Author Topic: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?  (Read 248230 times)

JGS1980

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3700 on: August 24, 2020, 02:18:56 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.

Influenza kills 20K to 60K people in the USA every year.
Worldwide, it kills 300K to 800K people per year.

Source: CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1663
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3701 on: August 24, 2020, 02:22:38 PM »
The other coronaviruses are like that scenario, and have become endemic with low-level (often asymptomatic) infections in the population.

Really? I had no idea.  It's strange to think (applying this to myself) that I've probably had colds much more frequently than I suspected, when I usually have 1-3 per year and the course of them are so reliable, like a checklist.  To think I've regularly had others that I don't know about sort of blows me away.  Also, my husband (who I've known now for about 7.5 years) has only once had a cold since I've known him. However, he frequently says "My throat hurts, I think I might be catching something!" and then the next day is totally fine.  Perhaps he actually has more colds than me, and he really has been "sick" all those times.

Longwaytogo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 40
  • Location: One Particular Harbor
  • Wherever you go; there you are!
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3702 on: August 24, 2020, 04:43:46 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.

Yeah it definitely varies. I'm in MD and mask compliance is really high. NC,PA, and VA...not so much. I went into a gas station in VA and out of 5 people I was the only one wearing a mask...even the cashier had no mask!

I've been assuming it would be with us forever?  Eventually we'll potentially have some combination of vaccine/treatment/herd immunity but I assume it'll become endemic like many other coronaviruses.


Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3703 on: August 24, 2020, 08:07:02 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.

Influenza kills 20K to 60K people in the USA every year.
Worldwide, it kills 300K to 800K people per year.

Source: CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

Yeah. And that’s with vaccinations. I expect covid will be like that, if we’re lucky.


Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3705 on: August 24, 2020, 11:34:33 PM »
It's getting a bit DDR here.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/coronavirus-perth-woman-who-hid-in-truck-to-get-into-wa-handed-sixmonth-jail-term/news-story/2bd606ac3b099ccdbd44327c1cb133c7

Eh, the jail term is way too harsh (you can run over a child and get a lesser jail sentence as long as you weren't speeding/drunk), but I'm glad they're finally cracking down on breach of quarantine rules. It's quarantine mishaps that have caused the entire second wave.

Hope they throw the book also at those two teenage women who travelled from Queensland to Victoria, had a house party, went back to Queensland while symptomatic, lied about their whereabouts (to escape quarantine) and continued to socialise while evading a covid test (till they had to go to hospital)...would be nice to see them getting locked up too.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3706 on: August 24, 2020, 11:52:38 PM »
No.

Nobody should be imprisoned for travelling within their own country.

And all covid-related fines should be refunded. Every one of them.

The government at no point tried persuasion and education, but went straight for coercion.

No.

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3707 on: August 25, 2020, 05:28:19 AM »
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.

Have been keeping fingers crossed on this since that Nature paper.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1157
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3708 on: August 25, 2020, 08:04:20 AM »
No.

Nobody should be imprisoned for travelling within their own country.

And all covid-related fines should be refunded. Every one of them.

The government at no point tried persuasion and education, but went straight for coercion.

No.

hahaha!!!  Persuasion and education don't work all that well.

Signed,

Someone in the U.S.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13915
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3709 on: August 25, 2020, 08:26:17 AM »
No.

Nobody should be imprisoned for travelling within their own country.

And all covid-related fines should be refunded. Every one of them.

The government at no point tried persuasion and education, but went straight for coercion.

No.

hahaha!!!  Persuasion and education don't work all that well.

Signed,

Someone in the U.S.

People in the US got mixed messages, after all, it's just like the flu and masks are so unimportant that POTUS didn't wear them touring hospitals and factories.  So the education and persuasion to not take it seriously worked quite well, eh?

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3710 on: August 25, 2020, 09:51:50 AM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly




jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1157
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3711 on: August 25, 2020, 10:19:56 AM »
No.

Nobody should be imprisoned for travelling within their own country.

And all covid-related fines should be refunded. Every one of them.

The government at no point tried persuasion and education, but went straight for coercion.

No.

hahaha!!!  Persuasion and education don't work all that well.

Signed,

Someone in the U.S.

People in the US got mixed messages, after all, it's just like the flu and masks are so unimportant that POTUS didn't wear them touring hospitals and factories.  So the education and persuasion to not take it seriously worked quite well, eh?

That's a fair point.  Yes, we have had very inconsistent messaging.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3712 on: August 25, 2020, 03:22:30 PM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

I think this is the same article on Fox Business:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/new-thinking-on-covid-lockdowns-theyre-overly-blunt-and-costly

The initial shutdown made a lot of sense - it gave us time to learn about the virus and how to mitigate it.     I'm not so sure that having more shutdowns is a good thing at this point.    We should be able to manage the virus without Draconian measures.    If there are specific problems areas, then they can be addressed more aggressively, otherwise people need to get on with their lives.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3713 on: August 25, 2020, 05:48:36 PM »

That's a fair point.  Yes, we have had very inconsistent messaging.

If my son's teacher told him that 1+1=2 and his principal walked in and said, "no, it's 3," there would, I think, be some confusion in the classroom.

But with my entire state shut down, it's nice to know that at least Diversity & Intersectionality Change Managers will still exist. While people are fined for going for doughnuts and young women are choked in the street by police for going about with their faces uncovered (is this Iran?), important work is still being done.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/lets-face-it-these-are-nonsense-jobs/news-story/79b4f374b296890439c9b0ee853202ad


Quote
As if the coronavirus hasn’t foisted enough change on us, NSW and Victoria are about to unleash more. Last week alone, during the ­biggest economic downturn in a ­century, the two states were advertising 20 high-paid jobs variously requiring skills in “change, culture, transformation and strategy”, with total salaries above $3.5m.Pick of the bunch was the $249,000 director of intersectionality and inclusion role at the Victoria Department of Justice, who must, naturally, “provide authoritative, strategic and innovative advice in relation to inclusion and intersectionality”.
Also appealing was the $327,000 director of people and culture role at the NSW Department of Education, who should “provide expert strategic advice across a range of strategic priorities”. Familiarity with Sun Tzu’s Art of War is presumably a given.
But it was vocational training giant TAFE NSW that’s at the vanguard of a change revolution, advertising separately for a “change lead”, “change manager”, “change analyst”, “change co-ordinator”, “change specialist” and, the lowest-paid of the group, an “organisational change officer”, making do on $88,000.
The change lead ($194,000), manager ($173,000) and co-ordinator ($119,000) will at least have lots of time for blue-sky thinking with only a change analyst, specialist and officer to oversee.
The NSW Ombudsman, which handles complaints about government, isn’t immune to the change revolution either, seeking (albeit more frugally) its own “change lead” on $164,000 to “develop and embed a strategic approach to change across the Ombudsman”. Perhaps, like obscenity, you know a strategic approach to change when you see it. “The Change Lead will own the single view of change,” the advertisement explained. Talk about ­pressure.
Change is afoot south of the border, too. Victoria’s Environmental Protection Agency and State Revenue Office were luring change experts with $161,000 and $141,000 salaries, respectively. The former would need to “achieve organisation-wide support, enthusiasm, and participation in the changes … including delivery of change solutions (such as) change facilitation, change champions and change leadership”.
One feels for the successful applicant in a #WFH world, having to psyche up colleagues on Zoom call and nurture change champ­ions who may well have the camera option turned off.
Perhaps the SRO change role should be greater paid given the challenge at hand: state taxes have barely changed in 20 years.
Our two biggest state governments would appear to have provided an answer to anthropologist David Graeber’s 2019 book Bullshit Jobs: The Rise of Pointless Work and What We Can Do About It. Answer: not much.
“Economics around the world have become vast engines for producing nonsense,” Graeber writes in a book that delineates five classes of bullshit jobs, of which change roles fit best into “flunkie” and “box ticker” categories. The former “exist to make someone else feel or look important”, the latter “allow organisations to claim they are doing something that in fact it is not doing”.
You might think the tier of government most directly responsible for destroying livelihoods on an unprecedented scale in this country might have the modesty to rein in such profligacy. This is the biggest economic contraction since the national accounts were developed more than 50 years ago. Private sector wages are shrinking for the first time in a generation.
Jobs that are necessary, which arise from real demand from households and businesses, such as accommodation, retail, many professional services, have been wiped out, while those existing purely by fiat, for which no one would pay a cent, flourish.
It’s government arrogance and amorality that justifies such “jobs” — and the extraordinary salaries — in a major recession. It’s not the job creation we need.
Naturally, these advertised roles are just the latest recruits to the massively unproductive standing change, diversity and inclusion army entrenched in the public sector across the country.
In May the NSW Department of Planning hired a “manager, diversity & inclusion strategy” on a salary of $148,134, who would “lead a small, diverse team which is responsible for developing and implementing strategic plans to embed diversity and inclusion” across the department.
Perhaps this crack team is musing over whether brownfield developments are racist.
Meanwhile, as government sucks intelligent workers into the pointless work Graeber identifies, it hobbles the private sector’s scope to generate jobs.
For example, four years after it started negotiations, the Fair Work Commission knocked back an enterprise agreement sought by Swissport for its thousands of ground support staff.
That leaves intact the Airline Operations — Ground Staff Award 2020, which specifies, among other absurdities, that workers be paid $3.19 a week more for every coffin they handle and $5.18 a week if they handle money between $200 and $1000. You might think an industry facing an existential crisis required more flexibility.
Then there’s the Building and Construction On-Site Award, whose mind-blowing complexity makes it a wonder much is built at all. The construction sector is facing the loss of 150,000 jobs by early next year, yet it specifies loadings for working at different heights, in different types of weather.
And, a personal favourite, employees “who are regularly required to compute or estimate quantities of materials in respect of the work performed by other employees must be paid an additional 23.3 per cent of the hourly standard rate per day or part thereof”.
At least they are being paid more for something that need to be done, unlike the “change” army.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2020, 05:52:28 PM by Kyle Schuant »

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Displaying your outrage accomplishes nothing.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3714 on: August 25, 2020, 06:01:11 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.

Yeah it definitely varies. I'm in MD and mask compliance is really high. NC,PA, and VA...not so much. I went into a gas station in VA and out of 5 people I was the only one wearing a mask...even the cashier had no mask!

I've been assuming it would be with us forever?  Eventually we'll potentially have some combination of vaccine/treatment/herd immunity but I assume it'll become endemic like many other coronaviruses.

What part of VA? I’m in SE VA and it’s pretty much 100% here.

Longwaytogo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 40
  • Location: One Particular Harbor
  • Wherever you go; there you are!
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3715 on: August 25, 2020, 06:39:17 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.

Yeah it definitely varies. I'm in MD and mask compliance is really high. NC,PA, and VA...not so much. I went into a gas station in VA and out of 5 people I was the only one wearing a mask...even the cashier had no mask!

I've been assuming it would be with us forever?  Eventually we'll potentially have some combination of vaccine/treatment/herd immunity but I assume it'll become endemic like many other coronaviruses.

What part of VA? I’m in SE VA and it’s pretty much 100% here.

Near Fredericksburg but off the beaten path in King George county a bit was the specific gas station.

Outside of that I spent the weekend at my Uncle's house so I didnt go any other public places; so small sample size.

Longwaytogo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 40
  • Location: One Particular Harbor
  • Wherever you go; there you are!
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3716 on: August 25, 2020, 08:00:51 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.

Have been keeping fingers crossed on this since that Nature paper.

This one?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3717 on: August 25, 2020, 08:50:12 PM »
What I don't understand is why here in Victoria we are fining people for breaking curfew, criminally investigating fairly trivial things of that nature, but we are not investigating the 5 security guards who we know (through genomic sequencing) passed on the entire second wave to Victorians?

I'm not saying they necessarily committed a crime - no one seems to be willing to report the specifics due to "confidentiality" - but what we do know, from evidence given at the inquiry, is that the second wave of transmission started in late May. This is when our stage 3 restrictions were still in place; extended family gatherings were not permitted. We also know from evidence given at the enquiry that one of the security guards admitted to working as a courier and delivering food while symptomatic and awaiting the results of his covid test (this is a huge no-no).

Why is that not leading to fines? Or at least a police investigation?

Do the security guards and their families get a free pass for some reason?

Plina

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3718 on: August 25, 2020, 10:59:41 PM »

That's a fair point.  Yes, we have had very inconsistent messaging.

If my son's teacher told him that 1+1=2 and his principal walked in and said, "no, it's 3," there would, I think, be some confusion in the classroom.

But with my entire state shut down, it's nice to know that at least Diversity & Intersectionality Change Managers will still exist. While people are fined for going for doughnuts and young women are choked in the street by police for going about with their faces uncovered (is this Iran?), important work is still being done.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/lets-face-it-these-are-nonsense-jobs/news-story/79b4f374b296890439c9b0ee853202ad


Quote
As if the coronavirus hasn’t foisted enough change on us, NSW and Victoria are about to unleash more. Last week alone, during the ­biggest economic downturn in a ­century, the two states were advertising 20 high-paid jobs variously requiring skills in “change, culture, transformation and strategy”, with total salaries above $3.5m.Pick of the bunch was the $249,000 director of intersectionality and inclusion role at the Victoria Department of Justice, who must, naturally, “provide authoritative, strategic and innovative advice in relation to inclusion and intersectionality”.
Also appealing was the $327,000 director of people and culture role at the NSW Department of Education, who should “provide expert strategic advice across a range of strategic priorities”. Familiarity with Sun Tzu’s Art of War is presumably a given.
But it was vocational training giant TAFE NSW that’s at the vanguard of a change revolution, advertising separately for a “change lead”, “change manager”, “change analyst”, “change co-ordinator”, “change specialist” and, the lowest-paid of the group, an “organisational change officer”, making do on $88,000.
The change lead ($194,000), manager ($173,000) and co-ordinator ($119,000) will at least have lots of time for blue-sky thinking with only a change analyst, specialist and officer to oversee.
The NSW Ombudsman, which handles complaints about government, isn’t immune to the change revolution either, seeking (albeit more frugally) its own “change lead” on $164,000 to “develop and embed a strategic approach to change across the Ombudsman”. Perhaps, like obscenity, you know a strategic approach to change when you see it. “The Change Lead will own the single view of change,” the advertisement explained. Talk about ­pressure.
Change is afoot south of the border, too. Victoria’s Environmental Protection Agency and State Revenue Office were luring change experts with $161,000 and $141,000 salaries, respectively. The former would need to “achieve organisation-wide support, enthusiasm, and participation in the changes … including delivery of change solutions (such as) change facilitation, change champions and change leadership”.
One feels for the successful applicant in a #WFH world, having to psyche up colleagues on Zoom call and nurture change champ­ions who may well have the camera option turned off.
Perhaps the SRO change role should be greater paid given the challenge at hand: state taxes have barely changed in 20 years.
Our two biggest state governments would appear to have provided an answer to anthropologist David Graeber’s 2019 book Bullshit Jobs: The Rise of Pointless Work and What We Can Do About It. Answer: not much.
“Economics around the world have become vast engines for producing nonsense,” Graeber writes in a book that delineates five classes of bullshit jobs, of which change roles fit best into “flunkie” and “box ticker” categories. The former “exist to make someone else feel or look important”, the latter “allow organisations to claim they are doing something that in fact it is not doing”.
You might think the tier of government most directly responsible for destroying livelihoods on an unprecedented scale in this country might have the modesty to rein in such profligacy. This is the biggest economic contraction since the national accounts were developed more than 50 years ago. Private sector wages are shrinking for the first time in a generation.
Jobs that are necessary, which arise from real demand from households and businesses, such as accommodation, retail, many professional services, have been wiped out, while those existing purely by fiat, for which no one would pay a cent, flourish.
It’s government arrogance and amorality that justifies such “jobs” — and the extraordinary salaries — in a major recession. It’s not the job creation we need.
Naturally, these advertised roles are just the latest recruits to the massively unproductive standing change, diversity and inclusion army entrenched in the public sector across the country.
In May the NSW Department of Planning hired a “manager, diversity & inclusion strategy” on a salary of $148,134, who would “lead a small, diverse team which is responsible for developing and implementing strategic plans to embed diversity and inclusion” across the department.
Perhaps this crack team is musing over whether brownfield developments are racist.
Meanwhile, as government sucks intelligent workers into the pointless work Graeber identifies, it hobbles the private sector’s scope to generate jobs.
For example, four years after it started negotiations, the Fair Work Commission knocked back an enterprise agreement sought by Swissport for its thousands of ground support staff.
That leaves intact the Airline Operations — Ground Staff Award 2020, which specifies, among other absurdities, that workers be paid $3.19 a week more for every coffin they handle and $5.18 a week if they handle money between $200 and $1000. You might think an industry facing an existential crisis required more flexibility.
Then there’s the Building and Construction On-Site Award, whose mind-blowing complexity makes it a wonder much is built at all. The construction sector is facing the loss of 150,000 jobs by early next year, yet it specifies loadings for working at different heights, in different types of weather.
And, a personal favourite, employees “who are regularly required to compute or estimate quantities of materials in respect of the work performed by other employees must be paid an additional 23.3 per cent of the hourly standard rate per day or part thereof”.
At least they are being paid more for something that need to be done, unlike the “change” army.

“Pick of the bunch was the $249,000 director of intersectionality and inclusion role at the Victoria Department of Justice, who must, naturally, “provide authoritative, strategic and innovative advice in relation to inclusion and intersectionality”.”

I think it is funny that the director of inclusion and intersectionality is supposed to provide authoritative advice.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3719 on: August 25, 2020, 11:14:37 PM »
As an update, just this afternoon the police have announced an inquiry into the security guard situation, very vaguely worded (again for privacy reasons apparently) but it seems like they will be focussing on licensing arrangements by the employer (the private company employing the guards) rather than the personal responsibility of the guards themselves to obey the laws about when to self-quarantine.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3720 on: August 26, 2020, 07:55:11 PM »
I think the political tide is turning, Kyle. The voices of people like you and me who query the necessity for the strict lockdown and the QALY/cost-benefit savings are starting to now become acceptable political discourse (particularly with the plunging numbers).

The question really has to be asked, given that this thing is basically only affecting hospital and aged care environments, shouldn't we be allowing low-risk Victorians the ability to return to their jobs, and return to a semblance of normality? Does it make sense for a stockbroker living in Brighton to not be able to go for her daily drive or swim or surf, when she has nothing to do with covid transmission?

Sooner or later the political will must change. I'm seeing it now as the mental toll of these onerous burdens increases. You can't impose a curfew on a population forever, particularly when daily case numbers drop below 100. The vast majority of deaths have come from an aged care environment which has nothing to do with community transmission. It is its own bubble and it needs its own rules.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3721 on: August 26, 2020, 10:21:44 PM »
It's tricky to know the general mood of the population, a few voices can shout very loudly. Roy Morgan poll shows Victorians overwhelmingly in favour of the restrictions - but then who are the thousands of people who've contacted the crossbench MPs? Who knows, really.


I think the upper house cross-benchers will give Andrews his extension of the state of emergency, whether it's for a month or 12 months doesn't matter because once they've granted him one extension, they've now joined him in the sunk cost fallacy that we just have to keep doing the same thing until we get different results.


The real pressure, I think, will come when the federal money runs short. September 28th JobKeeper and JobSeeker are dropping, so people will go into the pre-Christmas period already feeling grumpy. Most likely he'll have to open up in December to let people do Christmas shopping. How about family gatherings? Well, either he allows them and (combined with the shopping centre mingling) we get a surge of cases in January, or he doesn't allow them in which case they go ahead and do them anyway, and we are treated to scenes of armed uniformed police officers issuing fines to grandma at Christmas lunch, or dragging the half-drunk dad in his stubbies off the barbeque.


Then just before New Year we get news that cases are rising again, and people start wondering if we'll go back to heavy restrictions. The Premier says he can't rule anything out and must follow the data. Then on January 4th, the dole drops again.


Then in March JobKeeper ends, and (it's not been specified) presumably the dole drops yet again.


I can't see how this is viable, politically. I don't think he and his advisors have thought this through.


There needs to be a path out of this which does not have states of emergency and endless lockdowns and people fined for going to skate parks.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3722 on: August 26, 2020, 10:27:48 PM »
The best thing that could happen is that the federal UBI dries up and people start feeling the financial pain.

That will then give us impetus to open up.

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3723 on: August 26, 2020, 11:27:36 PM »
I agree.

When we had the brief reopening I'd lost half my clients, on a second reopening I'd expect to lose half of the remaining. I don't expect a flood of people later since we're in a recession. Thus I'm in receipt of JobKeeper and it's my entire income.

I wrote to the federal Treasurer telling him this, noting that I was conscious of what a difference the money made to people, and asking that if he could not rescind JobKeeper entirely, that he should at least resist any pressure to not taper it off.

It'll be better for us in the end. But I'm not optimistic.

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3724 on: August 26, 2020, 11:32:09 PM »
Looks like Sweden has in fact done better than other European countries economically:



https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354

Funny thing is we are sort of adopting the Sweden strategy at this point.

habanero

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3725 on: August 27, 2020, 02:46:00 AM »
Looks like Sweden has in fact done better than other European countries economically:



https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354

Funny thing is we are sort of adopting the Sweden strategy at this point.

At least that article is fairly accurate. The prevailing story has been that Sweden has been sort of an anarchy with no restrictions and everyone has gone on with their lives as if nothing happened.

Anette

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3726 on: August 27, 2020, 03:42:41 PM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

I think this is the same article on Fox Business:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/new-thinking-on-covid-lockdowns-theyre-overly-blunt-and-costly

The initial shutdown made a lot of sense - it gave us time to learn about the virus and how to mitigate it.     I'm not so sure that having more shutdowns is a good thing at this point.    We should be able to manage the virus without Draconian measures.    If there are specific problems areas, then they can be addressed more aggressively, otherwise people need to get on with their lives.

Yeah, except don't tell people on this thread because they might not like to read that, it's all about how people are irresponsible if they share those options
But wait - you may have realised by the way nobody else responded to your message but everyone is happy to talk about how people should/could be punished for possibly not agreeing the appropriate measures are taken...

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3727 on: August 27, 2020, 04:12:24 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.

Have been keeping fingers crossed on this since that Nature paper.

This one?

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z

Yes. This is the one I'm thinking about.

Seem hopeful to me.

And I think might help explain why we're pretty flat after the first wave in Upstate NY despite having fewer restrictions in places like CA (where they hadn't had their 1st wave and got hit despite more stringent lock downs).

I think it also might partially explain why places that got SARS1 hard tended to do better than places that didn't (although behavior seems like an obvious contributor here too).

If it's true that 50% had some kind of T-Cell response because of contact with other "common" corona viruses, then maybe herd immunity isn't far away after places get their 1st wave (which seems like it can't be avoided, just delayed). Does anyone know of any city that's had two waves yet?

Unknown so far, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

We're running a bit of an experiment where I am now. We had been consistently below 1% positive tests for a while (months?). But University semester began on the 19th. No spike in positives so far, but I'm waiting for another week or two to see how many cases we imported from across the US (although all students did have to show a negative test before coming back to campus).
« Last Edit: August 27, 2020, 04:20:04 PM by NorthernBlitz »

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3728 on: August 27, 2020, 05:09:53 PM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

I think this is the same article on Fox Business:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/new-thinking-on-covid-lockdowns-theyre-overly-blunt-and-costly

The initial shutdown made a lot of sense - it gave us time to learn about the virus and how to mitigate it.     I'm not so sure that having more shutdowns is a good thing at this point.    We should be able to manage the virus without Draconian measures.    If there are specific problems areas, then they can be addressed more aggressively, otherwise people need to get on with their lives.

Yeah, except don't tell people on this thread because they might not like to read that, it's all about how people are irresponsible if they share those options
But wait - you may have realised by the way nobody else responded to your message but everyone is happy to talk about how people should/could be punished for possibly not agreeing the appropriate measures are taken...

People do tend to move together in the same direction.   Like a big herd.   :-)    masks, climate change, anti-Trump, anti-Fox, pro-Trump, #metoo.     And then they punish non-conformists.

But in this case I think they're just interested in other things.


Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2128
  • Displaying your outrage accomplishes nothing.
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3729 on: August 27, 2020, 05:26:23 PM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

I think this is the same article on Fox Business:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/new-thinking-on-covid-lockdowns-theyre-overly-blunt-and-costly

The initial shutdown made a lot of sense - it gave us time to learn about the virus and how to mitigate it.     I'm not so sure that having more shutdowns is a good thing at this point.    We should be able to manage the virus without Draconian measures.    If there are specific problems areas, then they can be addressed more aggressively, otherwise people need to get on with their lives.

Yeah, except don't tell people on this thread because they might not like to read that, it's all about how people are irresponsible if they share those options
But wait - you may have realised by the way nobody else responded to your message but everyone is happy to talk about how people should/could be punished for possibly not agreeing the appropriate measures are taken...

We don't want cognitive dissonance now.  Better to just ignore inconvenient evidence.   

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3730 on: August 27, 2020, 10:32:34 PM »
I don’t think anyone is advocating for blanket shutdowns again, at least in the US. At any rates I agree with the conclusions from the article HBFire and Scottish posted. It is worth mentioning that the authors predict only a 10% improvement in economic output with their targeted model. It’s unclear if that is a an absolute improvement (which would be great) or relative. Do you all know?
We have decent evidence that partial shutdowns and widespread mask compliance can control outbreaks. These are uniquely hot-button issues here in US, but even seemingly low-compliance states are doing a good job at controlling spread. We’re at a steady state of 500-1000 deaths per day and will probably hold at that until an effective vaccine comes. High-risk people will have to be extra vigilant to avoid infection, and multi-generational households will have disproportionate deaths. I don’t think there’s a lot we can do about that under than government subsidy for either workers in those households staying at home, or housing the older (and obese) members in alternate housing. Neither seem palatable to governments, so I guess we’ll just have a high death count. Life doesn’t have perfect solutions.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5796
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3731 on: August 28, 2020, 02:21:18 AM »
I found this an interesting contrarian viewpoint from Harvard (caution: may need a subscription to read):

New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

I think this is the same article on Fox Business:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/new-thinking-on-covid-lockdowns-theyre-overly-blunt-and-costly

The initial shutdown made a lot of sense - it gave us time to learn about the virus and how to mitigate it.     I'm not so sure that having more shutdowns is a good thing at this point.    We should be able to manage the virus without Draconian measures.    If there are specific problems areas, then they can be addressed more aggressively, otherwise people need to get on with their lives.

Yeah, except don't tell people on this thread because they might not like to read that, it's all about how people are irresponsible if they share those options
But wait - you may have realised by the way nobody else responded to your message but everyone is happy to talk about how people should/could be punished for possibly not agreeing the appropriate measures are taken...

We don't want cognitive dissonance now.  Better to just ignore inconvenient evidence.   
No, after 75 pages of "but my freedoms" you have all made us unable to recognise that anything remotely rational comes after certain forum names.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5796
  • Location: Avalon
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3732 on: August 28, 2020, 02:22:27 AM »
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.

Influenza kills 20K to 60K people in the USA every year.
Worldwide, it kills 300K to 800K people per year.

Source: CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

Yeah. And that’s with vaccinations. I expect covid will be like that, if we’re lucky.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 744
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3733 on: August 28, 2020, 05:17:49 AM »
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.

Influenza kills 20K to 60K people in the USA every year.
Worldwide, it kills 300K to 800K people per year.

Source: CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html

Yeah. And that’s with vaccinations. I expect covid will be like that, if we’re lucky.

At this point, can we realistically expect anything better?

HBFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1249
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3734 on: August 28, 2020, 06:28:31 PM »
We’re at a steady state of 500-1000 deaths per day and will probably hold at that until an effective vaccine comes.


Curious why you think it will hold this high.  From what I can tell, most developed nations have fallen to relatively low daily death numbers (below 50) despite reopening for several months now.  I think the US just took longer as its geography is so wide, it essentially had to go through multiple waves.  Do you expect NY to have another huge wave?  Surely various degrees of herd immunity is slowing things to some extent.

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3735 on: August 28, 2020, 08:52:15 PM »
We’re at a steady state of 500-1000 deaths per day and will probably hold at that until an effective vaccine comes.


Curious why you think it will hold this high.  From what I can tell, most developed nations have fallen to relatively low daily death numbers (below 50) despite reopening for several months now.  I think the US just took longer as its geography is so wide, it essentially had to go through multiple waves.  Do you expect NY to have another huge wave?  Surely various degrees of herd immunity is slowing things to some extent.

I agree over time it will slow down, but have two theories:

1) There are still large parts of our geography that have not had significant exposures.  There was another thread we were discussing why the simplistic time-dependent epidemiologic models aren't working for our country because they don't account for cross-population infection (someone from Pop B goes to Pop A, which is recovering, and restarts the spread) and also don't account for relaxation of lockdowns (which are necessary to keep the economy functioning). If we had a big spike in all the states simultaneously in the spring, I'd expect things to drop off rapidly as the susceptible people across the US would have been exposed and subsequent precautions were taken to slow down spread afterwards. Since we didn't there are the multiple waves that in aggregate look like a longer tail.

2) I've noticed recently what I call a death lag. Basically, in the NE death rates closely followed infection rates, and dropped rapidly afterwards. (NY, NJ, CT in the graph attached). However, in the latest round (CA, TX, FL, AZ) only AZ had a drop off. The other three are still on a plateau for deaths.
Explanation 1: Part of this is overwhelmed coroner's offices for report issuances, so we will have to see if in retrospect this is an artifact. If the latter, then when cases are re-analyzed it'll show a sharper peak in deaths with a faster downslope like seen in the Northeast.
Explanation 2: The other possibility is better management of the acute instability we see with COVID ICU patients, with subsequent later deaths. This is called the second peak phenomena, where we got people through the acute illness but then some BS other problem takes them out during recovery (PE, heart attack, ventilator-associated pneumonia, etc). It sucks and happens often in critically ill patients who survive the initial sepsis. We are seeing more of these now.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3736 on: August 28, 2020, 09:48:57 PM »
We’re at a steady state of 500-1000 deaths per day and will probably hold at that until an effective vaccine comes.


Curious why you think it will hold this high.  From what I can tell, most developed nations have fallen to relatively low daily death numbers (below 50) despite reopening for several months now.  I think the US just took longer as its geography is so wide, it essentially had to go through multiple waves.  Do you expect NY to have another huge wave?  Surely various degrees of herd immunity is slowing things to some extent.

I agree over time it will slow down, but have two theories:

1) There are still large parts of our geography that have not had significant exposures.  There was another thread we were discussing why the simplistic time-dependent epidemiologic models aren't working for our country because they don't account for cross-population infection (someone from Pop B goes to Pop A, which is recovering, and restarts the spread) and also don't account for relaxation of lockdowns (which are necessary to keep the economy functioning). If we had a big spike in all the states simultaneously in the spring, I'd expect things to drop off rapidly as the susceptible people across the US would have been exposed and subsequent precautions were taken to slow down spread afterwards. Since we didn't there are the multiple waves that in aggregate look like a longer tail.

2) I've noticed recently what I call a death lag. Basically, in the NE death rates closely followed infection rates, and dropped rapidly afterwards. (NY, NJ, CT in the graph attached). However, in the latest round (CA, TX, FL, AZ) only AZ had a drop off. The other three are still on a plateau for deaths.
Explanation 1: Part of this is overwhelmed coroner's offices for report issuances, so we will have to see if in retrospect this is an artifact. If the latter, then when cases are re-analyzed it'll show a sharper peak in deaths with a faster downslope like seen in the Northeast.
Explanation 2: The other possibility is better management of the acute instability we see with COVID ICU patients, with subsequent later deaths. This is called the second peak phenomena, where we got people through the acute illness but then some BS other problem takes them out during recovery (PE, heart attack, ventilator-associated pneumonia, etc). It sucks and happens often in critically ill patients who survive the initial sepsis. We are seeing more of these now.
From a case count perspective, I toss out anything from the first wave because the case count information is of such poor quality. Of course, considerable lag between infection and death is what we should expect when infections are logged in a more timely manner. A second reason death lag may be increasing is due to improved therapeutics, which can cause marginal patients to linger longer in the ICU before recovering or succumbing. This is less certain than the first factor and would require higher resolution data than I'm able to (lazily) get to falsify. Finally, the first wave was brought to a close through rather draconian measures which are unlikely to be repeated in the future. All states--whether heavily or marginally impacted--essentially brought things to a halt in unison, which explains much of the steep & sustained drop-off in deaths in the spring.

I don't think it's fair to call what is being observed in some of those states (CA, TX, FL, AZ) a plateau. In terms of 7 day average deaths/day, AZ is down almost 50% from peak, FL is down ~40% from peak, TX is down 20% (ignoring the end-of-July reporting anomaly still on worldometer), and CA is down 14%. The US aggregate peak is not down as much because the higher rates of spread and mortality have navigated to new states that were previously not heavily impacted. In each state so far, we are seeing a similar epidemiological curve that is turning over when the state reaches a certain level of infection and deaths/capita (behavioral changes and/or community immunity effects driving down Rt). My thesis is still that the latter effect is dominating in infection & death reductions because: Florida Man and 'Murica are real things that must be incorporated into the model. If you live in a locale that has high public health safety measures in place, don't assume that you can infer your bubble represents the public reaction in Macon, Georgia, for example.

Overall, as I argued elsewhere, a decline in average daily deaths to 600-700 is basically built into the US statistics at this point by late September. After that, it will increasingly depend on the magnitude of seasonal forcing of Rt versus the impacts of susceptibility and transmission heterogeneity in the population.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 10:35:13 PM by lost_in_the_endless_aisle »

Abe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1648
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3737 on: August 28, 2020, 10:21:06 PM »
Most recently posted analysis of infection fatality rate using seroprevalence studies and case data suggest an overall 0.5% infection fatality ratio in Europe and US. The IFR seems to be base 10 logarithmic with age (1% amongst >65yo vs 0.01% amongst 20-30yo). The usual caveats about accuracy of source data and all apply, but that’s what we have currently.
Preprint is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20180851v1.full.pdf

Based on a 0.5% IFR and known COVID-19 deaths, about we're at about 180,000 * (1/0.05) = 40m infected in US.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 10:28:49 PM by Abe »

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3738 on: August 28, 2020, 11:08:31 PM »
We have quite good data here in Victoria. I posted about it upthread. It seems the death rate for over 80s is about 10-20% and the death rate for under 40s is about 0.03% so it is, as you say, probably a 10 fold rise per every 20 years of life.

Our chief health officer said up to 25% of nursing home residents who get the infection die.

Surprised the exponential nature of the death rate isn't better known / disseminated as it's one of the major features of the disease.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 11:10:10 PM by Bloop Bloop »

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1231
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3739 on: August 28, 2020, 11:10:41 PM »
Most recently posted analysis of infection fatality rate using seroprevalence studies and case data suggest an overall 0.5% infection fatality ratio in Europe and US. The IFR seems to be base 10 logarithmic with age (1% amongst >65yo vs 0.01% amongst 20-30yo). The usual caveats about accuracy of source data and all apply, but that’s what we have currently.
Preprint is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20180851v1.full.pdf

Based on a 0.5% IFR and known COVID-19 deaths, about we're at about 180,000 * (1/0.05) = 40m infected in US.
Of course, the herd immunity thresholds cited in the underlying papers [e.g. this] are the "standard" assumptions which assume a homogeneous population and spherical cows, etc. The serology paper is interesting in its own right, nonetheless, but I wonder if antibodies don't still under-count the non-susceptible population based on t cell immunity and the temporally limited duration of IgG antibodies. Still, if IFR is 0.5% then the US has more like 44-45M infections to-date after accounting for the lag in infection-related deaths. Not a huge correction at this point but this consideration did matter a bit more earlier in the epidemic.

And careful, Abe--you are linking a paper that is not peer-reviewed. If you're not careful, GuitarStv will have a fit (because--I'm guessing--all non-peer-reviewed papers are false, and all peer-reviewed papers are true).

Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3740 on: August 29, 2020, 03:10:26 AM »
Well, there we go, the Dear Leader's got himself another 6 months of ruling by decree without bothering with parliament in between.

Like a few people we know, we're looking at moving interstate. The thing about authoritarian regimes - or times of civil conflict - is that the first people to leave are the well-educated and well-off. That's one of the things that makes it so hard to rebuild after it's all over.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3741 on: August 29, 2020, 03:46:49 AM »
What I don't understand is why so many Victorians are still sucking Dan's....er, teat even after it's been well established that his hotel quarantine cost $130 million in taxpayers' money and was completely ineffectual. It's like there's no criticism of the government that can be countenanced. It was the same after 9/11 too, Americans just fell in line behind Bush, saying "we're all in this together", which as a slogan sounds good but makes utterly no sense. The problem with people "uniting" after tragedies is that it stifles important dissenting voices.

I was all in favour of a lockdown when cases were 300-700 per day - now I don't see the justification when cases have fallen under 100 and community transmission is 30-40 per day. That's totally manageable without preventing people from leaving the house to go to work.

The "let's be super risk-averse" strategy is not one that I can commend.

A lot of my usually very left-wing friends are starting to agree, too, because the numbers just don't stack up and the unseen toll of the lockdown, on households' finances and morale, is mounting. But, unlike Kyle I do think the government is aware of this and they are aware that sooner rather than later they will have to give citizens some of their freedoms back. Already I can see a lot more people disregarding social distancing and traffic is picking up and it's clear you cannot tell people to stay at home indefinitely especially when we are cottoning on that most of the transmission is in particular sectors or particular suburbs.

It may be that 30-80 cases per day, every day, between now and when we get a vaccine is a perfectly fine price to pay.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3742 on: August 29, 2020, 07:08:46 AM »
Most recently posted analysis of infection fatality rate using seroprevalence studies and case data suggest an overall 0.5% infection fatality ratio in Europe and US. The IFR seems to be base 10 logarithmic with age (1% amongst >65yo vs 0.01% amongst 20-30yo). The usual caveats about accuracy of source data and all apply, but that’s what we have currently.
Preprint is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20180851v1.full.pdf

Based on a 0.5% IFR and known COVID-19 deaths, about we're at about 180,000 * (1/0.05) = 40m infected in US.
Of course, the herd immunity thresholds cited in the underlying papers [e.g. this] are the "standard" assumptions which assume a homogeneous population and spherical cows, etc. The serology paper is interesting in its own right, nonetheless, but I wonder if antibodies don't still under-count the non-susceptible population based on t cell immunity and the temporally limited duration of IgG antibodies. Still, if IFR is 0.5% then the US has more like 44-45M infections to-date after accounting for the lag in infection-related deaths. Not a huge correction at this point but this consideration did matter a bit more earlier in the epidemic.

And careful, Abe--you are linking a paper that is not peer-reviewed. If you're not careful, GuitarStv will have a fit (because--I'm guessing--all non-peer-reviewed papers are false, and all peer-reviewed papers are true).


Peer review is not a gold standard.   It's more of an bronze standard.  :-)    The real gold standard is reproducibility and widespread acceptance.    Admittedly, getting through peer review is an entrance requirement to get to widespread acceptance, but as a first pass filter it's not terribly effective.

This is from personal experience.    I peer review and occasionally write technical papers.     Some very good papers don't pass peer review because the reviewers either have a personal dislike for the material or don't understand it's relevance.    Lots of low quality papers get through peer review because they have the right buzzwords for whatever happens to be trendy today.


Kyle Schuant

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3743 on: August 29, 2020, 07:15:23 AM »
Bloop has more faith in people than me. And he's a lawyer!


Before the invasion of Iraq, all Republicans believed Iraq had WMD. Afterwards, they believed they'd been found. As for Democrats, 72% thought Iraq had WMD - and afterwards only 26% admitted having believed in it. "I knew all along it was a lie!" - Mistakes Were Made, p.24.


It's going to be the same for the lockdown. Even if 20,000 Victorians die and the economy collapses, the ALP guys will say it was a brilliant idea. And everyone else will say, "oh yeah I knew it was bullshit."


The lockdowns will end when the federal money tap shuts off. Not before.



« Last Edit: August 29, 2020, 11:19:47 PM by Kyle Schuant »

JGS1980

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 429
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3744 on: August 29, 2020, 09:52:46 AM »
Bloop has more faith in people than me. And he's a lawyer!


Before the invasion of Iraq, all Republicans believed Iraq had WMD. Afterwards, they believed they'd been found. As for Democrats, 72% thought Iraq had WMD - and afterwards only 26% admitted having believed in it. "I knew all along it was a lie!" - Mistakes Were Made, p.24.


It's going to be the same for the lockdown. Even if 20,000 Victorians die and the economy collapses, the ALP guys will say it was a brilliant idea. And everyone else will say, "oh yeah I knew it was bullshit."


The lockdowns will end when the federal money tap shuts off. Not before.

Bloop and Kyle, your perspectives are extremely interesting. Living the USA, I wish with all my heart that our leadership was as incompetent as you think your leadership is.

Shane

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1295
  • Location: PA
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3745 on: August 29, 2020, 05:40:43 PM »
Most recently posted analysis of infection fatality rate using seroprevalence studies and case data suggest an overall 0.5% infection fatality ratio in Europe and US. The IFR seems to be base 10 logarithmic with age (1% amongst >65yo vs 0.01% amongst 20-30yo). The usual caveats about accuracy of source data and all apply, but that’s what we have currently.
Preprint is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24.20180851v1.full.pdf

Based on a 0.5% IFR and known COVID-19 deaths, about we're at about 180,000 * (1/0.05) = 40m infected in US.
Of course, the herd immunity thresholds cited in the underlying papers [e.g. this] are the "standard" assumptions which assume a homogeneous population and spherical cows, etc. The serology paper is interesting in its own right, nonetheless, but I wonder if antibodies don't still under-count the non-susceptible population based on t cell immunity and the temporally limited duration of IgG antibodies. Still, if IFR is 0.5% then the US has more like 44-45M infections to-date after accounting for the lag in infection-related deaths. Not a huge correction at this point but this consideration did matter a bit more earlier in the epidemic.

And careful, Abe--you are linking a paper that is not peer-reviewed. If you're not careful, GuitarStv will have a fit (because--I'm guessing--all non-peer-reviewed papers are false, and all peer-reviewed papers are true).


Peer review is not a gold standard.   It's more of an bronze standard.  :-)    The real gold standard is reproducibility and widespread acceptance.    Admittedly, getting through peer review is an entrance requirement to get to widespread acceptance, but as a first pass filter it's not terribly effective.

This is from personal experience.    I peer review and occasionally write technical papers.     Some very good papers don't pass peer review because the reviewers either have a personal dislike for the material or don't understand it's relevance.    Lots of low quality papers get through peer review because they have the right buzzwords for whatever happens to be trendy today.

Apparently, the phenomenon you describe has been going on in the social "sciences" for quite some time. A couple of years ago, three academics set out to illustrate that fact by writing and getting published in prestigious peer-reviewed journals 20 academic papers that were all hoaxes. Here's an essay they wrote describing their project.


Quote
Something has gone wrong in the university—especially in certain fields within the humanities. Scholarship based less upon finding truth and more upon attending to social grievances has become firmly established, if not fully dominant, within these fields, and their scholars increasingly bully students, administrators, and other departments into adhering to their worldview. This worldview is not scientific, and it is not rigorous. For many, this problem has been growing increasingly obvious, but strong evidence has been lacking. For this reason, the three of us just spent a year working inside the scholarship we see as an intrinsic part of this problem.

We spent that time writing academic papers and publishing them in respected peer-reviewed journals associated with fields of scholarship loosely known as “cultural studies” or “identity studies” (for example, gender studies) or “critical theory” because it is rooted in that postmodern brand of “theory” which arose in the late sixties. As a result of this work, we have come to call these fields “grievance studies” in shorthand because of their common goal of problematizing aspects of culture in minute detail in order to attempt diagnoses of power imbalances and oppression rooted in identity.

We undertook this project to study, understand, and expose the reality of grievance studies, which is corrupting academic research. Because open, good-faith conversation around topics of identity such as gender, race, and sexuality (and the scholarship that works with them) is nearly impossible, our aim has been to reboot these conversations. We hope this will give people—especially those who believe in liberalism, progress, modernity, open inquiry, and social justice—a clear reason to look at the identitarian madness coming out of the academic and activist left and say, “No, I will not go along with that. You do not speak for me.”

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1799
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3746 on: August 29, 2020, 07:42:22 PM »
Yeah, didn't mean to rant on.      I really just meant to say that GuitarStv (if he was here and had commented!) would not be wrong in this comment about lack of peer review.    At this stage the bulk of the published material about covid-19 is better than speculation, but it's got a long process to follow to be accepted science or medicine.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7039
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3747 on: August 29, 2020, 09:05:51 PM »
Bloop has more faith in people than me. And he's a lawyer!

Before the invasion of Iraq, all Republicans believed Iraq had WMD. Afterwards, they believed they'd been found. As for Democrats, 72% thought Iraq had WMD - and afterwards only 26% admitted having believed in it. "I knew all along it was a lie!" - Mistakes Were Made, p.24.

It's going to be the same for the lockdown. Even if 20,000 Victorians die and the economy collapses, the ALP guys will say it was a brilliant idea. And everyone else will say, "oh yeah I knew it was bullshit."


The lockdowns will end when the federal money tap shuts off. Not before.

Bloop and Kyle, your perspectives are extremely interesting. Living the USA, I wish with all my heart that our leadership was as incompetent as you think your leadership is.

Their perspectives are a minority based on the polls here.

It may be that 30-80 cases per day, every day, between now and when we get a vaccine is a perfectly fine price to pay.

The problem is it's not going to be 30-80 cases a day. It's either <20 a day in perpetuity (as it is in NSW) which allows the health system to contact trace immediately and put the community on notice to either isolate or avoid areas, or it very quickly spirals from 30 to 80 to 200 and 700 in a matter of weeks as was the case in Victoria.

You can only stop 50 a day with a stage 3 lockdown. You guys need to get it down below 20, there's really no other choice. Continuing to spout these stats about a minuscule proportion of young people dying ignores the strain on the health system that treating this disease costs, and the lingering after effects of having it on the unfortunate patient. You can't pretend that just because 0.03% die and 99.97% of young people who catch it don't means there is statistically no problem.

Well, there we go, the Dear Leader's got himself another 6 months of ruling by decree without bothering with parliament in between.

Like a few people we know, we're looking at moving interstate. The thing about authoritarian regimes - or times of civil conflict - is that the first people to leave are the well-educated and well-off. That's one of the things that makes it so hard to rebuild after it's all over.

This is ridiculous. He went to parliament to get that authority to extend those powers. By definition, that is not autocratic.

He wanted 12, the other side wanted rolling 1 months. Seems everyone met in the middle. Sounds exactly like representative democracy in action to me.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2020, 09:08:01 PM by marty998 »

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3748 on: August 29, 2020, 09:29:44 PM »
I'd be happy with a stage 3 or stage 2.5 lockdown. Stage 4 is far more onerous. Particularly, the curfew and the closure of retail/manufacturing are very big set-backs compared to stage 2 and 3.

We got it down to well below 20 cases and the only thing that separated us from NSW (which has kept it low for months) is that we were extremely slow to contact trace; we gave bad advice to security guard contractors; we let security guard contractors break all sorts of rules and then, other than firing them, took no further action; and our government tried to cover it up. None of those things has anything to do with stage 2/3/4 restrictions, other than perhaps we need to continue curtailing the ability of high-risk workers to work at multiple sites, and we need to continue banning family get-togethers. Besides that, the rest of the stage 3/4 restrictions are mere optics when case numbers go below 100.

I'd be happy to stay at stage 3 lockdown for weeks, or stage 2 lockdown for months (though I doubt it'll get that far). None of that bothers me. Stage 4 has a steep mental and financial cost to a lot of workers, and that's the main issue.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: How long can we wait while flattening the curve?
« Reply #3749 on: September 02, 2020, 03:21:05 AM »
The federal money is going to dry up in a few weeks - I'm glad the federal government resisted calls to keep the extremely generous payments forever - which just gives more impetus for Victoria to open up. You can't aim for "zero", you just have to aim for "good enough", which is what we're going to have to do. Open up retail and manufacturing and hospitality so we can get the economy going again and stop bleeding federal cash for furloughed workers.