|
Post by fauxmaha on May 6, 2020 14:00:37 GMT -5
Why the stretch to "He didn't believe in the lockdown himself"? There is no reason to go there other than a determination to go there. Little brain ruling big brain covers the guy's behavior perfectly well and is a proven motivation for every species on this planet. Silly me. I should have realized he had reasons.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on May 6, 2020 14:08:06 GMT -5
Damn good reasons!
|
|
|
Post by RickW on May 6, 2020 15:03:34 GMT -5
There are any number of questions regarding what has occurred, and what will occur, and what will occur the next time. Lots of questions. How much death is acceptable? That is a question that every government, anywhere, always wrestles with on the side of caution, because that’s their nature, in the end, to keep their citizens alive? How acceptable is it to destroy the economy, and people’s livelihoods? Is it better for the economy to lock down, or let some parts fall apart because some people isolate, some people panic, some don’t? At what point will such a panic cause runs on banks, interrupt food distribution networks?
How much disruption to the health care system is acceptable?
The bigger questions of course, are, how much did social isolation help? We don’t know, really. The modeling would indicate that if anything was going to be done, it was the thing to do. But how much? Also, the next virus will be different from this one. For instance, Ebola is a terrifying virus. You basically hemorrhage to death from every orifice in your body. But it kills really fast, and kills most of the victims, so it tends to die out before it spreads. This one is not so deadly. Somewhere in between is a truly frightening number. What’s the risk of a virus with those numbers hitting us?
I think New Zealand got it right. Shut down hard for a month. Because the current business just seems like a way to prolong the agony. A month, the economy would have had a shock. Months of this, there’s going to be a lot of economic casualties. There already are, but a lot more folks can survive a month, not six months to a year.
Last food for thought, is there is no guarantee there will be a vaccine. Three decades and more on, there is no vaccine for HIV. None for Ebola. There are treatments for HIV now, but they are extremely expensive, and took years to develop.
I dunno. Everyone’s playing it be ear. But I don’t think any government will ever just not do anything. And they will never have enough info, and never enough money to make it all right.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on May 6, 2020 15:14:40 GMT -5
I dunno. Everyone’s playing it be ear. But I don’t think any government will ever just not do anything. And they will never have enough info, and never enough money to make it all right. But this is the first time they've ever shut down the country. They didn't for Ebola. Or HIV. Or SARS. Or anything else at least in my lifetime. Ever. They've always "just not do anything". Ever. What is it about this that changed that?
|
|
|
Post by theevan on May 6, 2020 15:40:29 GMT -5
I dunno. Everyone’s playing it be ear. But I don’t think any government will ever just not do anything. And they will never have enough info, and never enough money to make it all right. But this is the first time they've ever shut down the country. They didn't for Ebola. Or HIV. Or SARS. Or anything else at least in my lifetime. Ever. They've always "just not do anything". Ever. What is it about this that changed that? I dunno, but it sure seems to have brought out many folks' inner totalitarian. Especially those who wield any kind of power. It's like we've become a nation of Barney Fifes
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on May 6, 2020 15:45:27 GMT -5
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 6, 2020 15:48:14 GMT -5
I would say it the other way around. We've never not done something -- no matter the threat. No matter the virus. We've always done something. What was different about this threat that rather than assessing the threat and coming up with a reasonable plan (Sweden was on the same deadline) we decided there was only one way to handle it? Why did we instantly jump to "we already started too late"? Why did we accept that what was true for New York would hold true in Montana? Why? Why when the numbers fell from an estimated 2.2 million deaths did that not make a dent in our fears? Why do so many still believe that 2.2 million number when it isn't even close? Why when it is discovered the exponentially more people have already been infected without even knowing it, was that reported as the bad news that the virus is extremely contagious rather than as the good news that that means the virus is exponentially less deadly than predicted? Why did we utterly and completely abandon the idea of herd immunity when that is and always has been the only real means to riding out a virus? Why was this one different that we didn't even consider the herd immunity idea like Sweden did. We didn't even consider it. And maybe if we had, intransigent folks would have been more easily coaxed into wearing masks and joining in the safety precautions that would maximize the hope for the vulnerable while not robbing that hope from everyone else. Why? How did it happen that we ended up with such a drastic decision before anyone ever even debated it?
|
|
|
Post by majorminor on May 6, 2020 15:50:58 GMT -5
I dunno. Everyone’s playing it be ear. But I don’t think any government will ever just not do anything. And they will never have enough info, and never enough money to make it all right. But this is the first time they've ever shut down the country. They didn't for Ebola. Or HIV. Or SARS. Or anything else at least in my lifetime. Ever. They've always "just not do anything". Ever. What is it about this that changed that? I’ve been thinking about this for a few weeks. Could it be as monkey see monkey do simple as everyone watching China’s Wuhan response and the fact that this whole thing kicked off like the made for TV Pandora’s Box movie we’ve all watched at some point in our lives?
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 6, 2020 15:56:18 GMT -5
But this is the first time they've ever shut down the country. They didn't for Ebola. Or HIV. Or SARS. Or anything else at least in my lifetime. Ever. They've always "just not do anything". Ever. What is it about this that changed that? I’ve been thinking about this for a few weeks. Could it be as monkey see monkey do simple as everyone watching China’s Wuhan response and the fact that this whole thing kicked off like the made for TV Pandora’s Box movie we’ve all watched at some point in our lives? That, and it was fresh in the minds that matter that this is the response we were going to do first time we saw anything that COULD be that virus we've been waiting for. In this case, we were a hammer and no matter what the next virus that came down the pike, it was going to look exactly like a nail. www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/aboutWe are also operating on incredibly centralized information. As was pointed out very early on, Germany had greater ability to test early on because rather than centralizing their testing, they had less regulation and far more sources providing testing. We were condemned to following what the CDC had already put in place. The US has been operating for a very long time on the idea that the central government an its agencies are the collection of all the greatest minds in the country -- as if those in Washington got there by winning some kind of single elimination tournament, leaving the States to be run by losers. Because we believe in centralizing, we simply couldn't see either the effectiveness of every State deciding for itself what its particular population required, nor the value of different models being tested. Never mind, again, that we dismissed herd immunity without a debate. And our information centers are equally centralized. The news every night comes out of NY and Washington. What happens in NY feels like it is happening everywhere. The reporters who give us the nightly news ride subways to work. Doesn't everyone?
|
|
|
Post by RickW on May 6, 2020 16:01:26 GMT -5
I dunno. Everyone’s playing it be ear. But I don’t think any government will ever just not do anything. And they will never have enough info, and never enough money to make it all right. But this is the first time they've ever shut down the country. They didn't for Ebola. Or HIV. Or SARS. Or anything else at least in my lifetime. Ever. They've always "just not do anything". Ever. What is it about this that changed that? Because none of them spread the way coronavirus did. Ebola has died out very quickly every time it started. SARS never did get much of a foothold here, and if you look at the number of overall cases everywhere, it was small - China had only 5300 SARS cases, and a few hundred deaths. There were only 8000 total cases worldwide of SARS and hundreds of deaths. In the USA, you're averaging 1,000 deaths per day from Coronavirus. That's quite a difference. If SARS had started to hit those numbers, they would have reacted.
|
|
|
Post by RickW on May 6, 2020 16:10:16 GMT -5
I would say it the other way around. We've never not done something -- no matter the threat. No matter the virus. We've always done something. What was different about this threat that rather than assessing the threat and coming up with a reasonable plan (Sweden was on the same deadline) we decided there was only one way to handle it? Why did we instantly jump to "we already started too late"? Why did we accept that what was true for New York would hold true in Montana? Why? Why when the numbers fell from an estimated 2.2 million deaths did that not make a dent in our fears? Why do so many still believe that 2.2 million number when it isn't even close? Why when it is discovered the exponentially more people have already been infected without even knowing it, was that reported as the bad news that the virus is extremely contagious rather than as the good news that that means the virus is exponentially less deadly than predicted? Why did we utterly and completely abandon the idea of herd immunity when that is and always has been the only real means to riding out a virus? Why was this one different that we didn't even consider the herd immunity idea like Sweden did. We didn't even consider it. And maybe if we had, intransigent folks would have been more easily coaxed into wearing masks and joining in the safety precautions that would maximize the hope for the vulnerable while not robbing that hope from everyone else. Why? How did it happen that we ended up with such a drastic decision before anyone ever even debated it? So, you don't believe that what everyone did as far as social distancing cut those numbers? Because at that point those who believe and disbelieve will have a disconnect. Therein lies the problem, and there will be conspiracy theories and contradictions for years. Did it succeed, or did it just happen? If no one did it, would we all be fine, and it's all just a totalitarian wet dream come true? And again, banking on all this for the next time one of these comes is like saying that because I made a hundred grand on the commodities market last year, I'll make it again this year. The next virus will be different again as far as how it moves and how deadly it is. One thing I agree that was sorely lacking was enough info; South Korea tested and tested and tested, so they knew where they had problems, and how quickly it was moving. Then you can make valid decisions.
|
|
|
Post by james on May 6, 2020 16:12:22 GMT -5
There is something that I can do for all the healthcare workers that continue to risk their health or life fighting for the lives of others. I can try not to become a further burden to them at a time their existing load is heavy. That's my main reason for my extremely limited social contact. I can't see myself changing my behaviour markedly in the short or medium term. Also I'd like to minimise the possibility that I'll kill my dad.
Those are my key thoughts on my own particular, privileged situation.
|
|
|
Post by millring on May 6, 2020 16:13:24 GMT -5
So, you don't believe that what everyone did as far as social distancing cut those numbers? That's pretty darn close to 160 o opposite of what I said.
|
|
|
Post by RickW on May 6, 2020 16:24:06 GMT -5
So, you don't believe that what everyone did as far as social distancing cut those numbers? That's pretty darn close to 160 o opposite of what I said. Hmm, I misunderstood your point completely. My apologies. I would say that the lack of testing, especially at the start, was disastrous as far as being able to predict anything. South Korea went hard at it, and it worked. They did a combination of heavy testing, isolation where needed and did heavy tracing of contacts. It worked for them. But with the lack of information, there was only one proposal that would seem to be viable, and everyone took it. It seems to have worked in British Columbia, unless of course we had achieved some kind of herd immunity.
|
|
|
COVID 19
May 6, 2020 17:07:16 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by aquaduct on May 6, 2020 17:07:16 GMT -5
But what about Sweden?
|
|
|
Post by epaul on May 6, 2020 17:29:38 GMT -5
You mean Sverige?
|
|
|
Post by RickW on May 6, 2020 17:37:09 GMT -5
What about them? They have done things every differently. They have a high death rate, but their health care system is not getting slammed like Italy did, and New York did. I guess we’ll all see how they do long term against the rest of the world.
|
|
|
Post by sidheguitarmichael on May 6, 2020 18:33:25 GMT -5
I dunno, but it sure seems to have brought out many folks' inner totalitarian. Especially those who wield any kind of power.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on May 6, 2020 18:40:11 GMT -5
Sid, any news on your test?
How's the breath? (other than the onions, that is)
|
|
|
Post by sidheguitarmichael on May 6, 2020 18:43:33 GMT -5
On a more serious topic, reading the local news shows increasing daily political infighting across the state, because (Spokane) Mayor Woodward is now joined by Rep McMorris Rodgers in leaning on Inslee for an independent timeline for Spokane county. Inslee could ignore the mayor, but not a U.S. representative.
In other news, there are some incredible decisions being made with regard to school in the fall, but that is for another time in another thread.
Since yesterday was cinco de mayo, I elected to make a rare break for it, and score K and I a taco plate from one of the local places. I go in to pick up my carry out, and there's 3 guys I know, all at different tables. The server putting together the order goes "Hey Michael! Great to see you! Can I pour you a beer while you wait?"
Man, it was like coming off of a deserted island, or something, to be able to sit in that place and have a beer, listening to cool tunes for even a moment, at my own table with 4 guys around the room shooting the breeze.
The cracks in the damn are starting to leak water.
Prediction: The 4th of July will be the day to watch. If the cabin fever crowd don’t get their fireworks and hotdog on a stick, the revolution will begin in earnest. Especially with the local hospitals going broke, and releasing pressers soliciting customers. JMO.
|
|