Author Topic: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?  (Read 253708 times)

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2110
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3250 on: July 29, 2020, 11:51:02 AM »
Or maybe these people just don't follow anything and were not prepared at all, like if you asked me how many people die from leukemia each year.  100? 1,000?, 10,000? I have no fucking idea, and I spend exactly 0% of my life worrying about leukemia, even though I'm aware of it and I know it kills people.  Still, if I was part of a survey and had to give an answer it would probably seem completely disconnected from reality, because it is and would just be made up on the spot.

True, but leukemia hasn't been on the news nonstop for the last few months.  Even if you don't watch the news, people are talking about it, people have lost jobs, most people have gotten stimulus checks, people are wearing masks, etc.  You would think most people would at least be within one order of magnitude of the deaths and cases. 

Part of the reason the perceived numbers are so much higher than reality is probably because of the nonstop news cycle making it sound so bad.  We are at almost 150,000 reported deaths (Johns Hopkins Data) in the USA through about 4 months.  Average flu deaths are probably close to 40,000 per flu season (based on a glance at CDC data since 2010).  The flu season is also about 4 months.  So, by those rough numbers COVID has been about 4 times worse than the flu but has had well over 100 times the coverage (this is my wild guess).  If you base the expected death rate on increased news coverage vs actual numbers you would assume the numbers were MUCH higher.  My mother died from the flu in the 2017/2018 flu season which was a bad one with over 60,000 deaths.  I remember a couple passing comments in the news that the flu season was bad that year but it was pretty minimal coverage. 

Please note that I understand there are reasons for the increased news coverage such as:
- Flu season is predictable every years and stops at a predictable time.  We don't know how much worse COVID will get or when it will stop. 
- COVID is new and different.  New things are scary. 
- Political reasons (enough said)

The only reason we aren't worse off is because COVID has been in the news non-stop.  To put it in a different context, we've already had at least 4 times as many deaths as an average flu season after still having made large sacrifices to slow the spread.  Where would we be if we had not?  It's also ongoing, so who knows where we will end up by the time it has all played out. 

And it's sad that it's been made political by people who don't want to take it seriously.  Most countries are taking this seriously, and I don't think they're doing it just to affect American politics. 

And yes, COVID-19 actually is new and maybe should be a tad scary.  Unlike the flu there are still a lot of unknowns with this virus.  A recent study suggested that a majority of middle-aged people who had had even mild cases of COVID-19 may have serious heart damage. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/covid-19-and-the-heart-two-new-studies-offer-insights/ar-BB17imFH?li=BBnb7Kz

I'm not trying to argue the details of this particular study.  That's not my point.  My point is that we're playing around with a disease that we have not yet had a chance to really understand like we do the flu.  We really don't know what risks we would be taking by letting it spread unchecked.  And to put it in context for those who can only think in terms of the economy, what are the long-term economic effects of a significant portion of the workforce having chronic health problems?

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2110
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3251 on: July 29, 2020, 11:58:20 AM »
The CDC and the WHO really messed up the mask thing early on. The communication around masks was premature, really bad and confusing.

All organizations are made up of fallible people. When the organization is tasked with tracking a fast moving, emerging risk that is going to take hundreds of thousands of lives, those mistakes are going to be magnified.

To me, this is a much simpler explanation for bad things happening that almost every conspiracy theory I've ever heard.

Shit happens. People make mistakes.

What do you expect when half of American politicians are making it their top goal to tear down government institutions like the CDC?  It's amazing they're as functional as they are as much neglect and intentional dismantling as federal agencies are getting. 

Spud

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • Location: Southwest England, UK.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3252 on: July 29, 2020, 12:03:38 PM »
Please note that I understand there are reasons for the increased news coverage such as:
- Flu season is predictable every years and stops at a predictable time.  We don't know how much worse COVID will get or when it will stop.

This is the big issue. COVID-19 is doing way more damage than a bad flu season, at a time of year that can be thought of as the "flu off-season" i.e. flu is a non-issue.

Imagine what COVID-19 is going to be capable off when it forms a tag team with the seasonal flu from October to February. The US has been experiencing its highest daily death counts since late May in the last week or so after it looked like everything was fine and it was tapering off. There is only so long you can hold out when you're getting 50,00 to 75,000 new cases per day.

I know, I know, people keep saying that an increase in new cases is just because testing has improved etc. Why then, since the start of this thing has every country that has seen a rise in cases, eventually followed that with a rise in deaths? Literally every country (and the world as a whole) you can see this pattern. There is a 4 to 6 week lag, but eventually those deaths start rising again.

Nearly 153,000 deaths in the US right now. End of August, you could be up at 200,000, and you still won't be anywhere near the winter.

JGS1980

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 435
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3253 on: July 29, 2020, 12:15:41 PM »
Please note that I understand there are reasons for the increased news coverage such as:
- Flu season is predictable every years and stops at a predictable time.  We don't know how much worse COVID will get or when it will stop.

This is the big issue. COVID-19 is doing way more damage than a bad flu season, at a time of year that can be thought of as the "flu off-season" i.e. flu is a non-issue.

Imagine what COVID-19 is going to be capable off when it forms a tag team with the seasonal flu from October to February. The US has been experiencing its highest daily death counts since late May in the last week or so after it looked like everything was fine and it was tapering off. There is only so long you can hold out when you're getting 50,00 to 75,000 new cases per day.

I know, I know, people keep saying that an increase in new cases is just because testing has improved etc. Why then, since the start of this thing has every country that has seen a rise in cases, eventually followed that with a rise in deaths? Literally every country (and the world as a whole) you can see this pattern. There is a 4 to 6 week lag, but eventually those deaths start rising again.

Nearly 153,000 deaths in the US right now. End of August, you could be up at 200,000, and you still won't be anywhere near the winter.

Ericrugio's argument is bunk. C'mon, you are STILL comparing Covid-19 to the Flu 6 months later? When's the last time you saw Flu kill 20,000 New Yorkers in a month? Really do we keep having to explain this?

In response to Spud, however, I take a bit of a contrary stance. Because so many more people are being careful with hygiene precautions and social distancing, I expect it to be a fairly mild Flu season this 2020-2021 winter, and thus very few Flu deaths will occur.

P.S. I'm a Family Doctor and a I see sick people for a living. Have not been seeing very many upper respiratory infections of any kind (except for Covid) since March.

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3254 on: July 29, 2020, 01:19:13 PM »
Over here the flu season ended completely once Covid messirements were put in place. The graph just went to zero plain and simple.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2020, 03:14:16 PM by habaneroNorway »

Watchmaker

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3255 on: July 29, 2020, 01:29:55 PM »
Over here the flu season ended completely once Covid messirements were put in place. The graph just went to zero Platon and simple.

I do hold out hope that this could signal a real sea change in how we deal with the flu, and also working while ill.

I never thought much about the flu before. I didn't routinely get the flu shot. I just didn't view the flu as much of a risk. And for myself it wasn't, but I wasn't thinking through the implications of transmitting it to others who were more vulnerable. I know I'll be much more careful going forward about spreading the flu, and I'll never go in to the office sick again.

LWYRUP

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1158
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3256 on: July 29, 2020, 01:34:18 PM »
Over here the flu season ended completely once Covid messirements were put in place. The graph just went to zero Platon and simple.

I do hold out hope that this could signal a real sea change in how we deal with the flu, and also working while ill.

I never thought much about the flu before. I didn't routinely get the flu shot. I just didn't view the flu as much of a risk. And for myself it wasn't, but I wasn't thinking through the implications of transmitting it to others who were more vulnerable. I know I'll be much more careful going forward about spreading the flu, and I'll never go in to the office sick again.

Yes, I hope we have some long term cultural changes from this.  Like, wearing a mask on the subway when you have a cold.  That should be considered a standard common courtesy.

ericrugiero

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3257 on: July 29, 2020, 01:36:43 PM »
Ericrugio's argument is bunk. C'mon, you are STILL comparing Covid-19 to the Flu 6 months later? When's the last time you saw Flu kill 20,000 New Yorkers in a month? Really do we keep having to explain this?

You didn't understand my point.  I'm NOT saying Covid is just another Flu.  I was theorizing about why so many people are WAY out of the ballpark on the real numbers of Covid infections and deaths.  It's clearly worse than the flu and should be taken seriously.  That said, a comparison of how much worse than the flu it is can still be useful to understand how bad things really are.  We just need to keep in mind that it's not over and the numbers are continuing to grow (as I clearly pointed out in my earlier post). 

dignam

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3258 on: July 29, 2020, 01:46:16 PM »
Should also be mentioned that the measures taken to slow the spread of Covid will also slow the spread of the flu and colds, so you cannot simply add the standard numbers together and say it will be X times worse when flu season arrives.  I usually get sick once between January and April; I haven't been sick in over a year now.  Definitely due to extra precautions taken by me and others around me due to Covid.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3259 on: July 29, 2020, 03:11:37 PM »
Ericrugio's argument is bunk. C'mon, you are STILL comparing Covid-19 to the Flu 6 months later? When's the last time you saw Flu kill 20,000 New Yorkers in a month? Really do we keep having to explain this?

You didn't understand my point.  I'm NOT saying Covid is just another Flu.  I was theorizing about why so many people are WAY out of the ballpark on the real numbers of Covid infections and deaths.  It's clearly worse than the flu and should be taken seriously.  That said, a comparison of how much worse than the flu it is can still be useful to understand how bad things really are.  We just need to keep in mind that it's not over and the numbers are continuing to grow (as I clearly pointed out in my earlier post).

While you did make it a point to acknowledge those caveats, I still think the idea of comparing Covid deaths to a normal flu season confuses the conversation rather than furthering it. As other have suggested, the impacts of a virus during normal human activities compared to the impacts of a virus with significant changes in the populations' behavior doesn't tell us anything about how dangerous the virus is.

To give a tiny glimpse of how much difference the shutdown and behavioral modifications have made:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01538-8

I'll agree with your initial point that the non-stop coverage has perhaps made people think the death count is higher than it really is, but then again, is that a bad thing? If we had waited until the death count was more concerning to focus our collective attention on this problem, it would have been much too late.

Also, I suspect the responses would have been different if the numerical counts were included with those percentages. People are generally bad at relating percentages to counts. Tell people that something kills .1% of the world population every year and they might think, no big deal. Tell them it kills 7.8 million people and I suspect you would get a different reaction.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3260 on: July 29, 2020, 03:37:50 PM »
That said, a comparison of how much worse than the flu it is can still be useful to understand how bad things really are.  We just need to keep in mind that it's not over and the numbers are continuing to grow (as I clearly pointed out in my earlier post).

Sorry to harp on this, but I like to look at things from as many angles as possible.

Consider the number of annual influenza related deaths in New Zealand(400-500) and compare it to the number of coronavirus related deaths in the last 4 months (22). So Covid deaths in the US are ~400% of normal annual flu deaths but in New Zealand they are only 5% of annual flu deaths. If this is (more or less) the same virus, this suggests how significant of a variable our behavior can be. Without controlling for behavior, there's really no reason to compare total flu deaths to Covid deaths, at least not in the short term.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2020, 03:42:27 PM by Davnasty »

skp

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Location: oh
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3261 on: July 29, 2020, 04:57:53 PM »
Ericrugio's argument is bunk. C'mon, you are STILL comparing Covid-19 to the Flu 6 months later? When's the last time you saw Flu kill 20,000 New Yorkers in a month? Really do we keep having to explain this?

You didn't understand my point.  I'm NOT saying Covid is just another Flu.  I was theorizing about why so many people are WAY out of the ballpark on the real numbers of Covid infections and deaths.  It's clearly worse than the flu and should be taken seriously.  That said, a comparison of how much worse than the flu it is can still be useful to understand how bad things really are.  We just need to keep in mind that it's not over and the numbers are continuing to grow (as I clearly pointed out in my earlier post).

While you did make it a point to acknowledge those caveats, I still think the idea of comparing Covid deaths to a normal flu season confuses the conversation rather than furthering it. As other have suggested, the impacts of a virus during normal human activities compared to the impacts of a virus with significant changes in the populations' behavior doesn't tell us anything about how dangerous the virus is.

To give a tiny glimpse of how much difference the shutdown and behavioral modifications have made:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01538-8

I'll agree with your initial point that the non-stop coverage has perhaps made people think the death count is higher than it really is, but then again, is that a bad thing? If we had waited until the death count was more concerning to focus our collective attention on this problem, it would have been much too late.

Also, I suspect the responses would have been different if the numerical counts were included with those percentages. People are generally bad at relating percentages to counts. Tell people that something kills .1% of the world population every year and they might think, no big deal. Tell them it kills 7.8 million people and I suspect you would get a different reaction.

I can think of one thing.  Don't you think it ligitimizes peoples distrust with news coverage. 

K_in_the_kitchen

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3262 on: July 29, 2020, 05:30:09 PM »
Over here the flu season ended completely once Covid messirements were put in place. The graph just went to zero Platon and simple.

I do hold out hope that this could signal a real sea change in how we deal with the flu, and also working while ill.

I never thought much about the flu before. I didn't routinely get the flu shot. I just didn't view the flu as much of a risk. And for myself it wasn't, but I wasn't thinking through the implications of transmitting it to others who were more vulnerable. I know I'll be much more careful going forward about spreading the flu, and I'll never go in to the office sick again.

Yes, I hope we have some long term cultural changes from this.  Like, wearing a mask on the subway when you have a cold.  That should be considered a standard common courtesy.

I agree, in the future I doubt I'll ever leave my house without a mask on if I am sick, even if it's the common cold.  And during cold and flu season I may choose to wear a mask in stores to help protect myself.  I also hope employers and schools get much better about not making people come in when they're sick.  I think of all the times I had to work when I was sick, and there was no option not to.  I'd med up and go spread my germs around (seriously -- I handled money and receipts all day long, along with sitting with customers to open accounts, etc.).  DH gets 6 paid sick days per year, so he often goes in when he's just coming down with something because he doesn't want to waste a day and then need it a couple of days later if he gets really sick.  This happens all the time at his workplace, with many employees, and before our kids went to college, 9 times out of 10 when an illness struck at our house he was the first one to get sick because he was exposed at work and then brought it home to us.  Just last year DS was terribly ill and asked his instructor if he could take the midterm on another day, but the answer was no and she highly suggested he come in and take his midterm as to not negatively impact his grade.  I had to drive him and wait, his fever was high, and along with the chills and fatigue, he couldn't even drive.  This kind of stuff has to change

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1658
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3263 on: July 29, 2020, 06:19:50 PM »

In response to Spud, however, I take a bit of a contrary stance. Because so many more people are being careful with hygiene precautions and social distancing, I expect it to be a fairly mild Flu season this 2020-2021 winter, and thus very few Flu deaths will occur.

P.S. I'm a Family Doctor and a I see sick people for a living. Have not been seeing very many upper respiratory infections of any kind (except for Covid) since March.

Do you think that coinfection with both in those who ultimately contract covid will be an issue? Presumably those who are at high risk of acquiring one will be high risk for acquiring the other. I agree that 1+1 doesn’t = 3, but it’s too early to predict deaths one way or other. Definitely fewer cases, but not necessarily fewer deaths.

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10839
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3264 on: July 29, 2020, 07:41:55 PM »
Ericrugio's argument is bunk. C'mon, you are STILL comparing Covid-19 to the Flu 6 months later? When's the last time you saw Flu kill 20,000 New Yorkers in a month? Really do we keep having to explain this?

You didn't understand my point.  I'm NOT saying Covid is just another Flu.  I was theorizing about why so many people are WAY out of the ballpark on the real numbers of Covid infections and deaths.  It's clearly worse than the flu and should be taken seriously.  That said, a comparison of how much worse than the flu it is can still be useful to understand how bad things really are.  We just need to keep in mind that it's not over and the numbers are continuing to grow (as I clearly pointed out in my earlier post).

While you did make it a point to acknowledge those caveats, I still think the idea of comparing Covid deaths to a normal flu season confuses the conversation rather than furthering it. As other have suggested, the impacts of a virus during normal human activities compared to the impacts of a virus with significant changes in the populations' behavior doesn't tell us anything about how dangerous the virus is.

To give a tiny glimpse of how much difference the shutdown and behavioral modifications have made:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01538-8

I'll agree with your initial point that the non-stop coverage has perhaps made people think the death count is higher than it really is, but then again, is that a bad thing? If we had waited until the death count was more concerning to focus our collective attention on this problem, it would have been much too late.

Also, I suspect the responses would have been different if the numerical counts were included with those percentages. People are generally bad at relating percentages to counts. Tell people that something kills .1% of the world population every year and they might think, no big deal. Tell them it kills 7.8 million people and I suspect you would get a different reaction.
In Australia it’s winter. We were asked to all have the flu vaccine so that hospitals could concentrate on covid19 rather than being full of flu patients at this time of year. Together with the covid19 practices - social distancing etc. - this has caused the flu outbreak to collapse this year -

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-13/flu-cases-drop-amid-coronavirus-restrictions-statistics-show/12332204

So far this year we’ve had 36 deaths from the flu versus 705 in the whole 2019 season -

https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-surveil-ozflu-flucurr.htm

And 176 deaths from covid19 -

https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers

Our hospitals have more beds free than they usually do at this time of year.

To put this into perspective, we have about one tenth the population of the USA.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2020, 07:49:04 PM by deborah »

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3265 on: July 29, 2020, 07:47:03 PM »
Our state (Victoria) provides an interesting and illuminating case study. We've had a massive jump in numbers today to 723 (for context, previously the whole of Australia had never recorded more than 500 cases in a day, so 723 for our state alone is a LOT) but our Premier has said the R number is hovering around 1 and has also said that further lockdowns are not planned and that community transmission is not the main source. It seems that the major source of transmission is from work and specifically aged care homes. I suspect a lot of workers might work at multiple such homes and that's how it's spreading. The high number of deaths reported recently also corresponds with this hypothesis.

How do you shut down aged care homes? You can't, but you can mandate that workers can only go to one employer and can be pre-emptively be locked down (at their homes) outside of work if they work in high-risk industries.

Quote
“You cannot go to work if you are sick. You simply can't. All you will be doing is spreading the virus and putting people at risk.”

Premier Daniel Andrews said today’s alarming case increase is driven mostly from aged care but he still thinks too many people are still showing up to the workplace when they have symptoms.

"Too many people are going to work, even some when they have a positive test result," he said.

"That's a small number, though. I think a bigger number are people that are, between having the test taken and getting the results, they are still presenting to work. And for so long as that continues, then we will continue to see numbers go up."

The biggest challenge seems to be convincing workers to not work when clearly feeling symptoms. Pretty selfish to do that, if you ask me. It's clear that if you have any symptoms you need to get tested and stop bloody going back to work. There's even covid leave paid both to those who have to do a 2-week lockdown and those who have to do a 48-hour lockdown while awaiting test results.

Maybe next time around we just impose early and pre-emptive restrictions on high-risk industries. Pay them $1500 over a fortnight to not go to work for those 2 weeks.


alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2275
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3266 on: July 29, 2020, 08:21:14 PM »
Our state (Victoria) provides an interesting and illuminating case study. We've had a massive jump in numbers today to 723 (for context, previously the whole of Australia had never recorded more than 500 cases in a day, so 723 for our state alone is a LOT) but our Premier has said the R number is hovering around 1 and has also said that further lockdowns are not planned and that community transmission is not the main source. It seems that the major source of transmission is from work and specifically aged care homes. I suspect a lot of workers might work at multiple such homes and that's how it's spreading. The high number of deaths reported recently also corresponds with this hypothesis.

How do you shut down aged care homes? You can't, but you can mandate that workers can only go to one employer and can be pre-emptively be locked down (at their homes) outside of work if they work in high-risk industries.

Quote
“You cannot go to work if you are sick. You simply can't. All you will be doing is spreading the virus and putting people at risk.”

Premier Daniel Andrews said today’s alarming case increase is driven mostly from aged care but he still thinks too many people are still showing up to the workplace when they have symptoms.

"Too many people are going to work, even some when they have a positive test result," he said.

"That's a small number, though. I think a bigger number are people that are, between having the test taken and getting the results, they are still presenting to work. And for so long as that continues, then we will continue to see numbers go up."

The biggest challenge seems to be convincing workers to not work when clearly feeling symptoms. Pretty selfish to do that, if you ask me. It's clear that if you have any symptoms you need to get tested and stop bloody going back to work. There's even covid leave paid both to those who have to do a 2-week lockdown and those who have to do a 48-hour lockdown while awaiting test results.

Maybe next time around we just impose early and pre-emptive restrictions on high-risk industries. Pay them $1500 over a fortnight to not go to work for those 2 weeks.

One issue might be that while people might be eligible for payments if they're waiting on test results or test positive, turning down a shift for any reason may jeopardise their chances of being offered shifts in future by that employer. In that situation, some people may decide that they need to go to work in order to ensure continued employment, despite the risks.

the_fixer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 906
  • Location: Colorado
  • mind on my money money on my mind
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3267 on: July 29, 2020, 09:52:23 PM »
And some people have shown to be be positive for covid with no symptoms and go about their lives while spreading it without a clue that they are doing so. Why would they get tested if they are healthy and feel fine? Why would they call into work or stop going about their business?

Sounds like the genie is out of the bottle if you have 700 today how many more are out there passing it around...


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 #3268 on: July 29, 2020, 10:08:55 PM »
And some people have shown to be be positive for covid with no symptoms and go about their lives while spreading it without a clue that they are doing so. Why would they get tested if they are healthy and feel fine? Why would they call into work or stop going about their business?

Sounds like the genie is out of the bottle if you have 700 today how many more are out there passing it around...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The advice from the government is that the community transmission numbers aren't going up. The huge increase in cases is due to known transmission at aged care homes. And the message from the government is that it's not from asymptomatic community spread but rather from symptomatic employment spread. Daniel Andrews has stated that it's due to people who are sick but still insist on going to work.

But it may be that due to the way this virus affects certain sectors more than others that we need to have carve outs - e.g. all aged care workers and abattoir workers need to get tested (and get paid leave while doing so) whether or not they have symptoms, before resuming to work.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3269 on: July 30, 2020, 03:48:59 AM »

Maybe next time around we just impose early and pre-emptive restrictions on high-risk industries. Pay them $1500 over a fortnight to not go to work for those 2 weeks.
Back in April during the first lockdown when our state started on its fine-heavy approach, I noted that the federal and state governments had already set aside an extra $420 billion for economic stimulus, unemployment benefits, etc. That's $25,250 per Australian adult (going on the 16,635,280 registered voters). This doesn't include extra money tossed into the healthcare system.

With quick work with Google and Apple, they could have created an app, saying, "Stay home or go out as you wish, but if you do not go more than 20 metres from your registered address for more than one hour a day, we will pay you $500."

$500 a day for 7 days a week is $182,000 annually. 97% of the adult population earn less than this, and so would have a financial incentive to stay home even if it meant taking unpaid leave from work.

50 days of this would lead to the same cost we've hit already, not counting the cost of the depression we've created with the lockdowns. I'm not necessarily in favour of government spending all that money, but if they're going to anyway, the question is how best to do it.

Or it could be $250 a day for 100 days, or $125 a day for 200 days, etc.

Of course, we would have to allow for people we actually wanted to leave home, like aged care workers, freight drivers, etc. Other than drivers, mostly we could just register their work address in the software, too. But overall it'd keep more people at home for longer than did the authoritarian approach, and probably end up costing less for the government and the economy overall.

But that's not the authoritarian, finger-wagging, punitive way, so our leaders aren't interested in it.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3270 on: July 30, 2020, 03:54:06 AM »
The state govt has been keeping people in aged care homes, knowing the were covid+, until they needed ICU. That's driven the spread within the aged care homes.

SA, WA and Qld took any person in aged care who was covid+ and put them in hospital. After all, if they're 92 and diabetic with a heart condition and become covid+ they'll need ICU inside 3 days anyway.

Shades of Cuomo in NYC, really.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3271 on: July 30, 2020, 07:13:03 AM »

Maybe next time around we just impose early and pre-emptive restrictions on high-risk industries. Pay them $1500 over a fortnight to not go to work for those 2 weeks.
Back in April during the first lockdown when our state started on its fine-heavy approach, I noted that the federal and state governments had already set aside an extra $420 billion for economic stimulus, unemployment benefits, etc. That's $25,250 per Australian adult (going on the 16,635,280 registered voters). This doesn't include extra money tossed into the healthcare system.

With quick work with Google and Apple, they could have created an app, saying, "Stay home or go out as you wish, but if you do not go more than 20 metres from your registered address for more than one hour a day, we will pay you $500."

$500 a day for 7 days a week is $182,000 annually. 97% of the adult population earn less than this, and so would have a financial incentive to stay home even if it meant taking unpaid leave from work.

50 days of this would lead to the same cost we've hit already, not counting the cost of the depression we've created with the lockdowns. I'm not necessarily in favour of government spending all that money, but if they're going to anyway, the question is how best to do it.

Or it could be $250 a day for 100 days, or $125 a day for 200 days, etc.

Of course, we would have to allow for people we actually wanted to leave home, like aged care workers, freight drivers, etc. Other than drivers, mostly we could just register their work address in the software, too. But overall it'd keep more people at home for longer than did the authoritarian approach, and probably end up costing less for the government and the economy overall.

But that's not the authoritarian, finger-wagging, punitive way, so our leaders aren't interested in it.

That's not gonna work, Kyle. Firstly because it's easy to spoof your mobile GPS location. (Or just leave your phone at home obviously.) But secondly, let's imagine there's a foolproof way for the government to monitor someone's location. Firstly, you're gonna have a bunch of freedom crusaders saying this is a huge infringement on our human rights. Secondly you're going to have privileged cunts like me immediately deciding to stay home for 200 days so I can scoop up $100k in free taxpayer money, fuck yeah. Meanwhile all those underprivileged angelic people who have to go outdoors and work essential jobs will be saying "where's my money"?

So let's say you then make the app cognisant of everyone's registered home and workplace - and multiple workplaces for those who have multiple jobs (you can already see this is impossible to do, but let's humour the approach). Then what about all those unfortunate people with carer's responsibilities? They'll need additional freedoms, but they still want their money. Those who need medical treatment or to attend an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting? Should they be discriminated against? Those who need to attend a protest? You're basically with-holding $500 a day from people just because they're exercising their democratic right to protest.

Can't you see it's just a way to further entrench inequality? Even if the system worked perfectly, do you think the Australian populace would ever want rich professionals staying at home to get even more money for doing fuck all? So no, you'd have to restrict it to, say, only those earning under $80k a year. But then obviously compliance will go down somewhat.

And even if you just limited it to those under $80k, you'd basically have to have so many exemptions for people who need medical treatment, who need to give care, who want haircuts, who are homeless, who are problem gamblers attending Gamblers Anonymous, etc, you might as well just give everyone $500 in a way that's completely unenforceable. And then you end up where we are anyway, but a lot more in debt.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3272 on: July 30, 2020, 07:44:29 AM »
Even if the system worked perfectly, do you think the Australian populace would ever want rich professionals staying at home to get even more money for doing fuck all?
Office workers report doing no more than 2.5hr a day of actual work on average, and at least 40% think their job is entirely bullshit. We already pay well-off professional a lot of money to do fuck all.

The current system of subsidising one sector but not another, fining and otherwise harassing the already marginalised, and locking up poor people is not equitable, either.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2020, 08:38:53 AM by Kyle Schuant »

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3273 on: July 30, 2020, 07:52:05 AM »
These technical problems of tracking citizens will all be solved, once and for all, when we're all forced to get the Covid vaccine, including Bill Gates' tracking chip.  /s

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4099
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3274 on: July 30, 2020, 02:09:25 PM »
And Chinese 5G towers to track it...

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3275 on: July 30, 2020, 03:52:16 PM »
Now that the US has it's way with Huawei equipment, it looks like it'll be Ericsson.    They've come on board with the spreading covid through their cell towers just like Huawei does.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3276 on: July 30, 2020, 08:38:04 PM »
There was a cluster of 12 cases at a construction site. So the site got shut down.

The premier's been going around speaking to Islamic leaders to try to get the word out about no family gatherings during Eid etc

And apparently 1 in 4 people diagnosed with Covid are not staying home (as uncovered by spot checks at home!)

The government's looking at localised lockdowns (by sector) which I think is a great idea.

I know Kyle's criticised the Victorian government, but I think it's done the best it could without the benefit of hindsight.

Best case scenario is that in 3 weeks we can let the general population relax restrictions moderately while continuing tight restrictions for at-risk sectors and workers.

For me, I'm grateful we can still exercise outside, visit our nuclear families (as long as you're a member of the same household), and visit our intimate partners. The only freedom I really want back is the freedom to drive to day trips for hiking. I can live with all the rest.

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2275
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3277 on: July 31, 2020, 02:07:15 AM »
There was a cluster of 12 cases at a construction site. So the site got shut down.

The premier's been going around speaking to Islamic leaders to try to get the word out about no family gatherings during Eid etc

And apparently 1 in 4 people diagnosed with Covid are not staying home (as uncovered by spot checks at home!)

The government's looking at localised lockdowns (by sector) which I think is a great idea.

I know Kyle's criticised the Victorian government, but I think it's done the best it could without the benefit of hindsight.

Best case scenario is that in 3 weeks we can let the general population relax restrictions moderately while continuing tight restrictions for at-risk sectors and workers.

For me, I'm grateful we can still exercise outside, visit our nuclear families (as long as you're a member of the same household), and visit our intimate partners. The only freedom I really want back is the freedom to drive to day trips for hiking. I can live with all the rest.

It's been just over a week since the mask order. I'm optimistic that we'll start to see a decline in cases, given the incubation period and time between getting a test and receiving a result.

Spud

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • Location: Southwest England, UK.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3278 on: July 31, 2020, 05:04:02 AM »
Reading the discussion between Kyle and Bloop regarding Kyle idea of making an app to tell people to stay at home and offering a monetary incentive, it is open to abuse if someone purchases a burner phone/dumbphone so they could leave their smartphone at home with the GPS telling the government that they’re staying locked down whilst they’re out and about.

Regardless, I think this all comes back to the point that the world, as a whole, was in no way prepared for this pandemic. As a planet, we've responded reasonably well in some areas and very badly in others, but overall, there really isn't that much we can do. We as humans love the illusion of control and ofimposing our collective will on a thing to make it do what we want, but in the grand scheme of things, looking at the numbers going through the roof in the US, Brazil and India, there's nothing we can do other than watch.

Sure, small, remote, low population countries like New Zealand (22 total deaths) or Iceland (10 total deaths) can make it look every nation should be containing this, but as soon as you look at any large, densely populated country, the pattern becomes clear - if you give this virus an inch, it takes a mile.

Australia were beating it, now they're struggling again, even if only slightly.

It's still just as deadly as it ever was, still just as contagious as it ever was. Still we have no vaccine, and want to do for a long time. People's tolerance of lockdown is basically at zero.

The US and Brazil are basically, whether they want to or not, now just letting this thing run rampant through the population. That's what the numbers are showing anyway.

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 669
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3279 on: July 31, 2020, 05:10:11 AM »
Iceland in addition to being a small country with low population, a remote island and happening to have a, relative to country size, pretty big genetic research company that handles the mass testing Iceland pretty much has a single point of entry: The Keflavik airport outside the capital.

Bar a few low-risk countries, anyone arriving on the airport has the option of taking a test (result is communicated via SMS within a few hours) or quarantine for 10 days.

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2582
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3280 on: July 31, 2020, 01:38:39 PM »
Regardless, I think this all comes back to the point that the world, as a whole, was in no way prepared for this pandemic. As a planet, we've responded reasonably well in some areas and very badly in others, but overall, there really isn't that much we can do. We as humans love the illusion of control and ofimposing our collective will on a thing to make it do what we want, but in the grand scheme of things, looking at the numbers going through the roof in the US, Brazil and India, there's nothing we can do other than watch.

Sure, small, remote, low population countries like New Zealand (22 total deaths) or Iceland (10 total deaths) can make it look every nation should be containing this, but as soon as you look at any large, densely populated country, the pattern becomes clear - if you give this virus an inch, it takes a mile.

The numbers do not agree with your assessment

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

There's many different ways to look at the data available at this link, but I would recommend selecting "per million people" and looking at either "confirmed cases" or "confirmed deaths" on a linear scale to show the extreme variation among countries.

You can also remove the countries with lower population densities using the list to the left.

Italy's trajectory is particularly interesting considering they were hit well before the US and therefore had less time to prepare. Look where they are now. Something they did is working.

Quote
It's still just as deadly as it ever was, still just as contagious as it ever was. Still we have no vaccine, and want to do for a long time.

Every day we learn new things about the virus: how it affects people and how to treat them, how it spreads and how to avoid spreading it. Even if it were inevitable that the virus will infect every last person on Earth, buying time for research and to spread out the burden on healthcare systems has and will continue to save lives.

pressure9pa

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3281 on: July 31, 2020, 02:35:37 PM »
My initial thought was a systematic misinterpretation of the question (% of population vs % of cases), but you never know with people, numbers and statistics.

That still doesn't explain it.  They thought 20% of people caught the virus, and 9% died.  Even if you think they understood the question as how many people who have caught the virus have died, they are still orders of magnitude off.  No matter how they interpreted those questions their beliefs are very disconnected from reality, but you can find the actual numbers published on dozens of websites.  It's so easy to look up and find out how many have actually died.

I know people are bad at math, but this is some seriously elementary math.  I don't even understand how someone can function in life without being able to perform such simple math.  The study says it's nationally representative, so I assume they aren't taking these polls in some kind of care home of mentally unfit people.  Apparently it's just free range mentally unfit people that are representative of our actual population. 

Or maybe these people just don't follow anything and were not prepared at all, like if you asked me how many people die from leukemia each year.  100? 1,000?, 10,000? I have no fucking idea, and I spend exactly 0% of my life worrying about leukemia, even though I'm aware of it and I know it kills people.  Still, if I was part of a survey and had to give an answer it would probably seem completely disconnected from reality, because it is and would just be made up on the spot.

I took a paid survey a couple of weeks ago, asking how many people (gross, not %) had contracted the virus.  I had no clue, because I've never really thought about what the population of Indiana was.  I looked it up later, and my percentages were pretty close, but I really underestimated the total population.  I can see how changing question and analysis between raw numbers and percentage would really throw those numbers off.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3282 on: July 31, 2020, 03:11:41 PM »
Regardless, I think this all comes back to the point that the world, as a whole, was in no way prepared for this pandemic. As a planet, we've responded reasonably well in some areas and very badly in others, but overall, there really isn't that much we can do. We as humans love the illusion of control and ofimposing our collective will on a thing to make it do what we want, but in the grand scheme of things, looking at the numbers going through the roof in the US, Brazil and India, there's nothing we can do other than watch.

Sure, small, remote, low population countries like New Zealand (22 total deaths) or Iceland (10 total deaths) can make it look every nation should be containing this, but as soon as you look at any large, densely populated country, the pattern becomes clear - if you give this virus an inch, it takes a mile.

The numbers do not agree with your assessment

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

There's many different ways to look at the data available at this link, but I would recommend selecting "per million people" and looking at either "confirmed cases" or "confirmed deaths" on a linear scale to show the extreme variation among countries.

You can also remove the countries with lower population densities using the list to the left.

Italy's trajectory is particularly interesting considering they were hit well before the US and therefore had less time to prepare. Look where they are now. Something they did is working.

Quote
It's still just as deadly as it ever was, still just as contagious as it ever was. Still we have no vaccine, and want to do for a long time.

Every day we learn new things about the virus: how it affects people and how to treat them, how it spreads and how to avoid spreading it. Even if it were inevitable that the virus will infect every last person on Earth, buying time for research and to spread out the burden on healthcare systems has and will continue to save lives.

As long as the disease isn't being spread by things we cannot control - like the black plague was spread by fleas on rats in the middle ages - it really doesn't seem to be that hard to stay on top of it.    I'm sure there are going to be small outbreaks for the next several years, but there's really no need for everything to be completely screwed up.     All you need is competent leadership and reasonable medical advice...

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3621
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3283 on: July 31, 2020, 03:13:47 PM »
Regardless, I think this all comes back to the point that the world, as a whole, was in no way prepared for this pandemic. As a planet, we've responded reasonably well in some areas and very badly in others, but overall, there really isn't that much we can do. We as humans love the illusion of control and ofimposing our collective will on a thing to make it do what we want, but in the grand scheme of things, looking at the numbers going through the roof in the US, Brazil and India, there's nothing we can do other than watch.

Sure, small, remote, low population countries like New Zealand (22 total deaths) or Iceland (10 total deaths) can make it look every nation should be containing this, but as soon as you look at any large, densely populated country, the pattern becomes clear - if you give this virus an inch, it takes a mile.

The numbers do not agree with your assessment

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus

There's many different ways to look at the data available at this link, but I would recommend selecting "per million people" and looking at either "confirmed cases" or "confirmed deaths" on a linear scale to show the extreme variation among countries.

You can also remove the countries with lower population densities using the list to the left.

Italy's trajectory is particularly interesting considering they were hit well before the US and therefore had less time to prepare. Look where they are now. Something they did is working.

Quote
It's still just as deadly as it ever was, still just as contagious as it ever was. Still we have no vaccine, and want to do for a long time.

Every day we learn new things about the virus: how it affects people and how to treat them, how it spreads and how to avoid spreading it. Even if it were inevitable that the virus will infect every last person on Earth, buying time for research and to spread out the burden on healthcare systems has and will continue to save lives.

As long as the disease isn't being spread by things we cannot control - like the black plague was spread by fleas on rats in the middle ages - it really doesn't seem to be that hard to stay on top of it.    I'm sure there are going to be small outbreaks for the next several years, but there's really no need for everything to be completely screwed up.     All you need is competent leadership and reasonable medical advice...

...which is why the USA is fucked.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3284 on: July 31, 2020, 03:29:05 PM »
Jeeze, only until January.      Only 5 months to go.

OtherJen

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3621
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3285 on: July 31, 2020, 03:32:55 PM »
Jeeze, only until January.      Only 5 months to go.

Yep, and 150,000 Americans died of COVID-19 in the last 5 months. (You’re also more optimistic about a regime change than I am.)

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3286 on: July 31, 2020, 05:25:11 PM »
Looks like Florida is now the covid-19 epicenter in the US.   Here's some Trump action in Florida today.



Does the crowd seem smaller than it used to?

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7039
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3287 on: August 01, 2020, 04:52:15 PM »
Some things never change... crowd still looks very white and very aged.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3288 on: August 01, 2020, 08:33:29 PM »
Vic Police doing a good job of fining gatherings - they have been catching out house parties, booze parties and today fined a group of 5 at a religious gathering (and I'm sorta relieved that this is in the news because it means that religious practice won't get an exemption from the lockdown rules).

Remember guys, gatherings of only 2 people max! (And have to be household members or intimate partners!)

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3289 on: August 01, 2020, 09:05:59 PM »
Vic Police doing a good job of fining gatherings - they have been catching out house parties, booze parties and today fined a group of 5 at a religious gathering (and I'm sorta relieved that this is in the news because it means that religious practice won't get an exemption from the lockdown rules).

Remember guys, gatherings of only 2 people max! (And have to be household members or intimate partners!)
Where does something like this map conceptually? There are so many strange things happening all at once I can't keep track of what the standard narrative should conclude is most salient (police violence, free speech, public health concerns). I will point out the protesters blew their chance over 4 pandemicless years to hold their gathering, though given the facts in the US, I'm not sure whether or not the actual statistics in Australia support an interpretation of this incident based on widespread & pervasive racial bias.

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10839
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3290 on: August 01, 2020, 11:50:52 PM »
Melbourne has gone from level 3 to level 4 lockdown, and now has a curfew, and you can't really travel more than 5km.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3291 on: August 02, 2020, 01:49:38 AM »
Vic Police doing a good job of fining gatherings - they have been catching out house parties, booze parties and today fined a group of 5 at a religious gathering (and I'm sorta relieved that this is in the news because it means that religious practice won't get an exemption from the lockdown rules).

Remember guys, gatherings of only 2 people max! (And have to be household members or intimate partners!)
Where does something like this map conceptually? There are so many strange things happening all at once I can't keep track of what the standard narrative should conclude is most salient (police violence, free speech, public health concerns). I will point out the protesters blew their chance over 4 pandemicless years to hold their gathering, though given the facts in the US, I'm not sure whether or not the actual statistics in Australia support an interpretation of this incident based on widespread & pervasive racial bias.

That protest was in Sydney which is facing much laxer restrictions. That said, the protest was still ruled illegal, and eventually fizzled out.

Melbourne's just announced even stronger restrictions. The main changes seem to be:

1. You can only exercise within 5km of your house, and for one hour per day [my commentary: the 5km restriction seems just to be a codification of the stage 3 guideline which was that you should exercise at the nearest park to you, although it's now more onerous for bicyclists. The 'one hour per day' is obviously unenforceable.]

2. Only one family member can do the daily shopping, and it has to be within 5km of your home. [My commentary: seems sensible to me]

3. You can only travel more than 5km away from your home for work, care giving, etc [my commentary: seems sensible]

4. You can only exercise in groups of 2 max, and you can no longer play recreational sports e.g. golf [my commentary: not completely sure why recreation is being ruled out, but it's probably a matter of optics; anyway, seems vaguely sensible to me]

5. Curfew from 8pm to 5am [my commentary: I assume this is meant to discourage parties or social dinners/gatherings, and in that sense I agree with it, though otherwise it seems a strange measure]

There is still an exemption where you can visit / exercise with intimate partners, which I think is sensible.

I think there should be more of a focus on explicitly banning religious gatherings and extended family visits. They are banned under the rules but we should be clamping down hard on these big super-spread events.

My 2 cents

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3292 on: August 02, 2020, 02:14:21 AM »
Vic Police doing a good job of fining gatherings - they have been catching out house parties, booze parties and today fined a group of 5 at a religious gathering (and I'm sorta relieved that this is in the news because it means that religious practice won't get an exemption from the lockdown rules).

Remember guys, gatherings of only 2 people max! (And have to be household members or intimate partners!)
Where does something like this map conceptually? There are so many strange things happening all at once I can't keep track of what the standard narrative should conclude is most salient (police violence, free speech, public health concerns). I will point out the protesters blew their chance over 4 pandemicless years to hold their gathering, though given the facts in the US, I'm not sure whether or not the actual statistics in Australia support an interpretation of this incident based on widespread & pervasive racial bias.

That protest was in Sydney which is facing much laxer restrictions. That said, the protest was still ruled illegal, and eventually fizzled out.

Melbourne's just announced even stronger restrictions. The main changes seem to be:

1. You can only exercise within 5km of your house, and for one hour per day [my commentary: the 5km restriction seems just to be a codification of the stage 3 guideline which was that you should exercise at the nearest park to you, although it's now more onerous for bicyclists. The 'one hour per day' is obviously unenforceable.]

2. Only one family member can do the daily shopping, and it has to be within 5km of your home. [My commentary: seems sensible to me]

3. You can only travel more than 5km away from your home for work, care giving, etc [my commentary: seems sensible]

4. You can only exercise in groups of 2 max, and you can no longer play recreational sports e.g. golf [my commentary: not completely sure why recreation is being ruled out, but it's probably a matter of optics; anyway, seems vaguely sensible to me]

5. Curfew from 8pm to 5am [my commentary: I assume this is meant to discourage parties or social dinners/gatherings, and in that sense I agree with it, though otherwise it seems a strange measure]

There is still an exemption where you can visit / exercise with intimate partners, which I think is sensible.

I think there should be more of a focus on explicitly banning religious gatherings and extended family visits. They are banned under the rules but we should be clamping down hard on these big super-spread events.

My 2 cents
Some of those requirements do not make any sense to me. Are people more likely to catch covid >5km from their house? Car ownership in AU is >85% according to this so traveling more than 5km could just entail a lengthier car trip with no added risk.

Regarding golf, that is also ridiculous. What is the typical distance between golfers in normal times--100 yards? I think the optics of restrictions that have no common sense to them is worse than the infinitesimal risk of getting covid on a putting green. Furthermore, it's unclear how much these restrictions will prevent people from spending time outside/getting sun exposure to produce vitamin D, low levels of which are increasingly being linked to very bad outcomes with this illness, as well as the better established research linking low vitamin D levels to bad outcomes in respiratory diseases and immune function in general.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3293 on: August 02, 2020, 02:26:21 AM »
I agree there's no particular virus-transmission logic behind the 5km shopping restriction, but I suspect it's mainly to keep people in their local suburbs (which makes it easier to know where hotspots are, since there's less mixing), and it dovetails with the ban on social gatherings and family gatherings. If everyone knows they can only travel 5km, people are less likely to visit Nan on the weekend, etc...

Next pandemic, we should probably announce, as one of the very first steps (stage 2), a complete ban on parties, extended family visits, and social gatherings of any kind other than household members and intimate partners. In hindsight, that should have been the first thing we did.

I'm pretty comfortable with the heightened restrictions. I think they strike a good balance.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3294 on: August 02, 2020, 02:27:30 AM »
You are right--the mixing thing matters and might justify that radius (though if imposed at 5km where I live my only option would be Walmart)

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5813
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3295 on: August 02, 2020, 02:30:05 AM »
Bloop seems to have acquired a reasonable attitude to this: good for them.

The further someone drives the more often they have to visit the petrol station and the more likely they are to have mechanical failure or an accident, all of which take them out of their bubble and potentially put others at risk.

Golf is potentially fine if all it is is someone walking around a field with a club and a ball, although even then the optics are difficult - it's generally a sport for rich old white men.  But golf also involves club rooms and bars and the pro shop and parties of 4 going round the course and pinch points at the start and finish. And potentially driving more than 5km to the course.  So no.

kei te pai

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 430
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3296 on: August 02, 2020, 03:24:37 AM »
NZ lockdown (way back then) had a pile of possibly arguable restrictions such as no surfing,even if you lived right by the beach. There were plenty of but, but, but,  arguments expressed although compliance was generally good.

Time has shown that this was an effective strategy for the country. The fewer people out and about the easier contact tracing is, and the more apparent  breaches of lockdown are.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
  • Location: South Korea
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3297 on: August 02, 2020, 05:15:27 AM »
Some things never change... crowd still looks very white and very aged.

That carefully framed shot was the entire crowd. Only about 20 people showed up.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7039
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3298 on: August 02, 2020, 05:32:30 AM »
NZ lockdown (way back then) had a pile of possibly arguable restrictions such as no surfing,even if you lived right by the beach. There were plenty of but, but, but,  arguments expressed although compliance was generally good.

Time has shown that this was an effective strategy for the country. The fewer people out and about the easier contact tracing is, and the more apparent  breaches of lockdown are.

It makes perfect sense to me. If you say everything is banned except golf and surfing guess what happens? Tens of thousands of people will suddenly take up golfing and surfing.

Don’t laugh, you know it.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5813
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3299 on: August 02, 2020, 06:06:21 AM »
NZ lockdown (way back then) had a pile of possibly arguable restrictions such as no surfing,even if you lived right by the beach. There were plenty of but, but, but,  arguments expressed although compliance was generally good.

Time has shown that this was an effective strategy for the country. The fewer people out and about the easier contact tracing is, and the more apparent  breaches of lockdown are.

It makes perfect sense to me. If you say everything is banned except golf and surfing guess what happens? Tens of thousands of people will suddenly take up golfing and surfing.

Don’t laugh, you know it.
My retired (and by their recycling bins heavy drinking) neighbours started walking every day when lockdown rules meant that was their only way to leave the house.  They now look fitter and happier than I've ever known them.