I've often been a part of the problem Mark.  Sometimes I've been right and sometimes I've been wrong.  But I trust my gut more than I trust the herd mentality or those who jump on the band wagon.  I'm often a skeptic.  In this case I'm half and half.  I know that COVID-19 is harmful, and sometimes fatal, to many.  I'm skeptical that the one size fits all mentality extends to those areas where the risk has proven to be small...so far.  I'll respond to the threat according to the situation on the ground in my area.

Noel

I see that some of your fellow countrymen are actively campaigning to herd back together. From this side of the world, to do that seems not to be a terribly good idea.If you and your fellow countrymen are going to behave like that, you should close your borders and let no one out.

Edited April 17, 20206 yr by Reader

3 hours ago, dave2013 said:

I would like to go on the record and make some predictions:

1. Many States and localities will begin to relax their restrictions and begin reopening within 2 weeks with minimal negative effects such as greatly increased death rates.

2. The vast majority of the country will be fully reopened within 2 months, with some small problem areas like New York City remaining.  Again, minimal or no negative effects.

3. The Covid-19 death toll for 2020 in the U.S. will be less than 200,000 and likely much closer to 100,000.  At least 80% of those deaths will be folks over 65 years of age.  95+% of Covid-19 deaths of those aged <65 will have underlying health problems such as diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, obesity, etc.  The overwhelming majority, 99+%, of people under the age of 65 who contract Covid-19 will survive and experience flu-like symptoms. 

4. The Covid-19 fatality rate in the U.S. will end up being around 1%, or less.  Not 2-3% as some have claimed.

About a year from now, most folks will realize that much of the hysteria related to the coronavirus was unwarranted.  There was indeed cause for alarm in high population density cities like New York City and a few others, but in 95+% of the country there was no cause for alarm.  Simple safety measures such as social distancing, hand washing, wearing masks, etc. would have been enough to stem the spread of the virus. 

Governments erred on the side of caution and overreacted, which they had to do at the time, but in the end a lot of the reaction was unnecessary.

Covid-19 was not nearly as deadly as so many claimed it would be and there was no need to shut things down for more than 4-6 weeks, except in a few badly affected areas like NYC, and no need to lock things down at all in many parts of the country.

 

Dave

 

Your principal argument is that "Its different here"   -   more specifically "people pass the virus on less in NM than in NYC"

Now when Bergamo came to light in Italy in February  we in the UK thought "Its different here" - more specifically "Italians socialise in big family groups", "there are lots of old Italians", "Italians hug and kiss all the time"

If you look on OurWorldInData the day by day progress of deaths in the UK has followed exactly the same curve as Italy.

Countries have tried to halt the virus with social distancing, hand washing, advice to avoid groups of 500, 100, 10, 3 etc and ultimately decided that the only way to stop it was  a lockdown

One of the benefits of the big reset we are all doing is to have  a pause and try and learn how the virus spreads and to what extent we can relax yet ensure than on average an infected person doesn't pass it on to more than one other person. We need to boost testing such that we can test everyone with a cold.   

In NM I see on your dashboard that you have sadly had 44 deaths.  Two weeks ago you had tested and found 400 positives.  With an IFR of 0.5% there must have in fact been around 9000 infected people in NM at that time.  Without a lockdown that would have grown to 130K by now if  the infection rate is around the typical value of 3.

Germany has started relaxing restrictions along with Austria and Denmark so that may give us all some clues.

I worry that keeping a virus with a natural R0 of 3 down to 1.0 is going to be very difficult.

 

 

 

 

 

 

To add to my last post, I do think that it is conceivable that there is some truth that the virus is passed on more in big cities but we need to look for evidence that that is the case.  Perhaps the South Koreans  can infer such things from their tracking apps, do people catch it on the subway or in the office or in bars?

Speaking of the economy, there is also the problem that you can lead a horse to water, but.........

For instance, I have no intention on visiting any movie theatres, no matter what anyone says, till quite a long time after a vaccine is widely available, so say for at least a year.

Cruises? Hahahahahahahahah!!!

Visiting the bank, a public pool, getting on a crowded train? Visiting Disney? Can you say hazmat suit, boys and girls?

In fact, I suspect many people are not going to want to have anything to do with large crowds, especially in enclosed spaces until just about everyone is vaccinated (though there are some out there already willing to take their chances) and if things open too early and there is a rebound, well..... Forgetaboutit.

I can imagine certain groups flocking back to churches and etc. I also suspect unfortunately that that won't end well.

Would you send your kid back to school right now, or really, anytime in the next few months? The first sick kid, and that will end real quick!!

How about financial/medical responsibility of companies whose employees get sick en masse after returning? I hear the government is being heavily lobbied about some sort of blanket protection from liability...... How nice.....

Are people going to return to buffets and restaurants anytime soon, except for takeout? Are people going to be comfortable while waitresses come by in a mask to take their orders?

Add this to the posts above about people already wary about potential vaccines, and I think its going to be very interesting to see how the public decides to react on the next few months.

Edited April 17, 20206 yr by HiFlyer

51 minutes ago, birdguy said:

I know that COVID-19 is harmful, and sometimes fatal, to many.

So true especially the one who fight at the front, Healthcare Workers, alot died while trying to help others.

If you see a car accident you drive extra carefully for what 25 minutes and then push it out of your mind.  The same will be true people want to socialise - its who we are.  

After the big vaccination exercise when the hospitals report no cases we will be cautious for a few weeks and then all  go out for a drink!   Unless you get to Venice on the first day you will never see it quiet.

I would hope that one of the treatments (or a combination) makes a big difference before we get there though.

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

HiFlyer, there comes a time when death becomes acceptable to one's self.  I never thought I would live as long as I have.  And being quite healthy I probably have a few more years left in me.

Noel, I understand your thinking. You get to a certain age and decide what will be, will be.
Nothing wrong with that under normal circumstances.
However, the same reasoning cannot be used when discussing such a contagious virus.

To use your analogy, being on the outside perimeter of the herd is to be a more likely potential target. Once the predator catches its prey, the rest of the herd moves off in safety.

That doesn't happen with Coronavirus.

It's more analogous with being a fish in a bait ball. Most predators (gulls, seals, sharks, dolphins) also take just one or two fish at a time. Fairly manageable, as the rest of the shoal can move off.

However, this can happen:

 

To torture the analogy somewhat, the whale represents the lack of medical facilities. Too many get caught at the same time and perish.

That's the rationale behind social distancing and self-isolating / staying at home. Giving others the opportunity to get some form of treatment if they get the virus.
It's not about preventing 100% from catching it in the first place, it's about giving those who would normally be expected to survive the chance, rather than being turned away at the hospital door.
 

24 minutes ago, SteveFx said:

If you see a car accident you drive extra carefully for what 25 minutes and then push it out of your mind.  The same will be true people want to socialise - its who we are.  

After the big vaccination exercise when the hospitals report no cases we will be cautious for a few weeks and then all  go out for a drink!   Unless you get to Venice on the first day you will never see it quiet.

I would hope that one of the treatments (or a combination) makes a big difference before we get there though.

A couple of days ago I read that Sterling Moss had passed away. I'll always remember what he said about racing accidents......when you see an accident go as fast as you can because everyone else will slow down to think about it...........

4 minutes ago, W2DR said:

If you see a car accident you drive extra carefully for what 25 minutes and then push it out of your mind.

If i'm driving, car accidents are never out of my mind. Ever. I'm constantly scanning the other cars and trucks around me, waiting for that telltale slip. Also the edges of the road and surrounding foliage for deer. It means that yes, I'm probably a bit more tense than some drivers, but it also means that over the years I've driven right through the middle of several multi car accidents in progress and looked into the rear-view to see cars still crashing behind me.

Essentially, I think the other drivers on the highway are proven nutters! (and determined to take me with them)

There is no time when I'm not watching out for that accident, and that's worked out pretty well, honestly, leaving me already calculating angles, speeds and my exit strategy when everyone else's eyes are just beginning to widen.....

That probably trends into how I feel about coronavirus as well. We'll see if that's good or bad. 😿

2 hours ago, SteveFx said:

Your principal argument is that "Its different here"   -   more specifically "people pass the virus on less in NM than in NYC"

Now when Bergamo came to light in Italy in February  we in the UK thought "Its different here" - more specifically "Italians socialise in big family groups", "there are lots of old Italians", "Italians hug and kiss all the time"

If you look on OurWorldInData the day by day progress of deaths in the UK has followed exactly the same curve as Italy.

Countries have tried to halt the virus with social distancing, hand washing, advice to avoid groups of 500, 100, 10, 3 etc and ultimately decided that the only way to stop it was  a lockdown

One of the benefits of the big reset we are all doing is to have  a pause and try and learn how the virus spreads and to what extent we can relax yet ensure than on average an infected person doesn't pass it on to more than one other person. We need to boost testing such that we can test everyone with a cold.   

In NM I see on your dashboard that you have sadly had 44 deaths.  Two weeks ago you had tested and found 400 positives.  With an IFR of 0.5% there must have in fact been around 9000 infected people in NM at that time.  Without a lockdown that would have grown to 130K by now if  the infection rate is around the typical value of 3.

Germany has started relaxing restrictions along with Austria and Denmark so that may give us all some clues.

I worry that keeping a virus with a natural R0 of 3 down to 1.0 is going to be very difficult.

I'm only speaking of the U.S. as the data I based my predictions on is specifically for the U.S.  However, I also looked at some data from Italy regarding demographics which clearly indicates that the vast majority of deaths are those aged 65 and over.

I agree with you that we do need a shutdown period in order to buy time so that we can learn more and develop treatments.  I actually support a *temporary* lockdown.  The duration of the lockdowns must be tailored to each area, e.g. high population density cities will likely need longer lockdown periods and more extreme measures in general than rural areas.

Almost half of the deaths from Covid-19 in the U.S. have occurred in New York City alone, which makes sense - it has one of the highest population densities in the country.  European countries also have higher population densities than the U.S. overall, which IMO is why the infections spread more rapidly there.

My contention is that we cannot have lockdowns that last more than a few months, otherwise we will destroy our economies.  The longer the lockdown, the worse it will be and the longer it will take to recover.

Are we willing to destroy the economy and suffer the brutal consequences for who knows how long in order to save 0.5%, or 1%, of the population?  That is the ultimate question.

Also as some say here, no matter what the govt. does people aren't going to rush back out to the restaurants the day the lockdowns are lifted.  It will take time before life returns to normal, but it will return to normal.  My guess is that this will happen once we have an effective vaccine.

Some people are going to die from this virus no matter what we do.  What price are we willing to pay in order to save 100,000, 200,000, 500,000, a million?

I don't have all the answers, of course.  I do know, however, that we cannot afford to keep our economies shut down for many months or until there's a vaccine available.

Dave

Edited April 17, 20206 yr by dave2013

F737FG, Au contraire.  I believe my thinking is appropriate FOR ME in any situation.  I'm not advocating you or anyone else should adopt it.  I survived two wars.  I'll survive this even if I do march to a different drummer.  

Noel 

4 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

 

My contention is that we cannot have lockdowns that last more than a few months, otherwise we will destroy our economies.  The longer the lockdown, the worse it will be and the longer it will take to recover.

And I agree entirely.  I have friends who own businesses who face ruin through no fault of their own.

This is a very good article in the Guardian which discuses the idea of really scaling up testing to 10s millions a day as a possible way out.  

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/17/political-imagination-end-lockdown-mass-testing-contact-tracing
 

 

 

Yay Birdguy! I totally agree !  We are what we are. Drum on my friend.

 Sue

30 minutes ago, SteveFx said:

And I agree entirely.  I have friends who own businesses who face ruin through no fault of their own.

This is a very good article in the Guardian which discuses the idea of really scaling up testing to 10s millions a day as a possible way out.  

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/17/political-imagination-end-lockdown-mass-testing-contact-tracing
 

 

 

Totally agree.  If we can test a lot of people rapidly then it becomes possible to quickly isolate those infected and stop this virus dead in its tracks.

Dave