own currency and can borrow at zero percent. If you don't recognize that it's a false choice to say that we have to let the virus spread because of the economy, that's on you.

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1619
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2802 on: July 01, 2020, 08:41:47 AM »
To be just a tad more specific, I guess what I'm saying is that, while the resulting opinions may vary on a spectrum, I can pretty quickly gauge where people get their news.
Where do you think DeSantis and Abbott are getting their news from? Have they suddenly switched to reading the New York Times in the past few days?

I live in a part of the country where the vast majority of the population don't know what the hell they're going to do when the stimulus expires this month, or how they will handle childcare if kids don't go back to school, etc.
Did the people in your part of the country happen to elect senators and a president who won't renew the stimulus? Whether or not they did, it's sad that they're going to be hurt by its lack. But it's, like, not an inherent problem? Like we could pass another stimulus bill, and there's only one of the two political parties that is currently opposed to that action.

I live in Ohio. The county voted for Clinton; the Congressional district representative is a democrat; and our senators are one R and one D. So I don't know what you're getting at.

Regarding the former point, I don't think Abbott and DeSantis are making decisions based on any sort of science.


ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1619
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2803 on: July 01, 2020, 08:43:47 AM »
Brings up Kavanaugh, completely absent of context. Lots of words. I'm smarter than you. Lots more words. Why does everyone think I'm a right wing nutjob?

Re: economic collapse, the United States prints its own currency and can borrow it at zero percent.

My Kavenaugh comment is about the coverage, not necessarily the situation itself. If you don't think COVID is from the same playbook, that's on you.

media = bad is the most tired and lazy take of the past five years and I've lost all patience for it.

And your comment regarding economic collapse wreaks of socioeconomic privilege. Glad this isn't affecting you. I live in a part of the country where the vast majority of the population don't know what the hell they're going to do when the stimulus expires this month, or how they will handle childcare if kids don't go back to school, etc.

The United States prints its own currency and can borrow at zero percent. If you don't recognize that it's a false choice to say that we have to let the virus spread because of the economy, that's on you.

Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2804 on: July 01, 2020, 08:45:14 AM »
So which serological study should we be paying attention to? The one out of Stanford from a few months ago that said everyone and their mom had COVID and thus it wasn't deadly at all? The ones out of New York that seem to agree with the notion that COVID is 10x deadlier than the flu? Or some other study that confirms your worldview?

Science is a conversation. Some scientists do research and form an opinion. Others do more research and present a different opinion. And over time, the facts evolve. And the media reports on those facts. It's messy and imperfect. But it's a process. Cheap second guessing and time traveling is not.

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2805 on: July 01, 2020, 08:46:44 AM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.

Media bad. Government bad. Got it.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2806 on: July 01, 2020, 08:52:36 AM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.
Enlighten us. Seems like folks are pretty happy with the expanded unemployment benefits and it has prevented a lot of folks from descending into abject poverty. I am aware that people are less than pleased with the small business loan stuff, because it came with a lot of weird strings attached.

I am remarkably socioeconomically privileged, but, being as I'm in the top 0.5% of incomes, I did not need COVID to tell me that. It also doesn't impinge on my opinion about policy.

ReadySetMillionaire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1619
  • Location: The Buckeye State
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2807 on: July 01, 2020, 08:55:27 AM »
So which serological study should we be paying attention to? The one out of Stanford from a few months ago that said everyone and their mom had COVID and thus it wasn't deadly at all? The ones out of New York that seem to agree with the notion that COVID is 10x deadlier than the flu? Or some other study that confirms your worldview?

Science is a conversation. Some scientists do research and form an opinion. Others do more research and present a different opinion. And over time, the facts evolve. And the media reports on those facts. It's messy and imperfect. But it's a process. Cheap second guessing and time traveling is not.

For this exact reason, I think John Ioannidis's pre-print study performing a macro-analysis of 23 different seroprevalence studies is a good barometer of where the science is at. I grant that it has not been peer-reviewed, but prior to being an "outsider" regarding COVID, my understanding is that Dr. Ioannidis was one of the most respected scientists in the world when it came to statistical analysis.

In examining these 23 different studies, he estimates that IFR is around .26%, and perhaps as high as .84%, and much, much, much lower for people under 70.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v2

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2808 on: July 01, 2020, 09:01:51 AM »
This is the same guy whose lab published that widely panned study about the prevalence of infection in Santa Clara County in April.

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4265
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2809 on: July 01, 2020, 09:02:54 AM »
I think you can simultaneously think that with the limited information we had 4 months ago, it was ok to freak out, and also that with the information we have now, it's probably a waste of time to do much more than masks/no huge events/protect the elderly.

It's not clear to me why it's gov't overreach/right wing freakout time when at the time the disease seemed to be killing people like crazy. But likewise it seems dumb to double down on freaking out and mortgaging our future on the possibility that maybe some people will have lung problems down the road (ie, left wing freakout time). That's a big step down from worrying that it's going to kill many millions of people in the US, and it justifies an adjustment in policy.

-W

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2810 on: July 01, 2020, 09:08:30 AM »
Brings up Kavanaugh, completely absent of context. Lots of words. I'm smarter than you. Lots more words. Why does everyone think I'm a right wing nutjob?



Right? I literally laughed out loud at that post.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2811 on: July 01, 2020, 09:11:28 AM »
It's not clear to me why it's gov't overreach/right wing freakout time when at the time the disease seemed to be killing people like crazy. But likewise it seems dumb to double down on freaking out and mortgaging our future on the possibility that maybe some people will have lung problems down the road (ie, left wing freakout time). That's a big step down from worrying that it's going to kill many millions of people in the US, and it justifies an adjustment in policy.
I am definitely not worried about a huge number of people having long term lung function issues. I was also never worried about COVID killing "many millions" of people. OTOH, even at the low estimate of 0.25% population IFR, a disease that infects everyone in the U.S. would kill almost a million people.

As yet, no country has demonstrated the ability to protect the elderly, because it turns out elderly people either have younger people taking care of them, or else themselves must go out into the world and interact with younger people e.g. by going to the grocery store and getting food. It's also not obvious to me that accepting the ~50-75k deaths that would be implied by a 0.05% IFR for people <70 years old is a good tradeoff compared keeping the economy relatively closed for a while. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2812 on: July 01, 2020, 09:14:48 AM »
So which serological study should we be paying attention to? The one out of Stanford from a few months ago that said everyone and their mom had COVID and thus it wasn't deadly at all? The ones out of New York that seem to agree with the notion that COVID is 10x deadlier than the flu? Or some other study that confirms your worldview?

Science is a conversation. Some scientists do research and form an opinion. Others do more research and present a different opinion. And over time, the facts evolve. And the media reports on those facts. It's messy and imperfect. But it's a process. Cheap second guessing and time traveling is not.

For this exact reason, I think John Ioannidis's pre-print study performing a macro-analysis of 23 different seroprevalence studies is a good barometer of where the science is at. I grant that it has not been peer-reviewed, but prior to being an "outsider" regarding COVID, my understanding is that Dr. Ioannidis was one of the most respected scientists in the world when it came to statistical analysis.

In examining these 23 different studies, he estimates that IFR is around .26%, and perhaps as high as .84%, and much, much, much lower for people under 70.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v2

Ioannidis is the Stanford guy. Interestingly, 0.26% is right around the CDC's current best guess too. Based on my own analysis (I'm a data person, not a infectious disease person to be perfectly clear) I think it's higher, but he's in good company, right now at least.

But I can't help but to remark about how common it is to trot out early 2.2 million death estimates or the WHO's 3.4% case (not infection) fatality rate, each of which were very small parts of large white papers that came with a ton of caveats. But how much time do we spend on the fact that Ioannidis floated the possibility of fewer than 10,000 US deaths in mid-March. Not only that, he said that they wouldn't even be noticeable. That they'd be background noise in regular seasonal flu numbers.

That is obviously absurd at this point, given that we're approach 150K deaths, and these deaths are driving clear and obvious excess mortality. I'm not going to nail Ioannidis to the cross over this, but I've been working on COVID modeling for 4 months now. It's taken up most of my full time job and some of my personal time as well. I read a lot of research and a lot of viewpoints. Enough to where I can safely say that nobody is going to come out of this having had it exactly right. So this line of thinking that there was this super scientist out there that we could have listened to, if only it hadn't been for the media and everyone running around like headless chickens, isn't very useful IMO.

My opinion is that we've probably saved 100,000 or more lives. The number would be bigger if we handled this better. Given that the United States's standard issue value for a prevented death is around $10 million, we should have been (and should be) more proactive about taking measures to soften the economic fallout. Especially given that we can print and borrow our own money at at 0%.

mathlete

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1638
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2813 on: July 01, 2020, 09:20:13 AM »
Ioannidis's early estimate (based on Diamond Princess research) of a 0.3% IFR may end up being pretty close.

But considering a scenario in which only 3 million Americans are infected (with very little mitigation), given what we know about the reproduction rate now, is pretty far off.

No one is going to come out of this having got it 100% correct. And if someone does, it will likely be in the Peter Schiff way of being correct, in that he's called 20 of the last 10 Recessions. As I said, science is a conversation and it takes time. All we can do is make decisions and policy based on the information we have at the time. The information we have right now says that this thing drives big excess mortality wherever it goes.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3602
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2814 on: July 01, 2020, 09:37:54 AM »
I think you can simultaneously think that with the limited information we had 4 months ago, it was ok to freak out, and also that with the information we have now, it's probably a waste of time to do much more than masks/no huge events/protect the elderly.

It's not clear to me why it's gov't overreach/right wing freakout time when at the time the disease seemed to be killing people like crazy. But likewise it seems dumb to double down on freaking out and mortgaging our future on the possibility that maybe some people will have lung problems down the road (ie, left wing freakout time). That's a big step down from worrying that it's going to kill many millions of people in the US, and it justifies an adjustment in policy.

-W
.

I agree with you that those are the most important and feasible measures now, although temporary local shutdowns still appear necessary in hotspot cities. The problem is that until this week, the stance on the Trump administration and much of the right wing has been "it's a hoax and un-American to take even basic safety measures to protect others."

It's hard to protect the vulnerable when a significant proportion of the population, including the President, is too selfish to adopt even simple, basic measures that would allow a safer return to a more normal society.

DadJokes

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1687
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2815 on: July 01, 2020, 10:15:09 AM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.
Enlighten us. Seems like folks are pretty happy with the expanded unemployment benefits and it has prevented a lot of folks from descending into abject poverty. I am aware that people are less than pleased with the small business loan stuff, because it came with a lot of weird strings attached.

I am remarkably socioeconomically privileged, but, being as I'm in the top 0.5% of incomes, I did not need COVID to tell me that. It also doesn't impinge on my opinion about policy.

My income is actually higher in 2020 than it was in 2019, and I haven't lost my job. For some reason, I received a nice $2,900 check (under income threshold, married with one child) despite not needing it. Multiply that by however many people also didn't lose their income, and that looks like a huge waste of money.

I'm not going to complain about it from the perspective of the guy who got free money, but from the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems like a pretty terrible use of government funds. It was using a hammer when a scalpel was needed.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2816 on: July 01, 2020, 10:24:14 AM »
My income is actually higher in 2020 than it was in 2019, and I haven't lost my job. For some reason, I received a nice $2,900 check (under income threshold, married with one child) despite not needing it. Multiply that by however many people also didn't lose their income, and that looks like a huge waste of money.

I'm not going to complain about it from the perspective of the guy who got free money, but from the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems like a pretty terrible use of government funds. It was using a hammer when a scalpel was needed.
TBH, this is not really that important. Whatever cutoff you'd propose (say, 125% of median or below), because of the income distribution curve being left-weighted, necessarily relatively few people are going to be affected. If you had in mind a more complicated means test, then remember that administration of these tests often cost almost as much as they save.

Also, as pointed out numerous times in this thread, the US is borrowing this money at ~0% interest.

And the last point is that economic stimulus isn't always only about covering necessities. Sometimes it also includes making sure that people who are mostly secure continue to feel secure and continue to consume so as to prevent the collapse of businesses that depend on that consumption.

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2964
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2817 on: July 01, 2020, 10:31:08 AM »
To me, there are two types of people following this.

First, there are the people who are paying attention to mainstream media outlets -- NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, etc. -- who are pushing this hype train the same way that the Russia, Kavenaugh, and impeachment stories were pushed. It's never ending breaking news, with the latest development always being worse than the last. These are the people citing the things you see on the news -- rare cases (e.g., of a young person dying), anecdotal side effects ("COVID feet"), and the constant moving of the goalposts (i.e., the media flavor of the week).

These people went from flatten the curve to hospital capacity to ventilators to asymptomatic spread to presymptomatic spread to we opened too soon and on and on and on and on. The concern never ends, and the context is never supplied. The bad news never stops, almost like it's on a treadmill that can't be turned off.

Second, there are people who are not paying as close of attention, but look at the macro statistics straight from the sources. They look at the antibody studies, the CDC data, their state data, the studies in Europe, etc. These people generally have accepted the pandemic for what it is and, based on what is actually happening, don't care anymore.

Tens of thousands more people died in the US than in Europe, despite Europe having a larger population and getting exposed first, because of the insufficient response in the US.

Quote
At this point, you have to be willfully ignorant of the antibody data, of the CDC data, etc. to think our government response has been anything short of a complete overreach and a total disaster. We are on pace for a really bad flu season -- 1957 or 1968 for example -- yet we have triggered widespread panic and an economic collapse.

On the contrary, at this point you have to willfully ignorant of the worldwide situation to think that the US did too much.  The US did less, and additional tens of thousands of people have died because the US did less than other countries. 

thriftyc

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 404
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Somewhere just west of Toronto
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2818 on: July 01, 2020, 10:34:38 AM »
I'm a dual US-Canadian citizen living in Ontario Canada.  IMO, US leadership needs to humble itself and look at other countries that are successfully handling Covid thus far.  In Ontario, and Canada for that matter, we have not only flattened the curve, but significantly reversed it.  Our 7 day moving average of new infections is going down every week.  Yes, there have been some pain in terms of shutting everything down, but now we are gradually reopening under the guidance of health officials and scientists, and the rates are still going down on average.  Mask's are now mandatory in Toronto in any public indoor space.  I'm happy to wear one cause there is now enough evidence showing that may help stop the spread.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 10:50:45 AM by thriftyc »

JGS1980

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2819 on: July 01, 2020, 11:21:29 AM »
To me, there are two types of people following this.

First, there are the people who are paying attention to mainstream media outlets -- NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, etc. -- who are pushing this hype train the same way that the Russia, Kavenaugh, and impeachment stories were pushed. It's never ending breaking news, with the latest development always being worse than the last. These are the people citing the things you see on the news -- rare cases (e.g., of a young person dying), anecdotal side effects ("COVID feet"), and the constant moving of the goalposts (i.e., the media flavor of the week).

These people went from flatten the curve to hospital capacity to ventilators to asymptomatic spread to presymptomatic spread to we opened too soon and on and on and on and on. The concern never ends, and the context is never supplied. The bad news never stops, almost like it's on a treadmill that can't be turned off.

Second, there are people who are not paying as close of attention, but look at the macro statistics straight from the sources. They look at the antibody studies, the CDC data, their state data, the studies in Europe, etc. These people generally have accepted the pandemic for what it is and, based on what is actually happening, don't care anymore.

I concede that I fall into this second camp.

A specific example I can think of is COVID-feet. Remember that? No. Because it's not really a thing anymore.

Or what about the multi-immune system failure in kids? Again, not a thing -- it is so "extremely rare" (per University of Michigan) that it's been basically impossible to study on a macro scale.

At this point, you have to be willfully ignorant of the antibody data, of the CDC data, etc. to think our government response has been anything short of a complete overreach and a total disaster. We are on pace for a really bad flu season -- 1957 or 1968 for example -- yet we have triggered widespread panic and an economic collapse.

The harm being done to our kids (and their parents) won't be fully understood for decades. The failure of doing blanket lockdowns instead of concentrating resources on nursing homes -- which is what the data told is in MARCH -- is arguably the greatest public health failure of all time. The economic collapse from this -- the death of small businesses and rise of big box stores and Amazon/Google/whatever -- sickens me.

Most of all, the complete breakdown of separation of powers should terrify everyone. The public health statutes absolutely DO NOT permit what state governments did during COVID. Public health directors only have power to "isolate" and "quarantine," and these terms are very carefully defined, and they DO NOT mean shutting everything down. This was a disastrous government overrreach that set an extremely dangerous precedent.

Perhaps my greatest frustration in all of this is that there was never a debate. You were just presumed to be some right wing nutjob who lacked empathy if you opposed what was going on. This was not just a failure of democracy, but of science. And I cannot say it any better than these Nobel prize winning scientists, who all but weep at how much science failed us during COVID.

https://vimeo.com/433350887/33bbbe4090

So, "listen to the experts?" It's not just the folks getting popular on TV. It's the researchers at NYU, Stanford, Harvard, etc. who have been telling us for months that we screwed this up, and royally so. Perhaps we will start listening to them sooner rather than later.

ReadySet ----> I couldn't disagree with you more.  No interest in arguing with you, but I had to say it.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2820 on: July 01, 2020, 12:14:47 PM »
Perhaps my greatest frustration in all of this is that there was never a debate. You were just presumed to be some right wing nutjob who lacked empathy if you opposed what was going on. This was not just a failure of democracy, but of science. And I cannot say it any better than these Nobel prize winning scientists, who all but weep at how much science failed us during COVID.

https://vimeo.com/433350887/33bbbe4090


I know most people won't have an hour to watch this whole video so I'd like to point out that this view is only expressed by one of the 5 panelists (Michel Levitt) in this discussion, so the plural "scientists" is incorrect. Levitt also confidently calls this coronavirus "a virus that is exactly as dangerous as the flu", which we know is not true. In my opinion, that damages his credibility. He clarifies later that he meant "it has exactly the same excess death and age ranges as flu" but that is also incorrect.

Quote
So, "listen to the experts?" It's not just the folks getting popular on TV. It's the researchers at NYU, Stanford, Harvard, etc. who have been telling us for months that we screwed this up, and royally so. Perhaps we will start listening to them sooner rather than later.

I think what you're still missing here, is that yes, there are experts opposed to lockdowns but they are a significant minority of "the experts". So what you're really saying is, listen to the minority group of experts who agree with me and ignore the majority who do not.

On the one hand, I think Levitt has some good points to make. One is that his research should not have been dismissed without review simply because it didn't align with consensus views*. The other is the problem of politicians and the media choosing scientists they agree with and turning them into something more than they really are. Ironically, Michael Levitt is a pretty good example of that. Media wishing to downplay the severity of the virus has given Levitt a greater share of the public view than his credentials demand.

*assuming that actually happened, because again, I question his credibility due to provably false statements he has made.

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4057
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2821 on: July 01, 2020, 01:24:52 PM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.

Media bad. Government bad. Got it.

Apparently only liberal media bad. Fox News is a shining example of journalism and accuracy?

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2822 on: July 01, 2020, 01:54:41 PM »
Perhaps my greatest frustration in all of this is that there was never a debate. You were just presumed to be some right wing nutjob who lacked empathy if you opposed what was going on. This was not just a failure of democracy, but of science. And I cannot say it any better than these Nobel prize winning scientists, who all but weep at how much science failed us during COVID.

https://vimeo.com/433350887/33bbbe4090


I know most people won't have an hour to watch this whole video so I'd like to point out that this view is only expressed by one of the 5 panelists (Michel Levitt) in this discussion, so the plural "scientists" is incorrect. Levitt also confidently calls this coronavirus "a virus that is exactly as dangerous as the flu", which we know is not true. In my opinion, that damages his credibility. He clarifies later that he meant "it has exactly the same excess death and age ranges as flu" but that is also incorrect.

Quote
So, "listen to the experts?" It's not just the folks getting popular on TV. It's the researchers at NYU, Stanford, Harvard, etc. who have been telling us for months that we screwed this up, and royally so. Perhaps we will start listening to them sooner rather than later.

I think what you're still missing here, is that yes, there are experts opposed to lockdowns but they are a significant minority of "the experts". So what you're really saying is, listen to the minority group of experts who agree with me and ignore the majority who do not.

On the one hand, I think Levitt has some good points to make. One is that his research should not have been dismissed without review simply because it didn't align with consensus views*. The other is the problem of politicians and the media choosing scientists they agree with and turning them into something more than they really are. Ironically, Michael Levitt is a pretty good example of that. Media wishing to downplay the severity of the virus has given Levitt a greater share of the public view than his credentials demand.

*assuming that actually happened, because again, I question his credibility due to provably false statements he has made.

I also listened to the whole hour + long talk that @ReadySetMillionaire linked above. It was an interesting discussion among some pretty smart people. But, I agree that Levitt was pretty biased in favor of his preferred narrative that Sweden was the only country in the world that had gotten its response to Covid right. It may end up that Levitt's right, but I think it's still too soon to be sure. In the meantime, my family and I are going to continue taking reasonable precautions to prevent ourselves getting sick. It's not that hard to wear a mask when we go out and to try to limit close contact with people outside of our immediate family.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2823 on: July 01, 2020, 05:25:52 PM »
So which serological study should we be paying attention to? The one out of Stanford from a few months ago that said everyone and their mom had COVID and thus it wasn't deadly at all? The ones out of New York that seem to agree with the notion that COVID is 10x deadlier than the flu? Or some other study that confirms your worldview?

Science is a conversation. Some scientists do research and form an opinion. Others do more research and present a different opinion. And over time, the facts evolve. And the media reports on those facts. It's messy and imperfect. But it's a process. Cheap second guessing and time traveling is not.

For this exact reason, I think John Ioannidis's pre-print study performing a macro-analysis of 23 different seroprevalence studies is a good barometer of where the science is at. I grant that it has not been peer-reviewed, but prior to being an "outsider" regarding COVID, my understanding is that Dr. Ioannidis was one of the most respected scientists in the world when it came to statistical analysis.

In examining these 23 different studies, he estimates that IFR is around .26%, and perhaps as high as .84%, and much, much, much lower for people under 70.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v2

Ioannidis is the Stanford guy. Interestingly, 0.26% is right around the CDC's current best guess too. Based on my own analysis (I'm a data person, not a infectious disease person to be perfectly clear) I think it's higher, but he's in good company, right now at least.

But I can't help but to remark about how common it is to trot out early 2.2 million death estimates or the WHO's 3.4% case (not infection) fatality rate, each of which were very small parts of large white papers that came with a ton of caveats. But how much time do we spend on the fact that Ioannidis floated the possibility of fewer than 10,000 US deaths in mid-March. Not only that, he said that they wouldn't even be noticeable. That they'd be background noise in regular seasonal flu numbers.

That is obviously absurd at this point, given that we're approach 150K deaths, and these deaths are driving clear and obvious excess mortality. I'm not going to nail Ioannidis to the cross over this, but I've been working on COVID modeling for 4 months now. It's taken up most of my full time job and some of my personal time as well. I read a lot of research and a lot of viewpoints. Enough to where I can safely say that nobody is going to come out of this having had it exactly right. So this line of thinking that there was this super scientist out there that we could have listened to, if only it hadn't been for the media and everyone running around like headless chickens, isn't very useful IMO.

My opinion is that we've probably saved 100,000 or more lives. The number would be bigger if we handled this better. Given that the United States's standard issue value for a prevented death is around $10 million, we should have been (and should be) more proactive about taking measures to soften the economic fallout. Especially given that we can print and borrow our own money at at 0%.
Still speculative (as is so much) but seroprevalence studies may drastically under-count the portion of the population immune, e.g.:
"Our collective dataset shows that SARS-CoV-2 elicits robust memory T cell responses akin to those observed in the context of successful vaccines, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe COVID-19 also in seronegative individuals."

(I keep seeing these T cell studies come out and they all seem to point in the same direction [but maybe the null results are too boring to publish?]. I suppose the gradation of the extent of T cell-derived immunity might also explain the massive variance in disease severity, as well as why outcomes are so well-correlates with age due to age-related immunosenescence.  If true, the findings seem to make better intuitive sense to me of the epidemiological curves in various places but I must admit I'm not following this as closely as you are!)

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2824 on: July 01, 2020, 09:31:51 PM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.
Enlighten us. Seems like folks are pretty happy with the expanded unemployment benefits and it has prevented a lot of folks from descending into abject poverty. I am aware that people are less than pleased with the small business loan stuff, because it came with a lot of weird strings attached.

I am remarkably socioeconomically privileged, but, being as I'm in the top 0.5% of incomes, I did not need COVID to tell me that. It also doesn't impinge on my opinion about policy.

My income is actually higher in 2020 than it was in 2019, and I haven't lost my job. For some reason, I received a nice $2,900 check (under income threshold, married with one child) despite not needing it. Multiply that by however many people also didn't lose their income, and that looks like a huge waste of money.

I'm not going to complain about it from the perspective of the guy who got free money, but from the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems like a pretty terrible use of government funds. It was using a hammer when a scalpel was needed.

I don't really understand why governments are throwing money at people with middle to high incomes who have savings. That is just going to lead to inflation. Sometimes a dose of austerity is needed. Not for those on the poverty line or close to it, but for those who have been doing just fine, would it kill the government to impose a modest waiting period or some form of asset verification? Even if it's just based on self-reporting or bank data which can be quickly cross-referenced, it would keep the budgetary toll of all this stimulus lower.

People talk about wanting Mustachian values of not rewarding over consumption but that's exactly what all this unfettered stimulus money is doing. The ceiling for receiving stimulus is way too high. Stimulus should be there to protect people from not having necessities - not to keep people mindlessly purchasing consumer items. If there's a domino effect then maybe that indicates that our economy is based on over-consumption and maybe it does need to correct a little bit and this is the perfect time for it! As long as we protect the poor, we can cut a little fat off the middle class and upper middle class.

I have lost some income during this covid but I haven't bothered researching whether I can get any stimulus payments (I doubt it) and the hassle associated with finding out is more than  I can bear. People who are financially comfortable should not be getting extra money. At all.

the_fixer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 899
  • Location: Colorado
  • mind on my money money on my mind
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2825 on: July 01, 2020, 10:21:52 PM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.
Enlighten us. Seems like folks are pretty happy with the expanded unemployment benefits and it has prevented a lot of folks from descending into abject poverty. I am aware that people are less than pleased with the small business loan stuff, because it came with a lot of weird strings attached.

I am remarkably socioeconomically privileged, but, being as I'm in the top 0.5% of incomes, I did not need COVID to tell me that. It also doesn't impinge on my opinion about policy.

My income is actually higher in 2020 than it was in 2019, and I haven't lost my job. For some reason, I received a nice $2,900 check (under income threshold, married with one child) despite not needing it. Multiply that by however many people also didn't lose their income, and that looks like a huge waste of money.

I'm not going to complain about it from the perspective of the guy who got free money, but from the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems like a pretty terrible use of government funds. It was using a hammer when a scalpel was needed.

I don't really understand why governments are throwing money at people with middle to high incomes who have savings. That is just going to lead to inflation. Sometimes a dose of austerity is needed. Not for those on the poverty line or close to it, but for those who have been doing just fine, would it kill the government to impose a modest waiting period or some form of asset verification? Even if it's just based on self-reporting or bank data which can be quickly cross-referenced, it would keep the budgetary toll of all this stimulus lower.

People talk about wanting Mustachian values of not rewarding over consumption but that's exactly what all this unfettered stimulus money is doing. The ceiling for receiving stimulus is way too high. Stimulus should be there to protect people from not having necessities - not to keep people mindlessly purchasing consumer items. If there's a domino effect then maybe that indicates that our economy is based on over-consumption and maybe it does need to correct a little bit and this is the perfect time for it! As long as we protect the poor, we can cut a little fat off the middle class and upper middle class.

I have lost some income during this covid but I haven't bothered researching whether I can get any stimulus payments (I doubt it) and the hassle associated with finding out is more than  I can bear. People who are financially comfortable should not be getting extra money. At all.
In a perfect world they would have taken the money and used it to provide income to those that lost their income or were in need but honestly the people that really needed it would have suffered and even started a financially devastating cascade in their finances during the time it took to vet and get the money out to people. You have to remember that many of the people that are in the worst shape are paycheck to paycheck or worse if they miss a paycheck or two things go downhill fast.


Are there better ways they could have gone about it you bet but With the current political environment (here in the US) I am amazed they were able to pull something together and execute in such a quick manner.

At the end of the day we spent ours and gave it away so even if we did not need the money it went back into the economy and will hopefully help keep it afloat.

Easy to second guess and Monday morning quarter back but lots of tough decisions had to be made and quick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2826 on: July 01, 2020, 11:05:00 PM »
the_fixer, I agree with the gist of what you're saying. It was an emergency situation. I can only hope that any future stimulus will be much better targeted since there will be time to think, deliberate and process.

I think the phrasing of the stimulus as being a general cash splash could be better refined. Let's just call it an emergency stimulus or an "essential needs package". Try to dissuade middle class and upper middle class earners from seeing it as a birthright to get stimulus.

...

Meanwhile, I have to say I really approve of what my government is doing with the virus. Most of the state remains quite open (I've been to heaps of restaurants and bars the past week, you just have to be careful to book in advance to get a table), but the virus hotspots where there's been a lot of family/work transmission have been heavily shut down. Cordons, police buses, even matching vehicle registrations to make sure that those with a vehicle registered in a hot spot suburb aren't travelling willy-nilly. I definitely believe that stronger, targeted enforcement is a better outcome than less strong, less targeted enforcement. Shut the "weak links" down and let everyone else go about their lives.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2827 on: July 02, 2020, 06:32:09 AM »
Again, if you don't realize how big of a clusterfuck the first round of government "aid" was (both personally or as a business), then you are remarkably socioeconomically privileged. To give these buffoons a second bite at the apple would only compound the error.
Enlighten us. Seems like folks are pretty happy with the expanded unemployment benefits and it has prevented a lot of folks from descending into abject poverty. I am aware that people are less than pleased with the small business loan stuff, because it came with a lot of weird strings attached.

I am remarkably socioeconomically privileged, but, being as I'm in the top 0.5% of incomes, I did not need COVID to tell me that. It also doesn't impinge on my opinion about policy.

My income is actually higher in 2020 than it was in 2019, and I haven't lost my job. For some reason, I received a nice $2,900 check (under income threshold, married with one child) despite not needing it. Multiply that by however many people also didn't lose their income, and that looks like a huge waste of money.

I'm not going to complain about it from the perspective of the guy who got free money, but from the perspective of a taxpayer, it seems like a pretty terrible use of government funds. It was using a hammer when a scalpel was needed.

I don't really understand why governments are throwing money at people with middle to high incomes who have savings. That is just going to lead to inflation. Sometimes a dose of austerity is needed. Not for those on the poverty line or close to it, but for those who have been doing just fine, would it kill the government to impose a modest waiting period or some form of asset verification? Even if it's just based on self-reporting or bank data which can be quickly cross-referenced, it would keep the budgetary toll of all this stimulus lower.

People talk about wanting Mustachian values of not rewarding over consumption but that's exactly what all this unfettered stimulus money is doing. The ceiling for receiving stimulus is way too high. Stimulus should be there to protect people from not having necessities - not to keep people mindlessly purchasing consumer items. If there's a domino effect then maybe that indicates that our economy is based on over-consumption and maybe it does need to correct a little bit and this is the perfect time for it! As long as we protect the poor, we can cut a little fat off the middle class and upper middle class.

I have lost some income during this covid but I haven't bothered researching whether I can get any stimulus payments (I doubt it) and the hassle associated with finding out is more than  I can bear. People who are financially comfortable should not be getting extra money. At all.

Lol! I think the money the US provided to Americans is a joke. Itís hardly going to lead to inflation. It isnít nearly enough money for that. And upper-class people didnít get it.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2020, 07:25:02 AM by Kris »

frugalnacho

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4217
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison Heights, Michigan
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2828 on: July 02, 2020, 07:08:23 AM »
Oh no the government gave a bunch of citizens a little of their own money back, how will civilization possibly survive?  We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy. 


Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2829 on: July 02, 2020, 07:11:21 AM »
The Australian government is giving everyone who lost their job either ~$560/week or $750 a week with no means testing or waiting period, and it's going to last at least 6 months and possibly more.

At this stage it's not giving people "a little of their own money" back any more.

"We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy."

We would be spending a lot less money if we had a little means testing going forward. But I'm glad that you think handing out large amounts of money to people who were formerly earning $60k or $80k a year is the right thing to do.



Paper Chaser

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2830 on: July 02, 2020, 08:54:31 AM »
The Australian government is giving everyone who lost their job either ~$560/week or $750 a week with no means testing or waiting period, and it's going to last at least 6 months and possibly more.

At this stage it's not giving people "a little of their own money" back any more.

"We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy."

We would be spending a lot less money if we had a little means testing going forward. But I'm glad that you think handing out large amounts of money to people who were formerly earning $60k or $80k a year is the right thing to do.

I think there's some confusion around the purpose of the government payments. The thinking seems to be that the payments were intended to be a safety net for those that needed it most (and it certainly served that purpose) but it was called a 'stimulus' for a reason. They wanted to get cash in people's hands to stimulate the economy. Some people bought groceries or paid rent and the money acted as a safety net. Others with more cushion used their new windfall to buy new cars or TVs or something and it acted as economic stimulus. Many people here donated their funds or used them to support small businesses and their low wage workers (servers getting larger than normal tips, etc) which then went to things like groceries and rent for those low wage workers.

Obviously it's not perfect, and a bunch of people just hoarded the new found cash (even some here) but it was intended to be more than just a safety net for those most at need. And I think it served that purpose, at least to a degree.

DadJokes

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1687
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2831 on: July 02, 2020, 09:48:00 AM »
The Australian government is giving everyone who lost their job either ~$560/week or $750 a week with no means testing or waiting period, and it's going to last at least 6 months and possibly more.

At this stage it's not giving people "a little of their own money" back any more.

"We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy."

We would be spending a lot less money if we had a little means testing going forward. But I'm glad that you think handing out large amounts of money to people who were formerly earning $60k or $80k a year is the right thing to do.

I think there's some confusion around the purpose of the government payments. The thinking seems to be that the payments were intended to be a safety net for those that needed it most (and it certainly served that purpose) but it was called a 'stimulus' for a reason. They wanted to get cash in people's hands to stimulate the economy. Some people bought groceries or paid rent and the money acted as a safety net. Others with more cushion used their new windfall to buy new cars or TVs or something and it acted as economic stimulus. Many people here donated their funds or used them to support small businesses and their low wage workers (servers getting larger than normal tips, etc) which then went to things like groceries and rent for those low wage workers.

Obviously it's not perfect, and a bunch of people just hoarded the new found cash (even some here) but it was intended to be more than just a safety net for those most at need. And I think it served that purpose, at least to a degree.

I hoarded about half of it (rest split between donations & a spendypants Xbox). Our economy being propped up by people spending everything they make is not something I feel that I should be supporting.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3602
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2832 on: July 02, 2020, 09:58:57 AM »
The Australian government is giving everyone who lost their job either ~$560/week or $750 a week with no means testing or waiting period, and it's going to last at least 6 months and possibly more.

At this stage it's not giving people "a little of their own money" back any more.

"We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy."

We would be spending a lot less money if we had a little means testing going forward. But I'm glad that you think handing out large amounts of money to people who were formerly earning $60k or $80k a year is the right thing to do.

I think there's some confusion around the purpose of the government payments. The thinking seems to be that the payments were intended to be a safety net for those that needed it most (and it certainly served that purpose) but it was called a 'stimulus' for a reason. They wanted to get cash in people's hands to stimulate the economy. Some people bought groceries or paid rent and the money acted as a safety net. Others with more cushion used their new windfall to buy new cars or TVs or something and it acted as economic stimulus. Many people here donated their funds or used them to support small businesses and their low wage workers (servers getting larger than normal tips, etc) which then went to things like groceries and rent for those low wage workers.

Obviously it's not perfect, and a bunch of people just hoarded the new found cash (even some here) but it was intended to be more than just a safety net for those most at need. And I think it served that purpose, at least to a degree.

I hoarded about half of it (rest split between donations & a spendypants Xbox). Our economy being propped up by people spending everything they make is not something I feel that I should be supporting.

We donated some and ďhoardedĒ the rest because thereís still a significant risk of job/income loss and weíre still early in the wealth accumulation phase. Itís sitting in our emergency fund. If we hold onto our jobs through this crisis, weíll probably replace our aging washer and dryer and donate the remainder.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8290
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2833 on: July 02, 2020, 10:36:21 AM »
Quote
Lol! I think the money the US provided to Americans is a joke. Itís hardly going to lead to inflation. It isnít nearly enough money for that. And upper-class people didnít get it.
Yup, this.  I think a few of my friends and family members don't understand this.  I lost some mail (should clean the house more often). Found it.  It was my missing renewed Driver's license. Friends and family "did you find your stimulus check?"

Um. No.  We don't get one of those.

frugalnacho

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4217
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison Heights, Michigan
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2834 on: July 02, 2020, 10:57:38 AM »

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2835 on: July 02, 2020, 04:41:34 PM »
The Australian government is giving everyone who lost their job either ~$560/week or $750 a week with no means testing or waiting period, and it's going to last at least 6 months and possibly more.

At this stage it's not giving people "a little of their own money" back any more.

"We should have set up a rigorous means testing system to make sure people that could still afford rent and groceries that month didn't get any of that sweet sweet stimmy money.  That way we could have spent the same amount of money but gotten less of it into the hands of the truly needy."

We would be spending a lot less money if we had a little means testing going forward. But I'm glad that you think handing out large amounts of money to people who were formerly earning $60k or $80k a year is the right thing to do.

I think there's some confusion around the purpose of the government payments. The thinking seems to be that the payments were intended to be a safety net for those that needed it most (and it certainly served that purpose) but it was called a 'stimulus' for a reason. They wanted to get cash in people's hands to stimulate the economy. Some people bought groceries or paid rent and the money acted as a safety net. Others with more cushion used their new windfall to buy new cars or TVs or something and it acted as economic stimulus. Many people here donated their funds or used them to support small businesses and their low wage workers (servers getting larger than normal tips, etc) which then went to things like groceries and rent for those low wage workers.

Obviously it's not perfect, and a bunch of people just hoarded the new found cash (even some here) but it was intended to be more than just a safety net for those most at need. And I think it served that purpose, at least to a degree.

I hoarded about half of it (rest split between donations & a spendypants Xbox). Our economy being propped up by people spending everything they make is not something I feel that I should be supporting.

+1

This is also how I feel. I didn't get any stimulus but if I'd gotten it I would have treated it like any other income, i.e., mostly invest it. When the economy is weak and needs this much stimulus (and the economy was weak even before covid) I take it as a sign that something is wrong and I am not willing to spend needlessly in order to cure it.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2836 on: July 02, 2020, 05:14:14 PM »
We should not expect economic policy to be decided by the spending habits of people who converse on a forum dedicated to frugality.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2837 on: July 02, 2020, 07:06:31 PM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

« Last Edit: July 02, 2020, 07:08:34 PM by scottish »

kenmoremmm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 525
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2838 on: July 02, 2020, 08:38:37 PM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

perhaps. but, if NYC's trendline is any indicator, then it seems like this will all be over, more or less, by the end of summer.
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

i have my doubts that americans will adhere to another round of lockdowns, so i think the spread will be quick and dramatic. many will die. and then we'll reach herd immunity, or close to it.

Mr. Green

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2475
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Wilmington, NC
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2839 on: July 02, 2020, 09:16:04 PM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

perhaps. but, if NYC's trendline is any indicator, then it seems like this will all be over, more or less, by the end of summer.
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

i have my doubts that americans will adhere to another round of lockdowns, so i think the spread will be quick and dramatic. many will die. and then we'll reach herd immunity, or close to it.
Except there's no actual evidence that getting it provides antibodies that last longer than a few months. If that's the case then there is no herd immunity, just this every year until we either find a vaccine or people take their heads out of their asses.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7039
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2840 on: July 02, 2020, 09:17:07 PM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

Just as there are those who continue to suggest that the world is flat, there are those who will continue to suggest the curve is flat.


Mariposa

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • Location: NYC
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2841 on: July 02, 2020, 09:32:03 PM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

perhaps. but, if NYC's trendline is any indicator, then it seems like this will all be over, more or less, by the end of summer.
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

i have my doubts that americans will adhere to another round of lockdowns, so i think the spread will be quick and dramatic. many will die. and then we'll reach herd immunity, or close to it.

We crushed the curve here in NYC, but except in certain pockets, we haven't reached herd immunity. I fully expect a second wave. Short of the National Guard imposing road blocks, which I don't see happening, it's going to come around back here as the rest of the country becomes engulfed.

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2842 on: July 02, 2020, 11:05:43 PM »
Cases continue to rise in most states, but deaths have not for the most part. Notable exceptions are TX, AZ, FL, which are all facing high ICU utilization. It remains to be seen if the current spike in ICU patients results in continued uptick in the daily deaths, or if treatment has improved sufficiently to mitigate the current spike. I am cautiously optimistic in this regard. Long-term effects of prolonged ventilation are not to be ignored, but we will see more of that in the coming months.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2843 on: July 03, 2020, 01:37:15 AM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

Will be interesting to see the wider effects this has on the US economy, interest rates, US dollar etc.

All so many unknowns at this stage. The US is such a diverse and unruly country that coordinating a proper response to the virus is proving difficult.

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2844 on: July 03, 2020, 02:04:07 AM »
As mentioned we have very few infections over here and very few in hospital or deceased.

However, I read in the newpaper today that there has been a pretty large outbreak of summer cold. This is in itself not a problem as the disease is completely harmless, but the main point is that mode of infection is the same as for Covid-19 and in that respect it is just luck that it wasn't Covid-19 that spread widely. Or in other words, the current state of regulations (very limited) and peoples's behavior (more and more relaxed due to lack of infections) is not sufficient to prevent Covid-19 from spreading widely if there should be a second outbreak. It remains to be seen what happens after the summer holidays as we get visitors from abroad and after the holidays school and day care resumes and people go back to work.

Also, during the strongest restrictions in march/april the rate of all infections diseases dropped by a lot, these are now apparantly almost back to normal levels.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5796
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2845 on: July 03, 2020, 02:08:02 AM »
I think it's over.    The curve is no longer flattening, it's back to growing geometrically.   57000 new cases in the US today.

The US is going to have to go through the whole lock-down again, or watch the destruction of it's health care system.

And this doesn't include the independence day parties...

Will be interesting to see the wider effects this has on the US economy, interest rates, US dollar etc.

All so many unknowns at this stage. The US is such a diverse and unruly country that coordinating a proper response to the virus is proving difficult.
We would know whether or not it was difficult if anyone had tried.

LightTripper

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
  • Location: London, UK
  • Rural Londoner. Lazy workaholic. Confused.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2846 on: July 03, 2020, 03:17:24 AM »
As mentioned we have very few infections over here and very few in hospital or deceased.

However, I read in the newpaper today that there has been a pretty large outbreak of summer cold. This is in itself not a problem as the disease is completely harmless, but the main point is that mode of infection is the same as for Covid-19 and in that respect it is just luck that it wasn't Covid-19 that spread widely. Or in other words, the current state of regulations (very limited) and peoples's behavior (more and more relaxed due to lack of infections) is not sufficient to prevent Covid-19 from spreading widely if there should be a second outbreak. It remains to be seen what happens after the summer holidays as we get visitors from abroad and after the holidays school and day care resumes and people go back to work.

Also, during the strongest restrictions in march/april the rate of all infections diseases dropped by a lot, these are now apparantly almost back to normal levels.

That's really interesting.  One silver lining that several friends have commented on (and I've noticed!) is how nice it is not to have had a cold for a properly long time (I was just finishing one in February/March when the whole Covid thing kicked off, but haven't been sick since).  It's also interesting how many of my sniffles are obviously just allergies/hay fever/dust, given some low level stuff persisted even when we were in total lock down.

The infection rates in most parts of London are very low at the moment, among the lowest in the UK.  I hope that this may be a sign that (even with only ~20% of people having antibodies) we may be approaching some kind of functional herd immunity (i.e. people who have the most human contact e.g. shop workers, health workers, are now largely immune) BUT I think it's just too early to say (how long does immunity last? How about this t-cell stuff?  There certainly doesn't seem to be a critical mass of scientists saying we are out of the wood, and even our bombastic PM apparently is going to say we are not out of the woods today, and urge people to be cautious: though sadly I would trust him as far as I could throw him based on his track record).

We have a big reopening this weekend in the UK (pubs and restaurants allowed to open, subject to restrictions, as are hotels, B&Bs, camp sites, hairdressers etc though still not gyms, pools, beauticians, weddings can happen but are limited to 30 guests and no reception, etc. - hence the PM having to go on telly to tell people to behave).  I noticed them all getting ready dropping my daughter to school this morning, and in some ways it's lovely to have a bit of life back in the city, but it's scary too.  I'm putting my Pollyanna hat on and deciding that it's fine, because it's all going to be young folks building immunity, and they're all going to be super-careful not to give it to Grandma or spread it around the supermarket (but I'm madly touching wood at the same time....)

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2847 on: July 03, 2020, 03:42:05 AM »
This simplified visual model of how an epidemic spreads and ends was pretty interesting.

How epidemics like covid-19 end (and how to end them faster)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2848 on: July 03, 2020, 07:28:24 AM »
This simplified visual model of how an epidemic spreads and ends was pretty interesting.

How epidemics like covid-19 end (and how to end them faster)

This assumes that once recovered people can no longer get the disease.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #2849 on: July 03, 2020, 07:43:56 AM »
This assumes that once recovered people can no longer get the disease.
Which is fairly likely to be true. There have been no confirmed cases of someone being reinfected with COVID-19 so far, and even if a small handful could be reinfected it's plain that it's a rare event.