Coronavirus / COVID-19

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I wouldn't presume to be able to predict the future---otherwise I'd be in a far more comfortable place than sitting in front of my computer typing this. This thread has been characterized as panic porn for calling this pandemic dire circumstances for humanity. I disagreed with that....until now. Months? Years? That's panic porn, IMHO. What leads you to think that the UK, or any other Western society is going to take advantage of the situation and go all Chairman Mao on its' population?

I'm not talking about some sinister plot, I'm talking about what's happening right now and it being normalised after it's been in place for 18 months. That's the time-frame we're being given here, 3 months of lock down minimum and 12-18 months of at least moderate social distancing.

You still didn't answer my question. How many deaths are an acceptable payment for your "social rights?"

I'll answer yours---the number of deaths from suicides, homicides, and other forms of social violence will certainly go up. The longer mobility is restricted, the more there will be. I'm not a sociologist, nor a statistician, so I can't give a body count. However.....I do know that if SARS-CoV-2 is left to run rampant in the name of "social rights", the body count will absolutely dwarf those who die from societal violence.

The difference between "mitigation" and "suppression" in the UK is pegged at roughly 230,000 lives, mostly elderly, how many extra suicides and battered young mothers is that worth to you? It's not a 1:1 equivalency, either, because death by disease is a natural part of life.

[Pannonian]

I'm not talking about some sinister plot, I'm talking about what's happening right now and it being normalised after it's been in place for 18 months. That's the time-frame we're being given here, 3 months of lock down minimum and 12-18 months of at least moderate social distancing.




The difference between "mitigation" and "suppression" in the UK is pegged at roughly 230,000 lives, mostly elderly, how many extra suicides and battered young mothers is that worth to you? It's not a 1:1 equivalency, either, because death by disease is a natural part of life.

The Great Smog of London resulted in an estimated 4,000 deaths, with upper estimates counting the final total at 10,000. That led to societal changes. You want 230,000 deaths to be something we accept?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The Great Smog of London resulted in an estimated 4,000 deaths, with upper estimates counting the final total at 10,000. That led to societal changes. You want 230,000 deaths to be something we accept?

The smog was man-made.

[Montmorency]

Just because one individual's family members have a fatalistic outlook does not indicate something essential about a generation, who themselves have known widespread lethal infectious disease except perhaps in their distant childhoods.

For those concerned, taking responsive and responsible emergency measures is not socialism, any more than contesting a military invasion is socialism. Now, the structural evils of American society highlighted by the epidemic and our response to it make as good a case for socialism as any, but that's distinct from effective emergency relief. Only Randian psychos could stand athwart the latter.

Americans didn't experience WW2 the way the UK did because we got richer and stronger and more prosperous as the war wound on. But the comparison is futile in terms of experience, because a pandemic is not actually like a war beyond the need for a strong collective response. We are living through an economic deep freeze; neither Americans nor Europeans have ever experienced anything like this in living memory.

And while smog was manmade, all social responses and government policies are also manmade. We are always burdened with decisions.


Look, this is out of our hands. In a month's time we will, as I keep emphasizing, have a more visceral experience of the costs of both blanket suppression and high caseload, tens of thousands of deaths, hospital overrun. We're going to be revisiting the data as it is updated. No one should act as though our course of action has been set for the remainder of the month, let alone the remainder of the year.

But there is no substitute for mass testing. If we can test millions of people, at that point we no longer require massive quarantines to flatten the peak. We can isolate positive cases and break transmission to the point where infection slows to a manageable trickle, with increasing surefootedness as asymptomatic or recovered individuals can freely return to normal life en masse. If we can't get capacity to test millions, we're blind and have few options.

A team from Sky News visited the hospitals in Cremona and Bergamo, two of the worst hit towns in Italy. Two videos (particular the second video) show what the physical reality behind the statistics is like: hospitals filled up with people suffering from severe pneumonia.

The video of army trucks carrying coffins with the dead is also from Bergamo, where the local crematorium apparently can't keep up with the pace that people currently are dying at in the city:

New York City hospitals are already reportedly on the verge of being overwhelmed, and the peak is an estimated ~40 days away. Having so few hospitals, doctors, and nurses per capita compared to other rich countries is really biting us.

[Pannonian]

The smog was man-made.

And deliberately not following a course known to be effective is not a similarly artificial decision? China have got it down to zero local transmissions for several days in a row. Other countries have similarly got the numbers down. We know what works.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The difference between "mitigation" and "suppression" in the UK is pegged at roughly 230,000 lives, mostly elderly, how many extra suicides and battered young mothers is that worth to you? It's not a 1:1 equivalency, either, because death by disease is a natural part of life.

Yo, this is straight up disgusting. "my life is worth more than yours old man cause you are supposed to die by now from your fragile body."

Talking about battered young mothers as some sympathy card while simultaneously downplaying the pain that older patients go through of having 5-10 days of their life choked by limited breathing capacity and slow death.

Get your head out of your ass.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The difference between "mitigation" and "suppression" in the UK is pegged at roughly 230,000 lives, mostly elderly, how many extra suicides and battered young mothers is that worth to you? It's not a 1:1 equivalency, either, because death by disease is a natural part of life.

I'm absolutely speechless

[Pannonian]

Dominic Cummings, the prime minister's senior aide, became convinced that Britain would be better able to resist a lethal second wave of the disease next winter if Whitty's prediction that 60% to 80% of the population became infected was right and Britain developed "herd immunity".

Cummings was the political driver behind Brexit and Johnson's election ("Get Brexit done"). And now he's the driver behind the UK's medical policy on a pandemic.

[Viking]

In the UK the "suppression" strategy is estimated to save an additional 250,000 lives, mostly elderly people, vs millions of children who will miss at least half a year of school.

Mostly elderly, but when dealing with such large number of deceased, a significant number of children are likely to lose at least one of their parents (to be clear, it has already happened at least once).

This report on 3200 dead from COVID-19 in Italy found that 36 of the deceased (about 2%) were between the ages of 30-49; and 9 individuals in this group (0.28% of the 3200) were between the ages of 30-39. The proportion of younger people may go up as time passes; it could be that younger individuals on average have a more drawn out progression of the disease before they die, given that they otherwise may be of better health.

250,000 lives saved would therefore likely, at the minimum, include 700 people aged 30-39, and another 2,100 people aged 40-49.

Those are the deaths, but another issue is the potential for a permanently weakened health. 96.5% of the deceased in the Italian report had acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). If any of those who survive COVID-19 also acquire this syndrome, this is part of what they risk:

Breathing problems. Many people with ARDS recover most of their lung function within several months to two years, but others may have breathing problems for the rest of their lives. Even people who do well usually have shortness of breath and fatigue and may need supplemental oxygen at home for a few months.

Problems with memory and thinking clearly. Sedatives and low levels of oxygen in the blood can lead to memory loss and cognitive problems after ARDS. In some cases, the effects may lessen over time, but in others, the damage may be permanent.

All of this also needs to be factored in for the cost analysis.

Suicides rates are about to skyrocket - as is domestic abuse and homicide - how many more of those deaths are you willing to stomach?

Suicide numbers could go up, but it is not obvious that they will skyrocket. This is a national crisis as much as a personal one.

Notably, suicide rates appear to be lower while countries are at war. This could to an extent be linked to lower unemployment rates, which currently are trending starkly in the opposite direction.

New York City hospitals are already reportedly on the verge of being overwhelmed, and the peak is an estimated ~40 days away. Having so few hospitals, doctors, and nurses per capita compared to other rich countries is really biting us.

I saw that, too. Just found this Bloomberg article with some more details, including for the larger area:

“This is the tipping point,” said Anne Goldman, vice president for non-education members at the United Federation of Teachers, which represents some health care workers. “We’re pretty much saturated with critically ill.”

[...]

In New Jersey, Holy Name Hospital has admitted 60 confirmed or suspected Covid-19 patients. The 321-bed facility in Teaneck is creating dozens of special new rooms.

[...]

Seventeen staff members have tested positive, including one who’s “very sick,” Jarrett said. Holy Name’s chief executive officer, Michael Maron, learned Friday that he tested positive.

[...]

Goldman, who is also a nurse, says that Elmhurst Hospital and NYU’s Brooklyn campus are seeing their intensive care units filled with a share of patients under 40 years old they had not anticipated.

“It’s not who we were expecting,” she says.

Over half of all Covid-19 patients in New York are between 18 and 49, the state says.

The swell is pushing out patients with other serious conditions, Goldman says. Cancer patients are having chemo treatments postponed, and wait times for treatment of even severe injuries, such as broken limbs, are spiking.

‘Tipping Point’ at New York Area Hospitals as Virus Cases Mount

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

And deliberately not following a course known to be effective is not a similarly artificial decision? China have got it down to zero local transmissions for several days in a row. Other countries have similarly got the numbers down. We know what works.

China will shoot you in the head if you disobey the Government - are you advocating that here? Singapore just enacts corporal punishment, we do not have that kind of society. Italy has started to see numbers fall but only once the population was sufficiently terrified of the disease, a week ago Italians were flouting restrictions just like Brits are now.

In any case, both China and Singapore are still seeing cases coming into the country, which means that they need to keep restrictions in place for the foreseable future - it's like keeping your hand on a saucepan lid to stop the pan boiling over - as soon as you let go the lid come flying off and all the steam comes out.

Yo, this is straight up disgusting. "my life is worth more than yours old man cause you are supposed to die by now from your fragile body."

Talking about battered young mothers as some sympathy card while simultaneously downplaying the pain that older patients go through of having 5-10 days of their life choked by limited breathing capacity and slow death.

Get your head out of your ass.

Not remotely what I said. In case you missed the hint I'm currently self isolating after developing a Dry Cough yesterday, today the cough isn't too bad but I have a sore throat, am dehydrated and am starting to feel a fever coming on. After writing this I'm moving my PhD research to the university's shared cloud storage and writing a letter to a colleague with my username and password authorising her to retrieve the research in the event of my death.

No, I am absolutely not joking - I'm working on the principle I have something like a 1 in 800 to 1 in 200 chance of not surviving this, which is pretty lousy odds, really.

Now, my point is this: Shutting down civil society for 12-18 months, which is what is now being subtly explained to the British public, will cause long-term damage to a lot of people. Mostly children who's development will be stunted, and will probably end up with health problems later in life from being overweight. Then there are the people with depression who will be deprived of stimulus, that group is at high risk of suicide but even if they don't become suicidal they can become dependent on anti-depressants or just plat out stop being able to look after themselves. Then there are the elderly whom you are so worried about despite poring scorn on them a week ago - many of them will die alone and afraid from a completely unrelated condition, having never caught the virus.

You are still only looking ahead weeks - I'm looking 6, 12, 18 months down the line - I'm thinking about the teenagers who don't get to have those early relationships and silly first kisses and the grandparents who pass away from heart attack or stroke before even seeing their grandchildren for the first time.

You're just looking at a raw number of people who might not die because they didn't catch a disease - you're not looking at the overall calculation and you're not appreciating that this is the calculation governments are making that calculation. They're looking at the degree of social distancing they enact and they're projecting how many extra suicides it will cause, how much social unrest, how much economic damage, and they're weighing that up against a number of lives they might save, and they ARE asking how many of those people are elderly and how many would live for five more years if they don't get Corvid-19.

So, respectfully, remove your own head from your own fundament - you are doing exactly what I am doing, weighing some lives against others, one type of suffering against another type of suffering.

Cummings was the political driver behind Brexit and Johnson's election ("Get Brexit done"). And now he's the driver behind the UK's medical policy on a pandemic.

You really need to post your sources.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm absolutely speechless

The figures reported are:

Do nothing: 500,000 dead.

Mitigation (plan before Monday): 250,000 dead

Suppression (what we are doing now, shut down society until further notice): 20,000 dead.

As I said to the others - how many lives are you willing to ruin to save that many people? If a million children have developmental problems later in life due to being locked up for 18 months is that acceptable? An extra 10,000 suicides of people in their early 20's? 2 million cases of PTSD?

It's a two sided equation, it's not just "how much are you willing to pay for your freedom" it's "how many lives are you willing to destroy on each side before you feel the scales are balanced." The longer we follow the suppression strategy the worse it gets. 12 month brings us to next March, which means (for example) the 2020 University Cohort don't actually physically go to University in September. 18 months takes us to the following September - those students are currently 17 and can't drink. Normally they would come to University at 18, go out to pubs, clubs etc. and then have calmed down by their second year and started buckling down for their degrees - which is fine because your first year doesn't count towards your grade. If they don't go to Uni next year and have online courses then they'll arrive at the start of their second year, go crazy, and all under-perform in their exams. That entire cohort will have degree results significantly worse as a result - which will follow them for life. The 2021 Cohort will have missed all of their final year of school and many may not apply at all, meaning they might never go to university.

This is just one example of the potential long-term impact.

Now, I'm not suggesting the UK sacrifice 250,000 people for the sake of the other 66 million, but I'm pointing out that there are very serious long-term consequences to the policies of social isolation that Western Democratic Governments are enacting. So maybe think a bit more critically and don't be so enthusiastic to give away all your rights and privileges.

[Pannonian]

China will shoot you in the head if you disobey the Government - are you advocating that here? Singapore just enacts corporal punishment, we do not have that kind of society. Italy has started to see numbers fall but only once the population was sufficiently terrified of the disease, a week ago Italians were flouting restrictions just like Brits are now.

In any case, both China and Singapore are still seeing cases coming into the country, which means that they need to keep restrictions in place for the foreseable future - it's like keeping your hand on a saucepan lid to stop the pan boiling over - as soon as you let go the lid come flying off and all the steam comes out.

You really need to post your sources.

The source was the Sunday Times.

Taiwan: population 23 million
Taiwan: 169 coronavirus cases

[Pannonian]

Now, I'm not suggesting the UK sacrifice 250,000 people for the sake of the other 66 million, but I'm pointing out that there are very serious long-term consequences to the policies of social isolation that Western Democratic Governments are enacting. So maybe think a bit more critically and don't be so enthusiastic to give away all your rights and privileges.

Do you still want to go ahead with Brexit now that we've seen what happens when people anticipate shortages? We don't currently have supply issues; the issue is with the consumer. We are due to reduce EU imports by 95% at the end of the year if nothing is done. Still sounds good?

[ReluctantSamurai]

China will shoot you in the head if you disobey the Government - are you advocating that here?

If you read personal accounts (NOT from virologists or other scientists) of people from Hubei Province, things were draconian in nature....but not that draconian (and yes, it doesn't mean things couldn't get that far). The Chinese accepted their scientists word that breaking the contagion chains was the method to stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and they bought in. Temperature checked when you left your dwelling; temperature checked when you used public transportation; temperature checked when you got to your destination; and the same on the journey home (hell, temperature checked BEFORE you got your temperature checked, probably)

In any case, both China and Singapore are still seeing cases coming into the country

The fact that they are finding those cases in the first place means they are aggressively monitoring incoming travelers. Anyone found to be infected is quarantined. Will that catch 100%? Probably not, but sooner or later someone will come up with a test that shows a +/- result much quicker than is now available.

No, I am absolutely not joking - I'm working on the principle I have something like a 1 in 800 to 1 in 200 chance of not surviving this, which is pretty lousy odds, really.

Sorry to hear that. Stay as well as you can be. The odds (at the moment) are still in your favor.

Now, my point is this: Shutting down civil society for 12-18 months, which is what is now being subtly explained to the British public, will cause long-term damage to a lot of people.

12-18 months of complete shutdown is over-reaction, IMHO. However, the biggest hole in your argument is the very methodology your are bitching about. Breaking the contamination chain is THE paramount factor in containing this virus. Numero-uno. It trumps every other factor. How is this done? Just look around the world to see what others have done.

1. Testing, testing, and testing on top of your testing. Knowing WHERE the virus has spread to allows you to organize containment. That's what the situation in S. Korea has shown. When you find a "hotspot" beginning to emerge, comes the next part.

2. Isolate the area in question to the fullest extent you can. That's what China did. And if you look at their current situation, that strategy worked (for the moment). And for a case failure, look at Italy.

Restrictions of your "civil liberties" via cancellation of events, bans on air travel, and in the worst case scenarios, severe lock-downs on personal travels, actually will SHORTEN the severity of the outbreak. Repeat, at the expense of some short-term inconvenience, the long-term situation will be much better. That's a trade-off that I'm personally willing to make.

As I said to the others - how many lives are you willing to ruin to save that many people? If a million children have developmental problems later in life due to being locked up for 18 months is that acceptable? An extra 10,000 suicides of people in their early 20's? 2 million cases of PTSD?

None of that shit matters if they are dead. That dog doesn't hunt, in my world.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Do you still want to go ahead with Brexit now that we've seen what happens when people anticipate shortages? We don't currently have supply issues; the issue is with the consumer. We are due to reduce EU imports by 95% at the end of the year if nothing is done. Still sounds good?

Brexit question importance = 0%

If you read personal accounts (NOT from virologists or other scientists) of people from Hubei Province, things were draconian in nature....but not that draconian (and yes, it doesn't mean things couldn't get that far). The Chinese accepted their scientists word that breaking the contagion chains was the method to stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2, and they bought in. Temperature checked when you left your dwelling; temperature checked when you used public transportation; temperature checked when you got to your destination; and the same on the journey home (hell, temperature checked BEFORE you got your temperature checked, probably)

China doesn't have to shoot people in the head because the people already know they will be shot for disobedience. By contrast, in the UK when the Government asks people to limit social contact everyone goes to the beach. Together.

The fact that they are finding those cases in the first place means they are aggressively monitoring incoming travelers. Anyone found to be infected is quarantined. Will that catch 100%? Probably not, but sooner or later someone will come up with a test that shows a +/- result much quicker than is now available.

This is a fair point, but no Western country has the inclination on infrastructure for this - remember the Right to Privacy? Most Democratic countries have rules that inhibit the state, to an extent, from tracking individuals as they go about their daily lives. China does not - it follows you everywhere.

Sorry to hear that. Stay as well as you can be. The odds (at the moment) are still in your favor.

My research is the only part of me that matters, though I would not want to upset my parents by dying - especially if they can't come to the funeral.

12-18 months of complete shutdown is over-reaction, IMHO. However, the biggest hole in your argument is the very methodology your are bitching about. Breaking the contamination chain is THE paramount factor in containing this virus. Numero-uno. It trumps every other factor. How is this done? Just look around the world to see what others have done.

OK, so you think 12-18 months is OTT. How long will you put up with it, 3, 6? If after three months restrictions are eased and cases spike? Expereince with the Spanish Flu shows quite clearly that these sorts of control measures are only effective whilst they remain in place. You can't full eradicate the virus so as soon as the measures are lifted it flairs back up. The epidemic ends only two ways.

1. It burns itself out.

2. You find an effective vaccine.

1. Testing, testing, and testing on top of your testing. Knowing WHERE the virus has spread to allows you to organize containment. That's what the situation in S. Korea has shown. When you find a "hotspot" beginning to emerge, comes the next part.

2. Isolate the area in question to the fullest extent you can. That's what China did. And if you look at their current situation, that strategy worked (for the moment). And for a case failure, look at Italy.

Restrictions of your "civil liberties" via cancellation of events, bans on air travel, and in the worst case scenarios, severe lock-downs on personal travels, actually will SHORTEN the severity of the outbreak. Repeat, at the expense of some short-term inconvenience, the long-term situation will be much better. That's a trade-off that I'm personally willing to make.

Watch South Korea and China over the next few months - my prediction is that they will lose control as soon as restrictions are eased.

None of that shit matters if they are dead. That dog doesn't hunt, in my world.

The majority of the people Corvid-19 will kill would have died within 5-10 years in any case, the people with PTSD, developmental problems etc. are unlikely to die of Corvid-19. That's the thing - there's very little overlap of the two groups.

1.5 million people in the UK are not going to be isolate, no human contact, for at least 12 weeks. It's on day two and it's pretty rough, I can tell you, not seeing another human being.

[Pannonian]

Brexit question importance = 0%

People need to eat, you know. We are due to lose 95% of our importing capacity from the EU at the end of the year. Do you want us to do something about it, or do you want to ignore it?

OK, so you think 12-18 months is OTT. How long will you put up with it, 3, 6? If after three months restrictions are eased and cases spike? Expereince with the Spanish Flu shows quite clearly that these sorts of control measures are only effective whilst they remain in place. You can't full eradicate the virus so as soon as the measures are lifted it flairs back up. The epidemic ends only two ways.

Very recent experience (current and ongoing in fact) shows that people anticipating shortages will strip the shelves bare, leaving nothing for those who can't get there in time (like NHS staff). This is with no current problems with the supply chain. When there will be problems with the supply chain, is this going to get better? How long do you want this state of affairs to go on for?

[Beskar]

Whilst all this hysteria about Covid-19 is going on, please do make sure to take good care of yourselves. Unfortunately someone I know just passed away with sepsis. I don't know the full story, but I heard they were resistant in getting help. So please, reach out and let people know, and if you are really unwell do get treatment asap.

[ReluctantSamurai]

You can't full eradicate the virus so as soon as the measures are lifted it flairs back up

So far, that hasn't been the case in China, which is the only example we have to work off of currently.

my prediction is that they will lose control as soon as restrictions are eased

And you base this prediction on........

The majority of the people Corvid-19 will kill would have died within 5-10 years in any case, the people with PTSD, developmental problems etc. are unlikely to die of Corvid-19. That's the thing - there's very little overlap of the two groups.

There is no epidemiological evidence that would support that statement. You have absolutely no idea who's going to become infected and who is not. What we do know is that if you break the contagion chain, less people will be exposed, and therefore less people get infected.

And again, this "I don't really give a shit how many old folks will die, cuz' they're just Walking Dead anyways" spiel is not only twisting potential fatalities to suit your whims (elderly people who were going to die soon anyway, as opposed to "millions of PTSD kids"), it's just another form of racism, AFAIAC, that we're going to start seeing more of; whether that be Asians, Iranians, Italians, or the elderly (ie the "Boomer Remover slur currently in vogue here in the US).

1.5 million people in the UK are not going to be isolate, no human contact, for at least 12 weeks

That's not how it works. In order to contract SARS-CoV-2, you have to ingest respiratory fluids from an infected host; either directly from being coughed/sneezed upon (or as a corollary, inhale infected aerosol), or by touching a surface laden with viable virus, and then touching your face. The epidemiologists have more or less determined 3m (or 6ft) is a safe enough distancing to cut your chances of inhaling infected aerosol drastically. Nothing I have read to date says no human contact, period.

Expereince with the Spanish Flu shows quite clearly that these sorts of control measures are only effective whilst they remain in place

This is not the H1N1 of 1918 (and by many accounts it should be called the Stars and Stripes Flu, because it likely started here in the US, or at the very least, spread to Europe by all the troops we were sending there), and there were little to no containment protocols in place at that time.

It is interesting to note how two cities in America fared drastically different during that outbreak:

https://www.wsls.com/features/2020/0...more-opposite/

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...785692bb5.html

In early October, city health commissioner Dr. Max C. Starkloff ordered the closure of schools, movie theaters, saloons, sporting events and other public gathering spots. Churches were told to suspend Sunday services. At the time, with nearly 800,000 residents, St. Louis was among the top 10 largest American cities.

“In an epidemic, somebody has to have the authority to make those kinds of decisions that infringe on people’s rights,” said Pamela Walker, who was the city’s health director from 2007 to 2015. “He had been health director for long enough to know his city and how people interacted. He also had the public’s trust.”

With the flu continuing its rampage, Starkloff imposed a stricter quarantine in November, closing down all businesses with few exceptions including banks, newspapers, embalmers and coffin makers, according to Post-Dispatch archives.

Thanks to the quarantine, St. Louis’ death rate was lowest among the 10 biggest cities at the time. In Philadelphia, where bodies piled up on sidewalks when the morgues overflowed, the death rate was nearly twice as high.

It was true for 1918, and it's true now. Quarantine works....but the key is trust. Trust that the people in charge know what they're doing (or in China, trust or else....), which is why we here in the States are in for far more pain than has been endured so far....our leadership sucks.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

People need to eat, you know. We are due to lose 95% of our importing capacity from the EU at the end of the year. Do you want us to do something about it, or do you want to ignore it?



Very recent experience (current and ongoing in fact) shows that people anticipating shortages will strip the shelves bare, leaving nothing for those who can't get there in time (like NHS staff). This is with no current problems with the supply chain. When there will be problems with the supply chain, is this going to get better? How long do you want this state of affairs to go on for?

The current panic is not just about shortages - it's about fear of disease and fear of quarantine. Principally it is about being pulled out of your house on a stretcher or in a body bag covered in your own faeces.

So far, that hasn't been the case in China, which is the only example we have to work off of currently.

And you base this prediction on........

Papers I have read comparing this to the flu pandemic, noting that cities which lifted restrictions saw flareups - because people brought the disease in. The comparison between 1918 US and the modern world is relevant because it's easier to travel from the US to Australia today than it was from East to west back then.

There is no epidemiological evidence that would support that statement. You have absolutely no idea who's going to become infected and who is not. What we do know is that if you break the contagion chain, less people will be exposed, and therefore less people get infected.

And again, this "I don't really give a shit how many old folks will die, cuz' they're just Walking Dead anyways" spiel is not only twisting potential fatalities to suit your whims (elderly people who were going to die soon anyway, as opposed to "millions of PTSD kids"), it's just another form of racism, AFAIAC, that we're going to start seeing more of; whether that be Asians, Iranians, Italians, or the elderly (ie the "Boomer Remover slur currently in vogue here in the US).

Now, first off, gonna point this out - stop swearing - it's not helpful and all it does is antagonise me.

Corvid-19 kills the old and infirm, children are the least affected, to date no child had died of the disease. So, your public health equation here is older people with comorbid conditions that make them high risk dying from Corvid-19 vs the young living with PTSD or developmental problems. You need to model how many "PTSD Kids" you're going to end up with, their long-term burden on the health system and compare that to the deaths from Corvid-19, and the after-affects of that.

That's public policy - right now you and your emotional well-being are deemed less valuable than the physical well-being of your grandfather. In the short-term that's a good trade, but the longer you make that call the worse the trade it. Also - you need to ask if Pops wants you to make that trade - in the UK the answer has been an emphatic "no" from the Oxygen and Zimmer-frame brigade.

This may well be a case of "Better Dead than Red" but it's more likely just a more pragmatic and less narcissistic attitude to death accompanied by a recognition that we've all got to go some time and Pops is gonna go first, so he's gonna live life whilst he can.

Meanwhile, his Millennial grandchildren wring their hands over how to cope with his death.

That's not how it works. In order to contract SARS-CoV-2, you have to ingest respiratory fluids from an infected host; either directly from being coughed/sneezed upon (or as a corollary, inhale infected aerosol), or by touching a surface laden with viable virus, and then touching your face. The epidemiologists have more or less determined 3m (or 6ft) is a safe enough distancing to cut your chances of inhaling infected aerosol drastically. Nothing I have read to date says no human contact, period.

"Do not leave your home for any reason, do not have visitors" is the message. Don't shoot the messenger.

It was true for 1918, and it's true now. Quarantine works....but the key is trust. Trust that the people in charge know what they're doing (or in China, trust or else....), which is why we here in the States are in for far more pain than has been endured so far....our leadership sucks.

Spanish Flu ran from 1918 to 1922 - how long do you plan to keep this quarantine going? Bear in mind, you can't quarantine Africa and South America because the Third World can't survive like that - and actually we'd all starve if they tried.

A complete a total lockdown for three months might clear it from the UK, but inevitably a private plane would land at a private airstrip and it would all start over, or refugees would come over in a boat. For Continental Europe or the US? Forget it.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Papers I have read comparing this to the flu pandemic, noting that cities which lifted restrictions saw flareups - because people brought the disease in. The comparison between 1918 US and the modern world is relevant because it's easier to travel from the US to Australia today than it was from East to west back then.

Corvid-19 kills the old and infirm, children are the least affected, to date no child had died of the disease. So, your public health equation here is older people with comorbid conditions that make them high risk dying from Corvid-19 vs the young living with PTSD or developmental problems.

Comparisons to the 1918 H1N1 outbreak only go so far. Different times, different medical practices, etc. But certain things hold true in both cases---quarantine worked then, and it works now. Break the contagion chains.

We better hope that all the little genetic permutations SARS-CoV-2 is conducting as we speak, doesn't result in something far more deadly as happened in the fall of 1918 with H1N1.

You need to check the facts on the no child has died statement. Though still rare, it has happened. and the recent trend in NYC is showing an alarming trend: (from the link posted earlier by Viking)

Over half of all Covid-19 patients in New York are between 18 and 49, the state says.

More infections, more chances to die.

And this:

https://www.vox.com/science-and-heal...ction-covid-19

“We do know that children tend to have more mild infection, have more mild disease, but we have seen [at least one child] die from this infection,” Maria Van Kerkhove, the Covid-19 technical lead at the World Health Organization, said in a press conference on March 16. “We can’t say universally that it’s mild in children, so it’s important that we protect children as a vulnerable population.”

Right now, the data on Covid-19’s effects on the young are sparse, but recent studies show that even with children, some groups are more vulnerable than others depending on age and health conditions. Some children with Covid-19 can still experience serious lung disease. Kids with simultaneous respiratory infections can be more vulnerable to Covid-19. Infants without mature immune systems can get sick from the virus. Yet compared to adults, Covid-19 appears to be less severe in most kids.

So the risk is very low that children die from SARS-CoV-2, but if they get sick enough, they could die from something else.

Now, first off, gonna point this out - stop swearing - it's not helpful and all it does is antagonise me.

I don't swear often, but I consider your logic concerning letting the elderly die so some unknown number of children don't suffer from PTSD, offensive, and being 67, that antagonizes me. Hence the harsher language.

This may well be a case of "Better Dead than Red" but it's more likely just a more pragmatic and less narcissistic attitude to death accompanied by a recognition that we've all got to go some time and Pops is gonna go first, so he's gonna live life whilst he can.

The kind of talk I'm referring to....

"Do not leave your home for any reason, do not have visitors" is the message. Don't shoot the messenger.

That's only if you have already contracted the virus. Sensible, no?

A complete a total lockdown for three months might clear it from the UK, but inevitably a private plane would land at a private airstrip and it would all start over, or refugees would come over in a boat. For Continental Europe or the US? Forget it.

After a 3 month quarantine, if you require ALL arriving passengers to be tested and sequestered for a period of time, the chance for re-infection is slim to none. If a quicker test becomes available, like the genetic code tracer being tested, sequestering time can be reduced or eliminated.

[Viking]

to date no child had died of the disease

To be precise, it appears that one 14-year-old boy died in China from the disease. It might be worth mentioning that a 12-year-old girl with "no pre-existing conditions" is currently on a ventilator in the US (source for both), and that an 18-year-old has died of the disease in England.

No idea idea how this disease compares to the flu in terms of severity for those under 18, would be interesting to see; we might not have enough data available yet.

[Pannonian]

The current panic is not just about shortages - it's about fear of disease and fear of quarantine. Principally it is about being pulled out of your house on a stretcher or in a body bag covered in your own faeces.

And yet you are ok with a much bigger death toll than effective measures would cut it down to.

Having looked around for commentary on the supermarket shortages, which affect 100% of adults, the cited reason isn't what you describe. The reason for shortages is to stock up in case of lockdown, and carrying on from that, to buy while they can find them.

Again, people need to eat. How do you propose to feed the nation? There are shortages in the retailers when the supplies aren't an issue. How do you propose to feed the nation when supplies are an issue? Assurances made last year that warnings were exaggerated and that the nation will find a way through have been proven to be wrong; the supply chain has not been cut, and the situation warned about has already happened. The nation has not found a way through. The problem is there. How do you propose to solve it? Or how do you propose to alleviate it?

NB. these are not rhetorical questions. If I ask a question, I intend to have an answer myself. The question is, what is your answer?

[Pannonian]

After a 3 month quarantine, if you require ALL arriving passengers to be tested and sequestered for a period of time, the chance for re-infection is slim to none. If a quicker test becomes available, like the genetic code tracer being tested, sequestering time can be reduced or eliminated.

Britain is famously rabies-free. All incoming pets have to be quarantined. The process has proven to be effective.

In China, people are subjected to a series of tests, presumably each of longer duration. They've got the final test down to 4 hours or something similar. The video I posted describes the process.

[edyzmedieval]

Apparently this crisis has moved into the deep end of politics - using emergency powers and suspending Habeas Corpus.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...avirus-970935/

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...-powers-140023

[Montmorency]

The discussion going on here right now is pretty dumb.


1. If we hold out for two months, cases dip during the summer, and spike again in the fall, then already we will have bought ourselves a great deal of time to ramp up necessary production, install necessary testing infrastructure and healthcare capacity, and hold down the overall mortality rate. A million dead spread over a year, even with some spikes, is better than a single tidal wave that contributes to millions of excess deaths.

2. Last I heard, people aged 20-50 are going to be infected at similar rates, and those infections - while less serious overall - still entail tens of millions of younger people hospitalized, killing and harming other younger people with COVID-19 due to overrun, killing and harming other younger people due to all the other health problems and emergencies going unaddressed - to say nothing of the tens of millions of other younger people living with weeks of mild-to-moderate walking pneumonia, sure to be the most hellish experience of their lives, many of them coming out with permanent organ damage.


And also, what the fuck is anyone on about wrt human contact. You can talk 6 feet apart, or video chat. This is the 21st century.


Edit: A point about N95 mask production, there is a bottleneck in production due to the little-known complexity of the design and needed equipment. A machine to produce melt-blown fabric for the mask filters, without which you may as well wear a bandana, costs millions of dollars and takes half a year to manufacture.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

And yet you are ok with a much bigger death toll than effective measures would cut it down to.

Having looked around for commentary on the supermarket shortages, which affect 100% of adults, the cited reason isn't what you describe. The reason for shortages is to stock up in case of lockdown, and carrying on from that, to buy while they can find them.

Again, people need to eat. How do you propose to feed the nation? There are shortages in the retailers when the supplies aren't an issue. How do you propose to feed the nation when supplies are an issue? Assurances made last year that warnings were exaggerated and that the nation will find a way through have been proven to be wrong; the supply chain has not been cut, and the situation warned about has already happened. The nation has not found a way through. The problem is there. How do you propose to solve it? Or how do you propose to alleviate it?

NB. these are not rhetorical questions. If I ask a question, I intend to have an answer myself. The question is, what is your answer?

Oh will you just stop banging on about Brexit, it's no longer relevant.

My answer is, based on the Italian experience this will sort itself out - in fact to an extent it already is. before I got sick I saw tinned tomatoes in Sainsbury's and lots of bog roll in Waitrose.

Anyway - I already said, a while back, that if this carries on they'll move to rationing. You'll download an app on your smartphone, load it up with credit and use that to pay the supermarket instead of money. The App will track how much bog roll you buy and if you buy it every day you'll get cut off.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

To be precise, it appears that one 14-year-old boy died in China from the disease. It might be worth mentioning that a 12-year-old girl with "no pre-existing conditions" is currently on a ventilator in the US (source for both), and that an 18-year-old has died of the disease in England.

No idea idea how this disease compares to the flu in terms of severity for those under 18, would be interesting to see; we might not have enough data available yet.

I stand corrected, although two death, one with underlying conditions, out of 200,000 cases is still a very low incidence.

Something to point out is that the US and the UK are both suffering an obesity epidemic and whilst I wouldn't suggest that this alone will kill you irrc the majority of Americans are now overweight, which means they're unfit. That's going to reduce your positive outcomes.

Speaking of positive outcomes, whilst I'm not suffering too badly yet I really need to get some sleep.

[Montmorency]

If we could just have one justified OK Boomer moment, this is the very essence.

[Pannonian]

Oh will you just stop banging on about Brexit, it's no longer relevant.

My answer is, based on the Italian experience this will sort itself out - in fact to an extent it already is. before I got sick I saw tinned tomatoes in Sainsbury's and lots of bog roll in Waitrose.

Anyway - I already said, a while back, that if this carries on they'll move to rationing. You'll download an app on your smartphone, load it up with credit and use that to pay the supermarket instead of money. The App will track how much bog roll you buy and if you buy it every day you'll get cut off.

1. To what extent? From the comments I've seen so far, it's not sorting itself out. Toilet roll and sanitiser are notoriously missing from the shelves. So is pasta, and other basics. From my own experience, something is present on the shelves, but what it is varies from day to day. The above listed is never present though.
2. How long do you want rationing to go on for?
3. Does everyone operate via phone apps? What happens to those who don't work that way?

Our supply chains are currently intact and we are already seeing empty shelves, contrary to assurances that we will find a way through. And you still want to add breaking the supply chain on top of that.

Oh, and this isn't about Brexit. This is about supplies. This is about feeding the nation.

[CrossLOPER]

I have to perfectly honest, and I am sorry if this is derailing the conversation or appearing insensitive, but I am shocked that being alone bothers people so much. I never understood the fear, really. I am not talking about vulnerable people like the old and those with mental issues, since those people have special needs. I spent quite a bit of time alone when I was younger and I continue to be more alone than the average person. I can't say I am a purely solitary person, but I can find plenty to do that doesn't involve other people. Books, games, drawing, taking a walk in the city cemetery, working in my workshop, working on my project car....

If the goal is purely isolation and not necessarily avoiding social contact, you can add old-school forums like this one to the mix. I also think that solitary contemplation is extremely important for maintaining a healthy state of mind. I can't imagine being overloaded with an endless mess of worries and not taking the time to process things.

Also, this isn't against those who must face isolation for over a month, or those with money concerns.