Coronavirus Thread

[RonJohn]

CLEARLY, they should be listed as a COVID-19 death.

Clearly no deaths should be listed as COVID-19 deaths because they are actually caused by cytokines.

 

[684Bee]

nm

 

[Techster]

One of the things I'm seeing more and more on social media is the geopolitical fallout of this virus. More specifically, how nations moving forward will treat China. It's starting to hit home how unreliable China is in terms of offering up information "for the greater good", and how dependant the world has become on China in the supply chain. China is proving that membership in NATO and WTO is a trophy to legitimize their way of governing, as opposed to a sincere effort of moving the world forward as a whole.

Of course, when this passes, and governments around the world will need to make tough economic decisions, will they be more than just tough talk when facing the possibility of paying the price for moving away from China?

 

[RonJohn]

However, the modeling is now being shown to have badly overestimated the size and nature of the pandemic.

A very large problem with the models is that wide scaled mitigation has never been used before. Until a couple of months ago, it was a theoretical response to a very contagious pandemic. Scientists could arrive at theoretical estimates of how large scale mitigation would affect infection rates of a pathogen. People who build models could put those estimates into the models. The reality of mitigation appears to be better than what was arrived at in models of the theoretical impacts. It is still far too early to arrive at any concrete conclusions about how dangerous or not this virus actually is. If the Ro actually is as high as the recent study says, and the mortality rate actually is a little over 1%, this could have been a very devastating event. If antibody testing shows that 80% of the American population has the virus, then it is more akin to the flu. To actually answer any of this, will take final data and time for epidemiologists and statisticians to work on the data.

Something that probably would help modelling mitigation's effects would be years worth of cell phone data from the entire public. If the models based infection rates on cell phones being close to each other instead of statistics, then they might have a better chance at predicting effects of different scales of mitigation efforts. However that could raise some privacy concerns.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

A very large problem with the models is that wide scaled mitigation has never been used before. Until a couple of months ago, it was a theoretical response to a very contagious pandemic. Scientists could arrive at theoretical estimates of how large scale mitigation would affect infection rates of a pathogen. People who build models could put those estimates into the models. The reality of mitigation appears to be better than what was arrived at in models of the theoretical impacts. It is still far too early to arrive at any concrete conclusions about how dangerous or not this virus actually is. If the Ro actually is as high as the recent study says, and the mortality rate actually is a little over 1%, this could have been a very devastating event. If antibody testing shows that 80% of the American population has the virus, then it is more akin to the flu. To actually answer any of this, will take final data and time for epidemiologists and statisticians to work on the data.

Something that probably would help modelling mitigation's effects would be years worth of cell phone data from the entire public. If the models based infection rates on cell phones being close to each other instead of statistics, then they might have a better chance at predicting effects of different scales of mitigation efforts. However that could raise some privacy concerns.

Do you really want the government to track your every move, regardless of how significant those statistics might be? That is way too Orwellian for me.

 

[FredJacket]

Can some of those climate modelers take a turn on virus modeling?

 

[RonJohn]

Do you really want the government to track your every move, regardless of how significant those statistics might be? That is way too Orwellian for me.

Using anonymous cell phone location data would probably be a lot better at forecasting than just statistics. Using non-anonymous cell phone data would be a great tool for containment. Contact tracing and identification could be almost complete and would catch people that current methods do not.

I did state that there would be be privacy concerns. I think that it will happen at some point. There is already some tracking by different companies and apps, although I don't think it is complete tracking. If someone had asked 30 years ago about having cameras everywhere on the street that could be used to track where you go, many people would have objected. Today that is common. If someone had asked 10 years ago about all neighbors putting up doorbell cameras that record everything that happens in the neighborhood, many people would have objected. Today that is common. Millennials and Gen Z'ers don't appear to be concerned about being on cameras or on maps most of the time.

 

[takethepoints]

It won’t last that long. We can’t put the country into abject despair for that long to protect such a small minority of people. The general population will demand strong quarantine protection for those people and to let everyone else live their lives.

My gut tells me some parts of the country will open up with social distancing, wearing masks, and what-not...and by the time any resurgence comes we’ll have a better read on vaccines and medicines.

Everyone should remember that we now have the best testing in the world. So if our testing isn’t enough, nobody else’s is either. This isn’t an American problem. The rest of the world won’t put up with this either. The health issues and despair from just 30 days will lead to uprisings and revolt if they try to hold this for longer than say another month.

See:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

And look at your favorite metric, in this case tests per million population. There you will see at once that the US, while giving a large number of tests, is not - repeat not - among the world leaders in the kind of surveillance that will be necessary to accommodate even a rolling withdrawal of restrictions without running the risk of making the infection rate explode. And that, of course, will make the death rate explode too.

Also, where do you get all this "abject despair" stuff? People seem to be coping fairly well and are expecting considerable aid in getting past this from the government. I've seen no opinion data showing anything resembling despair; if you have, let's see it. Now, if the checks get held up too long, that'll get people upset alright. But I suspect the administration knows that and will deliver as soon as the actual civil servants at Treasury begin to make the wheels work.

I'm pretty sure that most of us would rather not get sick then get back to work.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Using anonymous cell phone location data would probably be a lot better at forecasting than just statistics. Using non-anonymous cell phone data would be a great tool for containment. Contact tracing and identification could be almost complete and would catch people that current methods do not.

I did state that there would be be privacy concerns. I think that it will happen at some point. There is already some tracking by different companies and apps, although I don't think it is complete tracking. If someone had asked 30 years ago about having cameras everywhere on the street that could be used to track where you go, many people would have objected. Today that is common. If someone had asked 10 years ago about all neighbors putting up doorbell cameras that record everything that happens in the neighborhood, many people would have objected. Today that is common. Millennials and Gen Z'ers don't appear to be concerned about being on cameras or on maps most of the time.

That is true about the Millennials and Gen X's (not sure what a Gen Z'er is), but they are naive if they don't think the government, or anybody for that matter, can and probably does use those cameras and maps for potentially nefarious reasons. Like I said, I realize the potential good of having such information, at least in this case, but overall, I just don't like it.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

See:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

And look at your favorite metric, in this case tests per million population. There you will see at once that the US, while giving a large number of tests, is not - repeat not - among the world leaders in the kind of surveillance that will be necessary to accommodate even a rolling withdrawal of restrictions without running the risk of making the infection rate explode. And that, of course, will make the death rate explode too.

Also, where do you get all this "abject despair" stuff? People seem to be coping fairly well and are expecting considerable aid in getting past this from the government. I've seen no opinion data showing anything resembling despair; if you have, let's see it. Now, if the checks get held up too long, that'll get people upset alright. But I suspect the administration knows that and will deliver as soon as the actual civil servants at Treasury begin to make the wheels work.

I'm pretty sure that most of us would rather not get sick then get back to work.

Fine, if you want to use per capita testing (a fair point), pick your high water mark. The point stands. When world class is 20,000 tests per 1,000,000 people, you’re talking about only testing 2% of the population.

Abject despair comes from the fact we’re somewhere around 15% unemployment, 25% unemployment, and forecasts are for those to double. Have you seen the miles long lines at the food pantries? Google a bit and you’ll see what I mean. Look at places like San Antonio and places in Florida. People aren’t going to stand for this but for so long.

It’s a false assumption to state everybody would get sick if they went back to work in a month. Although I would guess a great many people would in fact want to get the virus and move on.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

See:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

And look at your favorite metric, in this case tests per million population. There you will see at once that the US, while giving a large number of tests, is not - repeat not - among the world leaders in the kind of surveillance that will be necessary to accommodate even a rolling withdrawal of restrictions without running the risk of making the infection rate explode. And that, of course, will make the death rate explode too.

Also, where do you get all this "abject despair" stuff? People seem to be coping fairly well and are expecting considerable aid in getting past this from the government. I've seen no opinion data showing anything resembling despair; if you have, let's see it. Now, if the checks get held up too long, that'll get people upset alright. But I suspect the administration knows that and will deliver as soon as the actual civil servants at Treasury begin to make the wheels work.

I'm pretty sure that most of us would rather not get sick then get back to work.

Give it another month or two and you will almost definitely see a helluva lot of despair in this country. And what happens when those government checks are spent? What are the people counting on them going to do then? We have GOT to re-open the country and get things going and people working again, or a crisis will result from not doing those things that may end up being worse than the health crisis itself.

 

[takethepoints]

Problem here is that no one has much credibility in this whole matter. The scientists and the science are what I respect deeply. However, the modeling is now being shown to have badly overestimated the size and nature of the pandemic. The field hospital in Seattle that was erected, saw no patients at all, and is now being dismantled is one aspect of that. The estimates that scared everyone about the need for beds and ventilators in NYC are another (it has turned out that Trump was factually correct that Cuomo did NOT need 30,000 ventilators.)

I want more data and more clinical trials. My understanding in listening to Fauci is that numerous such trials are underway. By the time this re-surfaces next Fall, we should know MUCH more about how to treat it (since a vaccine will still not be available yet) and we should be able to hold down mortality rates significantly based on that.

I think we have now seen the worst of this virus and will see steady improvement, with a few blips, from here on.

Hope you're right. But … this is a brand new virus and extremely contagious. Remember that the initial estimates of total deaths were based on not doing what we are doing now. Personally, I think that, even with the present measures and better treatments, we will still top better then 100K deaths from this before we have a vaccine. Relaxing at this point without proper surveillance mechanisms in place will make that absolutely certain, imho.

I'm with you on all of this, except that I think you are too optimistic about our capacity to handle what we have on our hands right now, not to mention in the future. But let's hope that sound advice prevails and we keep our heads down until the virus indicates that we can come out of this. As Fauci said yesterday, right now "… the virus is kind of decides whether or not its going to be appropriate to open or not." Yep.

 

[takethepoints]

Do you really want the government to track your every move, regardless of how significant those statistics might be? That is way too Orwellian for me.

Uh, they can already do that, you know. The only restriction is that you can't do it as part of a criminal investigation.

But if you are that worried, throw the sim chip in your phone away, buy a burner every week (they're dirt cheap), and go your merry way.

 

[takethepoints]

Give it another month or two and you will almost definitely see a helluva lot of despair in this country. And what happens when those government checks are spent? What are the people counting on them going to do then? We have GOT to re-open the country and get things going and people working again, or a crisis will result from not doing those things that may end up being worse than the health crisis itself.

You and bwelbo seem to have convinced yourselves that people are going to behave irrationally in this. As the crisis continues, the federal government will provide more money. It really is that simple. The Fed just pumped another $2.3 trillion into economy yesterday. Congress will follow suit; at a lag, of course.

There will be potentially dire economic consequences from this, but this downturn won't take place because of a failure on institutions, like 2007-8. This is a natural disaster. People respond differently to those, even if the effects are long lasting. I wouldn't worry so much, if I were you. Especially if that worrying leads to precipitate actions that increase our problems with the disease. We can handle the economy; we can't handle the virus yet.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

You and bwelbo seem to have convinced yourselves that people are going to behave irrationally in this. As the crisis continues, the federal government will provide more money. It really is that simple. The Fed just pumped another $2.3 trillion into economy yesterday. Congress will follow suit; at a lag, of course.

There will be potentially dire economic consequences from this, but this downturn won't take place because of a failure on institutions, like 2007-8. This is a natural disaster. People respond differently to those, even if the effects are long lasting. I wouldn't worry so much, if I were you. Especially if that worrying leads to precipitate actions that increase our problems with the disease. We can handle the economy; we can't handle the virus yet.

Huh? When did I say people would behave irrationally?

As far as the money, we're 6 weeks into this, and nobody has seen a single red cent. And when that check for a family of 4 comes in and its about $3,000, that will cover about 5% of their annual income if they represent a median family. If you're talking a solid middle class family earning $75,000/year, that check would represent 2 weeks of pay. If we rocket our debt up to $30-$35 Trillion to try and keep people whole, then we'll have a $1 Trillion/year bill to pay just on interest on the debt. That would represent a third of all of our federal income tax revenue in a normal year.

 

[kg01]

Clearly no deaths should be listed as COVID-19 deaths because they are actually caused by cytokines.

I feel, either no deaths should be attributed to COVID19 or all deaths should be attributed to COVID19. It's gonna get us all eventually, amirite?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

More anecdotal evidence around the SBA program and how its collapsing under its own weight and bureaucracy:
https://theweek.com/speedreads/9080...l-businesses-2-million-loans-now-maxing-15000

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

You and bwelbo seem to have convinced yourselves that people are going to behave irrationally in this. As the crisis continues, the federal government will provide more money. It really is that simple. The Fed just pumped another $2.3 trillion into economy yesterday. Congress will follow suit; at a lag, of course.

There will be potentially dire economic consequences from this, but this downturn won't take place because of a failure on institutions, like 2007-8. This is a natural disaster. People respond differently to those, even if the effects are long lasting. I wouldn't worry so much, if I were you. Especially if that worrying leads to precipitate actions that increase our problems with the disease. We can handle the economy; we can't handle the virus yet.

Some people are already behaving irrationally, some in the private sector and quite a few in government. The entire country has never shut down like this before. People who previously held at least decent-paying jobs, as well as some with relatively high-paying jobs are now not getting paid at all. Do you really think that those people won't get increasingly desperate if this lasts much longer? I am fortunate to have a fixed retirement income, so life pretty much goes on for me as before, and I am sure other retirees like me feel the same. But when conditions somewhat comparable to those during the Great Depression exist, things can potentially get way out of hand. And sadly people today are nowhere near as stalwart as most people during the depression were.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I am fortunate to have a fixed retirement income, so life pretty much goes on for me as before, and I am sure other retirees like me feel the same. But when conditions somewhat comparable to those during the Great Depression exist, things can potentially get way out of hand. And sadly people today are nowhere near as stalwart as most people during the depression were.

Isn't that the great irony? The people most susceptible to the virus are also largely not inconvenienced by shutting down the economy. The people least susceptible to it are the ones getting driven over the top of.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Isn't that the great irony? The people most susceptible to the virus are also largely not inconvenienced by shutting down the economy. The people least susceptible to it are the ones getting driven over the top of.

Yep !