Author Topic: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?  (Read 248264 times)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3650 on: August 19, 2020, 08:13:27 AM »
Oh ok, so Clinical Psychology encompasses the entire field of psychology.

No, it doesn't, and this is a valid point.

There do exist a (very) few areas of psychology that represent real science.  Some of the neuropsychology research I've read for example is scientific . . . measuring chemical levels in the brain and using treatment to return these values to known measurable values.  Biospsychology tends to fall into this category as well.  I hope that some day the many completely unscientific areas of psychology are split off from the branch and as a whole psychology can become a real science.  Pretending that all (or even most) of psychology is scientific is battling against having this happen though.  Unfortunately the majority of the fields of study of psychology do not follow science today.  This includes:
Clinical psychology
Cognitive psychology
Developmental psychology
Evolutionary psychology
Forensic psychology
Health psychology
Occupational psychology
etc.


It doesn't mean that the DSM is rubbish in its entirety, or has no value (or that psychology is rubbish, or economics, or any other social science).  I still think there is value to trying to apply the scientific method to social (including economic) data, however - while recognising the challenges of doing that.  Dismissing it all as akin to astrology is too harsh.

This is fair.  As mentioned, I think there's value in the social 'sciences'.  My issue is simply applying the term 'science' to them . . . it provides an air of legitimacy that these areas of study don't deserve.

The comparison to astrology was meant to demonstrate that even a totally unscientific field can follow the scientific method, not to disparage the social 'sciences'.  FWIW, I'd argue that any of the social sciences is of more value that astrology.

mizzourah2006

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
  • Location: NWA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3651 on: August 19, 2020, 08:28:26 AM »
Oh ok, so Clinical Psychology encompasses the entire field of psychology.

No, it doesn't, and this is a valid point.

There do exist a (very) few areas of psychology that represent real science.  Some of the neuropsychology research I've read for example is scientific . . . measuring chemical levels in the brain and using treatment to return these values to known measurable values.  Biospsychology tends to fall into this category as well.  I hope that some day the many completely unscientific areas of psychology are split off from the branch and as a whole psychology can become a real science.  Pretending that all (or even most) of psychology is scientific is battling against having this happen though.  Unfortunately the majority of the fields of study of psychology do not follow science today.  This includes:
Clinical psychology
Cognitive psychology
Developmental psychology
Evolutionary psychology
Forensic psychology
Health psychology
Occupational psychology
etc.


It doesn't mean that the DSM is rubbish in its entirety, or has no value (or that psychology is rubbish, or economics, or any other social science).  I still think there is value to trying to apply the scientific method to social (including economic) data, however - while recognising the challenges of doing that.  Dismissing it all as akin to astrology is too harsh.

This is fair.  As mentioned, I think there's value in the social 'sciences'.  My issue is simply applying the term 'science' to them . . . it provides an air of legitimacy that these areas of study don't deserve.

The comparison to astrology was meant to demonstrate that even a totally unscientific field can follow the scientific method, not to disparage the social 'sciences'.  FWIW, I'd argue that any of the social sciences is of more value that astrology.

You forgot Human Factors Psychology, experimental psychology, industrial psychology, and educational psychology. I guess ergonomics is pseudoscience good to know.

You seem to know a lot about all those sub-fields of psychology to confirm that all of the research that comes out of them is pseudoscience. It's like my friends on FB that barely graduated HS pretending to know everything about immunology right now.

You should open up a university and teach every subject yourself. You are clearly an expert in all fields of psychology and you think it's largely a worthless field, so I'd imagine your expertise in all of the fields of "real science" is far more comprehensive.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3652 on: August 19, 2020, 08:52:13 AM »
When you can't fight the idea, attack the person.

mizzourah2006

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
  • Location: NWA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3653 on: August 19, 2020, 09:01:32 AM »
When you can't fight the idea, attack the person.

You're the one making the claim it's all pseudoscience. How do I fight an idea like that? You've already conceded that in fact not all sub-fields of psychology are pseudoscience, so you've already moved the goal-posts once. It makes it hard to fight moving goal posts.

 Reminds me of this quote.

Quote
"First you get your Bachelor's degree, and you think you know everything."
"Then, you get your Master's, and you realize you don't know anything."
"Then you get your Doctorate, and you find out that nobody knows anything."

I don't make claims about entire fields I know little about. I just find it funny when people make extreme generalizations about entire fields of study, entire industries, entire groups of people, etc.. I get that some are more PC to do than others, but the behaviors are strikingly similar.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 09:03:53 AM by mizzourah2006 »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3654 on: August 19, 2020, 09:50:10 AM »
You are clearly an expert in all fields of psychology and you think it's largely a worthless field, so I'd imagine your expertise in all of the fields of "real science" is far more comprehensive.

I do not think psychology is largely a worthless field, and have never made that claim.  Quite the opposite:

That's not to say that psychology (or any social science) is without value.

Again, this doesn't mean that the pseudo-sciences are without value.

Many people draw comfort and make personal decisions from religion, psychology, and economics - these fields of study are not without value.

As mentioned, I think there's value in the social 'sciences'.  My issue is simply applying the term 'science' to them.

Indeed, the statement you made there appears to be rooted in the assumption that all fields of study that are not science are worthless (please correct me if this was not your intent) . . . and frankly, that's an odd point of view to hold given the statement here:

I don't make claims about entire fields I know little about.






You're the one making the claim it's all pseudoscience. How do I fight an idea like that? You've already conceded that in fact not all sub-fields of psychology are pseudoscience, so you've already moved the goal-posts once. It makes it hard to fight moving goal posts.

Is this really a case of moving the goal posts?

Take Thomas Aquinas . . . he did a lot of real science as part of his religious work.  Does the fact that he did  honest-to-God* science make religion scientific?  I can't think of a reasonable argument that it does.  Can you?  While huge swaths of a field of study are not scientific and while there exists no attempt to make them scientific . . . is it really fair to call the whole field science?  If you do believe that, can you explain the reasoning to me?


*heh


My intent was not to move goalposts, but to indicate agreement with you that there is indeed some small part of the field of psychology that is scientific.  There was a small part of the field of religious studies that was scientific too.  If in a couple hundred years the scientific parts of psychology eventually win out and completely eradicate the pseudo-science ones, then sure . . . we can call the field a scientific one.  But if (like religion) the overwhelming majority remains unscientific then I think it's unfair to do so.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8290
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3655 on: August 19, 2020, 10:16:14 AM »
All this psychology talk reminds me of an article I read years ago.  For the longest time, psychologists insisted that violent criminals were that way because they had low self esteem.

Then someone started looking at the data, and it turns out that it's the opposite.  The majority of violent criminals actually have very high self esteem.

obstinate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1055
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3656 on: August 19, 2020, 10:57:08 AM »
There's also the whole replication crisis, which is more pronounced in psychology than almost any other discipline. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis#In_psychology Barely a third of psychological studies can be reproduced in other labs, and effect sizes are on average only half of what is originally reported upon replication.

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3657 on: August 19, 2020, 12:12:02 PM »
The US took just 24 days to go from 150,000 deaths to 175,000 deaths. What will the toll be on November 3, 2020? Will it even matter? Will anyone care by that point?

This is true.  However, in my opinion the stat to really pay attention to is per capita.  For some reason there isn't much mention of the UK, which has a higher covid death rate per capita than the US.  I actually didn't realize the UK got hit so hard until I checked that stat.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 12:13:48 PM by HBFIRE »

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3658 on: August 19, 2020, 01:11:54 PM »
Its bit hard to compare countries as counting merhods differ. How they count is a large part of the Belgian numbers being very high (per capita). The UK just removed about 4000 deaths due to a change in how they count for example. The persons in question are most def dead but most likely not due to covid.

There was also some study out of Sweden arguing that in a lot of cases (albeit in a small sample) covid was at most a contributing factor and most likely not the main cause.

As a fun fact Norway has far less deaths that normal this year. There are few Covid-deaths and the measures have strongly limited the spread of other infections which normally would have finished off some of the high-risk patients (sick/elderly etc). A rather amusing example of this is that funeral agencies require emergency government support as there just aren't enough dead to make the business go around.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 01:59:47 PM by habanero »

Plina

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve
« Reply #3659 on: August 19, 2020, 01:35:47 PM »
Its bit hard to compare countries as counting merhods differ. How they count is a large part of the Belgian numbers being very high (per capital). The UK just removed about 4000 deaths due to a change in how they count for example. The persons in question are most def dead but most likely not due to covid.

There was also some study out of Sweden arguing that in a lot of cases (albeit in a small sample) covid was at most a contributing factor and most likely not the main


As long as you have had covid during the last months your death is getting registerd as caused by covid in Sweden. My parents former neighbour died in a nursing home sitting by the dinner table. She had been tested having covid and was therefore registered as a victim of covid. If she had a rally bad case she would probably not have died by the table.

My fathers uncle on the other hand was admitted to the hospital with covid and died there after a couple of days. He was 85 years and had a ton of other diagnoses and covid helped probably to speed the process.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3660 on: August 19, 2020, 03:14:04 PM »
Maybe I'm being unclear here.  This an example of the difference between science and pseudo-science:

With climatology, there is a significant amount of evidence that has been gathered that clearly shows the changes to our climate over time.  Increase in greenhouse gases (and the experiments that have been done showing the impact of these gases on planetary warming), measured satellite temperature changes over time, etc.  Mistakes and corrections have been made based upon new data, observations, and measurements showing which mathematical models are more correct.

<snip>

Sounds like something prone to overfitting, though doesn't it?   If only you could validate the models with an experiment!

Again, pick any aspect of climate science and I'll be able to show the data that supports the theories, how the data can be reproduced reliably by anyone, and how the theories work together to create a unified understanding of climate change.  Climate science doesn't include things based upon political or popular conception.  If it did, we wouldn't have any climate crisis . . . it's a lot more profitable to ignore a problem of our own making (or pretend it doesn't exist) than try to get people to change consumption habits.

If you're up for, I'll move this to another thread...    (I'd like to dig out more facts about climate science, I'm not a climate skeptic!)

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3661 on: August 19, 2020, 09:02:48 PM »
Quote
"Victoria's Deputy Chief Health officer says Melbourne's stage four lockdown will not ease until we see daily new cases in the "single digits or even low double digits"."

That's not going to happen before Christmas. We're in the 200s now. The deaths are 80+% in aged care.

alsoknownasDean

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2273
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3662 on: August 19, 2020, 10:44:31 PM »
Quote
"Victoria's Deputy Chief Health officer says Melbourne's stage four lockdown will not ease until we see daily new cases in the "single digits or even low double digits"."

That's not going to happen before Christmas. We're in the 200s now. The deaths are 80+% in aged care.

Whereas my prediction is that by the scheduled end of stage 4 on 13 September, we'll be seeing daily case numbers of around 50. How many of these will be community transmission and how many will be in health or aged care settings is anyone's guess. Although roughly half of the active cases are from health workers or in aged care settings.

The rate of new cases seems to be dropping by about 30% a week.

My prediction is that we'll go back to stage 3 at some point in September, and back to stage 2 in October. Whether this is staggered by area we'll find out.

Remember that two weeks ago we were in the 400s.

I just found out today that one of my neighbours had COVID. Fortunately he's recovered and returned to work, but still that hits close to home.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2020, 10:57:08 PM by alsoknownasDean »

kenmoremmm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 525
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3663 on: August 19, 2020, 11:16:20 PM »
Quote
"Victoria's Deputy Chief Health officer says Melbourne's stage four lockdown will not ease until we see daily new cases in the "single digits or even low double digits"."

That's not going to happen before Christmas. We're in the 200s now. The deaths are 80+% in aged care.
precisely why lockdowns are not a tenable long term solution.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3664 on: August 20, 2020, 03:57:02 AM »
Whereas my prediction is that by the scheduled end of stage 4 on 13 September, we'll be seeing daily case numbers of around 50.
He said "single digits" or low tens would be what they want to see before lifting Stage 4. As for how long that'll take - at least till late October. Worldwide, the way down from peak to X cases takes about 1.7 times as long as it took to get up there, for example if it took 20 days to go from 10 to 100 daily cases, it'll take 20x 1.7 = 34 days to go from 100 to 10.
Let's look at the numbers.

https://www.covid19data.com.au

Last time we had a 7 day average of 10 cases a day was June 14-15. The peak was 516 on August 2nd, which is 48 days.

Multiplying that by 1.7 gets us 82 days, and 82 days from August 2nd takes us to October 22nd.

However I think it'll extend beyond there (the x1.7 is just an average, some do a bit less, many do much more), because the spread isn't in the general community, it's in healthcare, aged care, meatworks and warehousing, and the lockdowns don't affect them. They've introduced measures which should slow spread, like reduced staff for meatworks and warehousing, etc, but those measures are not as strong in effect as those in the general population, ie Stage 4.

Community transmission was never big, so the main reason for the slowing of cases has been quite simply it running out of victims. If you have 50 residents in an aged care home and 50 staff, and the staff have 100 household members, that cluster may start with 30 victims, but it only has another 170 to run through before it fizzles out - and a certain number of people never get infected.

Quote
My prediction is that we'll go back to stage 3 at some point in September, and back to stage 2 in October. Whether this is staggered by area we'll find out.
I believe that's optimistic. I note that the state of emergency has a legislated limit of 6 months, so unless Andrews can persuade parliament otherwise, it ends on midnight September 13/14th - and all measures with it (though they could keep hotel quarantine of new arrivals going after then). So he'll go back to parliament and try to force something through, which I'd expect he'd get.

cerat0n1a

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1910
  • Location: England
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3665 on: August 20, 2020, 08:06:26 AM »
The US took just 24 days to go from 150,000 deaths to 175,000 deaths. What will the toll be on November 3, 2020? Will it even matter? Will anyone care by that point?

This is true.  However, in my opinion the stat to really pay attention to is per capita.  For some reason there isn't much mention of the UK, which has a higher covid death rate per capita than the US.  I actually didn't realize the UK got hit so hard until I checked that stat.

Hard to compare across countries due to different ways of counting deaths, as others have said. Probably the key difference is that the UK took a big hit upfront through government policies which (not by design) resulted in very high mortality rates in care homes early in the outbreak. The current rate of new deaths is fewer than 20 per day, compared with approaching 1500 per day in the US & Brazil.  Live UK Government data is here https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ if you're interested.

LightTripper

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 804
  • Location: London, UK
  • Rural Londoner. Lazy workaholic. Confused.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3666 on: August 20, 2020, 10:10:29 AM »
They've just recalculated the UK deaths: I believe it was recording all deaths of anybody who had ever had a positive test (which was OK to start with but obviously got less reliable over time).  They are now doing tests within 28 days of a positive test.  Which will both overcount and undercount.  I'm hoping somebody's done the work to figure out how to balance out the overcounting and undercounting to roughly cancel out, but I guess it must depend on how prevalent Covid is (relative to the death rate from other causes).  Still, I suppose there is no perfect way to do these things, and the main thing is to be able to track trends consistently over time, so it will do. 

It does highlight the difficulty of comparing across countries: although I don't think there is any doubt that the UK has been hit hard.

Michael in ABQ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1092
    • Military Saints
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3667 on: August 20, 2020, 10:36:41 AM »
The US took just 24 days to go from 150,000 deaths to 175,000 deaths. What will the toll be on November 3, 2020? Will it even matter? Will anyone care by that point?

This is true.  However, in my opinion the stat to really pay attention to is per capita.  For some reason there isn't much mention of the UK, which has a higher covid death rate per capita than the US.  I actually didn't realize the UK got hit so hard until I checked that stat.

Hard to compare across countries due to different ways of counting deaths, as others have said. Probably the key difference is that the UK took a big hit upfront through government policies which (not by design) resulted in very high mortality rates in care homes early in the outbreak. The current rate of new deaths is fewer than 20 per day, compared with approaching 1500 per day in the US & Brazil.  Live UK Government data is here https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ if you're interested.

US average has been about 1,000 deaths per day for the past few weeks. Weekends are generally about 500 deaths while weekdays are 1,000 - 1,500. Brazil looks to be similar, lower weekend counts offset higher weekday counts with an average of about 1,000. India is also at about 1,000 per day, albeit out 1.35 billion vs 330 and 210 million in the US and Brazil.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3668 on: August 20, 2020, 11:17:18 AM »
Whereas my prediction is that by the scheduled end of stage 4 on 13 September, we'll be seeing daily case numbers of around 50.
He said "single digits" or low tens would be what they want to see before lifting Stage 4. As for how long that'll take - at least till late October. Worldwide, the way down from peak to X cases takes about 1.7 times as long as it took to get up there, for example if it took 20 days to go from 10 to 100 daily cases, it'll take 20x 1.7 = 34 days to go from 100 to 10.
Let's look at the numbers.

https://www.covid19data.com.au

Last time we had a 7 day average of 10 cases a day was June 14-15. The peak was 516 on August 2nd, which is 48 days.

Multiplying that by 1.7 gets us 82 days, and 82 days from August 2nd takes us to October 22nd.

However I think it'll extend beyond there (the x1.7 is just an average, some do a bit less, many do much more), because the spread isn't in the general community, it's in healthcare, aged care, meatworks and warehousing, and the lockdowns don't affect them. They've introduced measures which should slow spread, like reduced staff for meatworks and warehousing, etc, but those measures are not as strong in effect as those in the general population, ie Stage 4.

Community transmission was never big, so the main reason for the slowing of cases has been quite simply it running out of victims. If you have 50 residents in an aged care home and 50 staff, and the staff have 100 household members, that cluster may start with 30 victims, but it only has another 170 to run through before it fizzles out - and a certain number of people never get infected.

Quote
My prediction is that we'll go back to stage 3 at some point in September, and back to stage 2 in October. Whether this is staggered by area we'll find out.
I believe that's optimistic. I note that the state of emergency has a legislated limit of 6 months, so unless Andrews can persuade parliament otherwise, it ends on midnight September 13/14th - and all measures with it (though they could keep hotel quarantine of new arrivals going after then). So he'll go back to parliament and try to force something through, which I'd expect he'd get.

Yeah, I'm starting to get jaded with the lack of really granular data.

As you say, Kyle, it seems the main vectors of active cases have been -
1. Aged care homes
2. Hospitals
3. Abattoirs and other similar industries
4. Schools
5. High density housing

(1) and (2) above account for 3/8 of all current cases.

Large parts of the state are being held in stage 3 or stage 4 lockdown and, while some of the measures are eminently reasonable (prohibitions against extended family gatherings, prohibitions on large social functions), some of the measures are purely for optics or for the "theatre" of it all (a curfew on all movement, refusing to allow sole traders to enter their businesses, [till recently] refusing to let anyone drive for exercise).

And then there are stupid "allowed" things such as - allowing employees in high-risk industries to work across multiple sites (no reason to do this - they have pandemic leave - force them to use it); not following the NSW more invasive method of contact tracing till very late in the piece; not having proper checks of actual quarantined people (forced to lockdown due to a positive test) till late in the piece.

Our rhetoric in Victoria has been misguided: "We're all in this together." This has allowed actual high-risk people to move around with relative impunity, and it's forced heavy measures onto low-risk suburbs and communities.

No one seems to want to impose onerous lockdown measures on, say, casuals who work across multiple risky employers and who live in high-density housing. Because it's like, "Oh, they're already disenfranchised, or whatever. Let's not point a finger at them." But the truth is that it's those demographics who needed to be locked down first. That's not to say they're subjectively to blame, at all. I mean, what can a casual worker do? He needs to work. So we should have accepted that, instituted the pandemic leave much earlier on, stopped playing a game of morality/blame, and just shifted to an objective assessment of risk.

Hopefully for the next pandemic we can do that.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3669 on: August 20, 2020, 04:24:00 PM »
Our rhetoric in Victoria has been misguided: "We're all in this together." This has allowed actual high-risk people to move around with relative impunity, and it's forced heavy measures onto low-risk suburbs and communities.
In The Age today there's an article -

https://www.theage.com.au/national/let-the-virus-run-but-protect-the-vulnerable-easier-said-than-done-20200820-p55nk5.html

- where the guy basically outlines all the difficult things we'd have to do to let the virus run but protect the vulnerable, he then concludes it's too hard. But he fails to explain why it'd be worse than what we have now.

He's also wrong, of course. For example he talks of healthcare workers being kept away from their families. That's not necessary, because we already decided that outside the vulnerable we let it run - so their households get infected, some of them get sick, almost none of them die. As for their households infecting the healthcare workers and thus the patients, we have that risk already, and that's why healthcare workers have hygiene protocols. So all he's doing is describing unreasonable pointless restrictions to justify our current unreasonable pointless restrictions.

I understand why he's doing it. The medical community began 100% supportive of the lockdowns. In the sixth month they're starting to realise the cost is greater than the benefits, particularly of some measures. They can't say it openly, because medicine has Barries and Karens who report you to AHPRA and you get suspended. But they're talking amongst themselves and with their families. The Vice-Chancellor of Melbourne University (not a medical doctor) says the costs are greater than the benefits.

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/melbourne-university-head-says-restrictions-could-do-more-harm-than-virus-20200820-p55nl3.html

Dissent is growing. We are under house arrest 23 hours a day. We have curfews. People are fined for going for doughnuts, or taking their kids to the park. Public protests are banned. Parliament hasn't sat properly since May. People are dying from cancer, diabetes, dementia, suicide and unintentional overdoses. Marriages are breaking up. Children are growing memories of their parents depressed and angry. And a dozen elderly infirm are dying everyday anyway. So what's it all for?

Dissent is growing.

RetireAbroadAt35

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3670 on: August 20, 2020, 05:19:57 PM »
And a dozen elderly infirm are dying everyday anyway. So what's it all for?
Because more people would die.  More people would get seriously ill.  More people would have long-term health impacts.  And it impacts more than the elderly or infirm.

I choose the middle path, in which all science-denying bums get run out of office and we focus our collective efforts on making testing fast and universal so we can lessen the restrictions while waiting for vaccines and therapies.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3671 on: August 20, 2020, 05:48:36 PM »
Because more people would die.
Foreign experience doesn't support that. Even Sweden's death rate was inflated by their denying medical care and actually killing the elderly infirm, many of whom otherwise would have lived.

400 Victorians a month are dying from the lockdown. I'm fine with 400 of us dying from the lockdown if it prevents 401 people from dying of covid. But it's not. We're getting the worst of both worlds.

Quote
More people would get seriously ill.  More people would have long-term health impacts.  And it impacts more than the elderly or infirm.
Yes. And the lockdown is doing these things, too.

Quote
I choose the middle path, in which all science-denying bums get run out of office and we focus our collective efforts on making testing fast and universal so we can lessen the restrictions while waiting for vaccines and therapies.
I don't think the Victorian government is capable of that. Here is the DHHS organisational chart, every person on that chart earns at least $200k, the top one $500k. Who's in charge? Not even they know. When you look at that chart, and realise too that that's just one department, the emergency management department and forestry and all the rest were involved too - I mean, the National Gallery of Victoria was part of the "mission team", wtf? - and there have been 5 State Controllers in as many months, you start to understand why security guards tasked with looking after those in quarantine were not only denied PPE, when they did their training if they ticked "yes" to "does mask-wearing prevent covid?" they were marked wrong. And of course, nobody can tell us who made that training module.

It is possible to test, treat and trace, and control outbreaks without widespread lockdowns. Taiwan, South Korea and Japan have done it. What we need to do is go to those countries and offer them a big wad of cash to come in and run things, and just do exactly what they tell us. But the anglosphere don't like learning from foreign countries, especially those with different-coloured skin. And so we clusterfuck on.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3672 on: August 20, 2020, 07:44:43 PM »
The numbers today in Victoria are a relief

I can't see the lockdown being extended for longer than 13 September. The chorus of voices is starting to build. There might even be cautious easing before the official date.

The economic damage and psychological damage of lockdown is mounting and once daily cases drop a little further there will be no justification for it continuing.

RetireAbroadAt35

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3673 on: August 20, 2020, 08:53:54 PM »
Foreign experience doesn't support that.
I'm not going to play armchair epidemiologist when it comes to "data".

Quote
I don't think the Victorian government is capable of that.
Well, it's not an either or, it's a question of how effective you can get.  And one thing I can say for sure, the Victorian government is beating the pants off my government.  You could have it much worse.

Quote
It is possible to test, treat and trace, and control outbreaks without widespread lockdowns. Taiwan, South Korea and Japan have done it.
I imagine we don't need to hire them.  It's not about expertise.  We just need the will, and a lot more testing.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3674 on: August 20, 2020, 10:39:15 PM »

I can't see the lockdown being extended for longer than 13 September. The chorus of voices is starting to build. There might even be cautious easing before the official date.

It's really hard to tell general public opinion, the only polls have been by partisan types, like The Guardian. At best we can see shifts in opinion, and absolutely there's been a shift - but from where to where? Hard to say.



I imagine we don't need to hire them.  It's not about expertise.  We just need the will, and a lot more testing.

It's very much about expertise. They built on their experiences of SARS-Cov-1 more than 10 years ago.

And of course, as Sutton noted today we could double testing but we'd double the time to get people's results back, giving those actually infected more time to infect others. The symptomatic need to be tested, those without symptoms aren't a priority, since they're not very infectious. So more testing than we're already doing (among the most in the world) would just slow things down - why? Because we don't have the systems. That's why some contacts of cases have taken weeks to be contacted by the tracers.

We actually half had a system - they'd wargamed out a pandemic plan a few times. But they abandoned it, and changed who was in charge each month - and if the State Controller is changing each month, you can bet the rest is in chaos, too. And so you get things like the security guards being given no PPE and being given hygiene training where they were asked, "can masks prevent covid?" and if they tick "yes" they're told they're wrong and have to do it again. Because there were no systems, it was just a jumble of people.

Expertise and systems. Success in anything significant is built on systems, that's why for example McDs does well - they have designed systems that even a dumb 15 year old can handle.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2020, 03:53:56 AM by Kyle Schuant »

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3675 on: August 24, 2020, 09:38:41 AM »
I can't see the lockdown being extended for longer than 13 September. The chorus of voices is starting to build. There might even be cautious easing before the official date.
You still think this?

Bloop will know, but others won't: legally, the state of emergency must expire after 6 months. The Premier is returning to parliament in the hopes of altering the legislation to allow him to extend it another 12 months. He's not doing this just so he can get people to wear face masks. He has 17 seats in the upper house, which has 40 members in all, and so he must secure the support of 4 of the crossbenchers. He's put some offside by only talking to them after he did a press conference announcing it, and asking for their support without bothering to present them with a draft bill.

On top of the state of emergency, he has as well the state of disaster, which can be wrangled to give him similar powers - and requires no parliamentary approval, nor does it have a time limit, only that he must "report" to parliament within seven days of its proclamation (which he hasn't done).

Meanwhile...

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/melbourne-magnate-sails-away-from-face-masks-and-lockdown-20200824-p55otv.html

and I don't blame that useless rich cunt, I'd go too, if I could. Should the legislation be amended as the Premier wishes, my family will look to move interstate. Should that prove too difficult, or the rest of Australia slip back into this madness, we'll have to look internationally.


Let this be a warning to all of you: if there are powers in the legislation, at some point a leader will use them, and they will be abused, and somehow the time will never quite be right for them to set their power aside. Never concede your freedoms.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3676 on: August 24, 2020, 09:52:17 AM »
First confirmed case of C19 reinfection.  https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/first-covid-19-reinfection-documented-in-hong-kong-researchers-say/ 

So much for flattening the curve?  Or at least any idea that that was going to be a temporary thing that we had to do.  Not to mention hopes for herd immunity. 

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3677 on: August 24, 2020, 10:09:01 AM »
First confirmed case of C19 reinfection.  https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/first-covid-19-reinfection-documented-in-hong-kong-researchers-say/ 

So much for flattening the curve?  Or at least any idea that that was going to be a temporary thing that we had to do.  Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.

Eh, one confirmed reinfection out of 24 million confirmed cases is not something to freak out about.  Way too soon to draw such a drastic extreme conclusion. 

The Spanish flu, which was far more deadly, had reinfection on a larger scale and that pandemic ultimately died off without vaccine.


If you read your article:

"Experts cautioned that this patient’s case could be an outlier among the tens of millions of cases around the world and that immune protection may generally last longer than just a few months. They said that ongoing studies tracking patients who had recovered from Covid-19 would help reach more definitive conclusions.

“There’s been more than 24 million cases reported to date,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a coronavirus expert at the World Health Organization, said at a briefing Monday, when asked about the Hong Kong report. “And we need to look at something like this at a population level.”
« Last Edit: August 24, 2020, 10:14:23 AM by HBFIRE »

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5796
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3678 on: August 24, 2020, 10:17:30 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3679 on: August 24, 2020, 11:03:09 AM »
First confirmed case of C19 reinfection.  https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/first-covid-19-reinfection-documented-in-hong-kong-researchers-say/ 

So much for flattening the curve?  Or at least any idea that that was going to be a temporary thing that we had to do.  Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.

Eh, one confirmed reinfection out of 24 million confirmed cases is not something to freak out about.  Way too soon to draw such a drastic extreme conclusion. 

The Spanish flu, which was far more deadly, had reinfection on a larger scale and that pandemic ultimately died off without vaccine.


If you read your article:

"Experts cautioned that this patient’s case could be an outlier among the tens of millions of cases around the world and that immune protection may generally last longer than just a few months. They said that ongoing studies tracking patients who had recovered from Covid-19 would help reach more definitive conclusions.

“There’s been more than 24 million cases reported to date,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a coronavirus expert at the World Health Organization, said at a briefing Monday, when asked about the Hong Kong report. “And we need to look at something like this at a population level.”


Also, the second infection "caused no disease" in the patient, i.e., he didn't get sick, at all. No headache. No cough. etc...

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3680 on: August 24, 2020, 11:05:19 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

Why not? People use the word "dick," all the time to refer to "despicable" people they don't like. Is that term offensive to you, as well?

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3681 on: August 24, 2020, 11:25:15 AM »
First confirmed case of C19 reinfection.  https://www.statnews.com/2020/08/24/first-covid-19-reinfection-documented-in-hong-kong-researchers-say/ 

So much for flattening the curve?  Or at least any idea that that was going to be a temporary thing that we had to do.  Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.

Eh, one confirmed reinfection out of 24 million confirmed cases is not something to freak out about.  Way too soon to draw such a drastic extreme conclusion. 

The Spanish flu, which was far more deadly, had reinfection on a larger scale and that pandemic ultimately died off without vaccine.


If you read your article:

"Experts cautioned that this patient’s case could be an outlier among the tens of millions of cases around the world and that immune protection may generally last longer than just a few months. They said that ongoing studies tracking patients who had recovered from Covid-19 would help reach more definitive conclusions.

“There’s been more than 24 million cases reported to date,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a coronavirus expert at the World Health Organization, said at a briefing Monday, when asked about the Hong Kong report. “And we need to look at something like this at a population level.”


Unwarranted optimism is also not called for. For instance, 24 million confirmed cases is an incorrect and misleading number to look at.  A good portion of those people haven't even recovered from their first bout, much less had time to contract it a second time, report symptoms (or not as noted), be tested and have the genome sequenced.  This man was on the early side for initial cases, so it's not surprising if he ends up on the early side of reinfections.

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3682 on: August 24, 2020, 11:28:34 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3683 on: August 24, 2020, 11:37:30 AM »


Unwarranted optimism is also not called for. For instance, 24 million confirmed cases is an incorrect and misleading number to look at.

I'm not being optimistic, I'm being realistic.  Your statement was:

So much for flattening the curve? Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.

It's ridiculous and hyperbolic to draw this conclusion from one confirmed reinfection.

For instance, 24 million confirmed cases is an incorrect and misleading number to look at.

Correct, from serological studies we know the actual number of infections is several magnitudes higher than 24 M which means one confirmed reinfection is not a reason to think the sky is falling.  Apparently from your article the experts agree with this sentiment.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2020, 11:41:59 AM by HBFIRE »

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10814
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3684 on: August 24, 2020, 11:38:09 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”
Actually, no. It is less vulgar, but it’s still quite misogynistic.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13915
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3685 on: August 24, 2020, 11:42:20 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”

Definitely a rude word in Canada.

If the b and c words are misogynistic, what are the p and d words?  Or is the difference that men do and women don't use the c and b words (especially the c word), but everyone uses the p and d words?

Language on an international forum is fraught.  Rude language is even more dangerous. 

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5664
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3686 on: August 24, 2020, 11:45:11 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”
Actually, no. It is less vulgar, but it’s still quite misogynistic.

I mean, sure. But definitely much less vulgar. And a lot more common.

I think I’m in the mood to defend Kyle because a week or so ago, an Australian friend of mine (female) got into an online stir where she was quite horribly excoriated for saying someone had acted like a “twat.” Of course, she meant it in the Australian context (and pronunciation) but some Americans got super angry and proceeded to rake her over the coals all over social media. It was quite depressing to see.

JGS1980

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3687 on: August 24, 2020, 11:46:10 AM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”

Definitely a rude word in Canada.

If the b and c words are misogynistic, what are the p and d words?  Or is the difference that men do and women don't use the c and b words (especially the c word), but everyone uses the p and d words?

Language on an international forum is fraught.  Rude language is even more dangerous.

Can't we all just agree to call everyone assholes if their behavior merits it? I believe most everyone has an asshole.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3688 on: August 24, 2020, 11:48:56 AM »


Unwarranted optimism is also not called for. For instance, 24 million confirmed cases is an incorrect and misleading number to look at.

I'm not being optimistic, I'm being realistic. 
And I wasn't "freaking out". The common cold does the same thing and I don't freak out about that, either. I asked a question (or are you not familiar with "? to stimulate conversation and your first response is to tell someone they're freaking out and offer misleading and incorrect information as a refutation. What's ridiculous is counting people who have not even recovered from a first infection as evidence that there is no need to even suggest (as I did) that reinfections contradict the story some maintain or hope for that herd immunity is on its way to save us. 


HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3689 on: August 24, 2020, 11:52:45 AM »
I asked a question (or are you not familiar with "? to stimulate conversation

Sorry, I took this as rhetorical by the way it was worded:

So much for flattening the curve? Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.


If you intended it as a genuine question then I apologize.  I think the answer to your question is, no we shouldn't draw that conclusion based on one confirmed reinfection.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2020, 11:55:42 AM by HBFIRE »

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10814
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3690 on: August 24, 2020, 11:58:59 AM »
Reinfection is quite unusual, but not unknown. When I was a child, there wasn’t vaccine for several of the childhood infections, and I knew the occasional other child who’d had one of them more than once. They still talked about herd immunity.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3691 on: August 24, 2020, 12:02:41 PM »
I asked a question (or are you not familiar with "? to stimulate conversation

Sorry, I took this as rhetorical by the way it was worded:

So much for flattening the curve? Not to mention hopes for herd immunity.


If you meant it as a genuine question then I apologize.  I think the answer to your question is, no we shouldn't draw that conclusion based on one confirmed reinfection.

Thanks.  I think the obvious plain reaction is "too soon to say" or "we shall see" as more people recover, but I am also interested and hopeful that others here might have thoughts on what we might look for or see next or any available info (anecdotal or otherwise) of people suspecting they have been reinfected. Also, interested if we might ever see how or if this intersects with the "long term" cases that we've been hearing of and what that looks like, if so.

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3692 on: August 24, 2020, 12:12:26 PM »
Again, according to the article, although the patient technically got "reinfected" with covid, he experienced no symptoms, i.e. he didn't get sick, at all, not even a little bit. If a person catches a cold and she doesn't know it, did she really have a cold?

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3693 on: August 24, 2020, 12:19:22 PM »
Again, according to the article, although the patient technically got "reinfected" with covid, he experienced no symptoms, i.e. he didn't get sick, at all, not even a little bit. If a person catches a cold and she doesn't know it, did she really have a cold?

Yes great point, which could even mean he still had a great T cell response which is what we are starting to think with this virus.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3694 on: August 24, 2020, 12:40:31 PM »
Again, according to the article, although the patient technically got "reinfected" with covid, he experienced no symptoms, i.e. he didn't get sick, at all, not even a little bit. If a person catches a cold and she doesn't know it, did she really have a cold?

Yes great point, which could even mean he still had a great T cell response which is what we are starting to think with this virus.

I wasn't so surprised by this. Aren't we learning that plenty of people are asymptomatic on their first round? So could happen in the second round too. But I believe we also know asymptomatic people are contagious, which is the concern. Worse than symptomatic people being contagious...

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16600
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3695 on: August 24, 2020, 12:42:53 PM »
[redacted]
Please don't use a term relating to a woman's anatomy to describe a despicable man.

Thanks.

I’ll defend Kyle on this one, in that the Australian context for that term is so different. “The C word” is incredibly vulgar and rude in the US (and probably Canada.?) but Australians use it basically as “jerk” or “asshole.”

Definitely a rude word in Canada.

If the b and c words are misogynistic, what are the p and d words?  Or is the difference that men do and women don't use the c and b words (especially the c word), but everyone uses the p and d words?

Language on an international forum is fraught.  Rude language is even more dangerous.

Can't we all just agree to call everyone assholes if their behavior merits it? I believe most everyone has an asshole.


Due to an unfortunate accident with a sewing machine in my youth, I do not have an asshole and thus am triggered by people referring to others as "assholes".  Yes, it probably could have been repaired . . . but as a particularly anal retentive person I just went with it.  So much rectal privileged going on here.  For shame.


:P

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3696 on: August 24, 2020, 12:46:47 PM »


I wasn't so surprised by this. Aren't we learning that plenty of people are asymptomatic on their first round? So could happen in the second round too. But I believe we also know asymptomatic people are contagious, which is the concern. Worse than symptomatic people being contagious...

I think its definitely noteworthy if his infection the first time was serious enough to get tested back in March, but this time its totally asymptomatic.  That could illustrate a built up T cell defense. 

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3697 on: August 24, 2020, 02:00:06 PM »


I wasn't so surprised by this. Aren't we learning that plenty of people are asymptomatic on their first round? So could happen in the second round too. But I believe we also know asymptomatic people are contagious, which is the concern. Worse than symptomatic people being contagious...

I think its definitely noteworthy if his infection the first time was serious enough to get tested back in March, but this time its totally asymptomatic.  That could illustrate a built up T cell defense.

This would surprise me if that turns out to be super common, if only because other coronaviruses don't work that way?  And one reinfection, as you have reminded, is too little to come to conclusions on. 

But, it would obviously be great if so.  There'd be no herd immunity, but it wouldn't matter because no one felt any ill effects of reinfection? It would be pretty weird.  In fact, following my point above, these asymptomatic people would presumably be infecting people at much higher rates than ever, not knowing they were contagious, but others wouldn't be bothered because they'd be asymptomatic, too?  And what happens to a virus in a situation like that?  Does it burn itself out, or just start mutating faster and faster and...?

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3698 on: August 24, 2020, 02:09:26 PM »
The other coronaviruses are like that scenario, and have become endemic with low-level (often asymptomatic) infections in the population. It's possible that COVID-19 will become like the others over time, or become like influenza and kill a couple thousand people per year on a regular basis. How long that will take is not knowable, since the 4 endemic coronaviruses have been around much longer than modern epidemiology.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Displaying your outrage accomplishes nothing.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3699 on: August 24, 2020, 02:16:09 PM »
I’m discovering what a bubble I’m living in. It was an eye opener to travel across the US and see the noncompliance with the very basic social distancing and mask usage. If you go into a store or restaurant here locally, well over 90% of folks seem to be wearIng masks. And frequently it’s 100%.

Once you cross the state line though, it seems to drop. It was pretty sad in some places. With some surprises. Rural Tennessee: a pretty good percent of folks were wearing masks. Well over 80%. In the Midwest it was far worse. In the places I saw in Missouri it was less than half.

Based on my admittedly nonscientific sample it looks to me like COVID is going to be with us for awhile.