Jump to content
Radio Shack Killa

God save us....

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Duquesne Frog said:

Someone needs to put a stop to the couching of the response to COVID as a "war."  We need to stop thinking of things that impact us without sentience as a military adversary. 

 

Coronavirus isn't "waging war" on us.  It is a natural disaster.  It would be just as stupid to declare a war on a tsunami or hurricane.  Or drugs.

 

And the framing is harmful because it puts people in the mindset of using wartime metrics to judge whether we are "winning" when those metrics are the wrong ones AND the concept of "winning" in the way one wins a war doesn't apply.

 

[/soapbox]

 

Agree 98.5%. The single dimension which might be parallel is the need for massive mobilization which includes planning, logistics and organization across the entire population. Unfortunately on that dimension the war appears to not be going as well as might be hoped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

 

Agree 98.5%. The single dimension which might be parallel is the need for massive mobilization which includes planning, logistics and organization across the entire population. Unfortunately on that dimension the war appears to not be going as well as might be hoped.

 

Sure.  There can be aspects of the response that do have certain parallels with wartime responses.  But the whole "fighting the Chinese virus" bit is going to bite has already bit us in the arse ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

Sure.  There can be aspects of the response that do have certain parallels with wartime responses.  But the whole "fighting the Chinese virus" bit is going to bite has already bit us in the arse ...

Absolutely. The buck here stops at the top here no matter how much the top tries to deny any responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Duquesne Frog said:

 

Sure.  There can be aspects of the response that do have certain parallels with wartime responses.  But the whole "fighting the Chinese virus" bit is going to bite has already bit us in the arse ...

I agree with your assertion regarding the military connotations of describing this in war-like terms, including the use of "Shelter in Place". That's something that should be reserved for disaster scenarios, i.e. tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires, biologic/chemical agent, military threat, etc. This needs to be a "Stay in Place" order, or something like it.

 

Also, and my language will reveal my true feelings about this, WTAF is our UN delegation doing trying to get specific language in a resolution denouncing China for being the cause of this pandemic? Is this really the time for placing blame on anyone? 🤦‍♀️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Is this really the time for placing blame on anyone? 🤦‍♀️"

 

The point is not in placing blame, it is in (an attempt at) denying any responsibility for failure to act professionally and scientifically. It will fool those who want to be fooled.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait for tomorrow to see the end of COVID.  At least according to the president when he said a bit ago:  “Looks like by April, you know, in theory, when it gets a little warmer, it miraculously goes away.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost as if the media doesn't realize that the NYC area has 1/2 of the cases in the entire country.  They added more than twice as many cases yesterday than the entire state of Texas has since this began.

 

 

EDIT:  I just ran the math and DFW has a whopping 0.017% of its population (1345 cases out of ~7.7 million people) that have tested positive for the virus.  At its current growth rate, we'll be up to 0.054% in 12 days.  Glad we are putting millions of people out of work for this.  It is extremely frustrating that the argument has been framed that there are two options: (a) either shut it all down and tank the economy or (b) do nothing because we are monsters and want to kill millions of people.

 

There is absolutely no reason that retail stores cannot stay open, so long as they implement protective measures such as maximum occupancy, offering hand sanitizer, gloves, etc., requiring people to wear masks, requiring social distancing (such as no cash transactions, etc.).   Similarly, those who are higher risk should be encouraged to shelter in place.  But for heaven's sake, the CDC estimates that 60 million Americans had Swine Flu in '09/'10, with 12,000, and we didn't change a single thing. In '17/'18 the CDC estimates that 44.8 million Americans had the Flu and that 61,000 died, yet again, no one changed a thing.  But now we are just telling millions of businesses that they cannot operate, and forcing millions of people to rely solely on the government to survive.  It's ludicrous. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) People will not uniformly implement the measures you propose.

2) A major part of the reason why NYC has gotten as bad as it has is because they took them too long to shut stuff down.

3) S. Korea and China are now able to start turning on parts of their economy because they took such drastic measures to shut down early AND implement far more comprehensive testing.

4) As long as testing in places like Texas is insufficient, there is no basis for determining what parts of the economy can be kept on.  The lack of testing is the main reason why we can't be more selective about what part of the economy can be safely turned back on. 

5) Assuming your numbers are right: 61,000/44.8M = 0.13% mortality rate and 44.8M/327M = 13.7% infection rate.  Range of estimates now is that COVID-19 's mortality rate is 0.66% to 1.5% (5-15 x worse than seasonal flu) and I've seen estimates of the infection rate for a disease for which we have little to no innate immunity nor a vaccine for (and assuming no mitigating efforts undertaken) from 50-75%.  That puts the potential fatality numbers in the 250,000 ballpark for the US, which is in the ballpark of what the White House (who has had to be drug kicking and screaming into fact-based reality throughout this and all other matters) yesterday warned the US should expect.

6) And the issue isn't so much the total number of fatalities as the rate at which hospitals are having to deal with those and the potentially millions of other hospitalizations all in the time span of a few weeks.

7) A total breakdown of the national medical infrastructure over the course of months is going to cost a shittonne, financially and sociologically.

 

Backing off now greatly increases the likelihood that Dallas or Houston becomes the next NYC.  The inability of the federal government (and some state governments) to respond to the events in China appropriately is why the US "curve" is now appreciably worse than all the other hot-spots (Italy, Iran, China, etc.) we've been seeing in the news.  And NYC hasn't gotten nearly as bad as it is going to get.

 

31leonhardt-newsletter-chart-jumbo.png?q

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not fair to cite nationwide statistics when the vast majority of cases are in a small area around NYC.  If you charted the NY/NJ line, I suspect it would actually look a bit worse than the blue line above, but the other 48 states' line would be the same as, or better than, the other countries charted above.  Look at it this way:

 

On 3/10, NY had 178 cases.  By 3/31, NY had 76049 (42,624% increase, with a max single day increase of 8,664 cases and an average increase of 3,612 per day). NY Shelter-in-place order: 3/20

On 3/10, NJ had 15 cases.  By 3/31, NY had 18997 (126,546% increase, with a max single day increase of 3,089 cases and an average increase of 903 per day). NJ Shelter-in-place order: 3/21

 

In comparison, the hardest states hit at first were Washington and California:

On 3/10, WA had 273 cases (53% more) By 3/31, WA had 5,455 cases (1,890% increase, with a max single day increase of 1,260 cases and an average increase of 246 per day). WA Shelter-in-place order: 3/23

On 3/10, CA had 155 cases  By 3/31, CA had 8,658 cases (5,485% increase, with a max single day increase of 607 cases and an average increase of 404 per day). CA Shelter-in-place order: 3/18

 

Look at Texas and Florida, whose Governors were criticized for not going far enough:

On 3/10, TX had 21 cases.  By 3/31, TX had 3934 (18,633% increase, with a max single day increase of 572 cases and an average increase of 186 per day). TX Shelter-in-place order:  3/31

On 3/10, FL had 27 cases.  By 3/31, FL had 6741 (24,866% increase, with a max single day increase of 1,004 cases and an average increase of 319 per day). FL Shelter-in-place order:  4/3

 

But somehow, the Country is using essentially the greater NYC area's numbers to justify treating dissimilar situations the same.  There is no reason to treat the situation in other states the same. Allowing businesses in Tarrant County to operate in some manor with additional protective measures is highly unlikely to recreate the explosion seen in NYC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Lyle Lanley II said:

Hypothetical, @Army Frog Fan - let's say you're in charge of the decisions for Tarrant County.  What do you put in place?

 

I think for retail, measures similar to those in place for hardware and grocery stores, although I would require places to offer purrell every couple of aisles

 

I think we could implement a reasonable dine-in plan as well, similar to Betsy Price's original one. Max Capacity, minimum spacing.  The technology already exists to allow people to order on their phones, to minimize interaction with the wait staff, you could even take the wait staff out of the equation all together and have a pickup counter.  Tables wiped down with disinfectant after each use, etc.

 

But I just cannot support shutting down the economy in the name of saving a hypothetical number of lives, or in some cases, just to spread out when those lives are taken.  We lose ~37,000 people annually due to car crashes.  Can we justify shutting down the economy to save those lives?  What about the tens of thousands each year that get the flu?  There has to be some middle ground.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might as well dust this one off for the next Democrat President to keep in his or her hip pocket.  We'll need to shut it all down to save lives due to a statistical model suggesting worst-case scenarios.

 

 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3504667/New-York-London-underwater-DECADES-Scientists-say-devastating-climate-change-place-sooner-thought.html

 

The world's coastal cities, including New York (pictured) and London, could be underwater by the end of the century, even if global warming falls below the governments' target of 2°C

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Army Frog Fan said:

 

I think for retail, measures similar to those in place for hardware and grocery stores, although I would require places to offer purrell every couple of aisles

 

I think we could implement a reasonable dine-in plan as well, similar to Betsy Price's original one. Max Capacity, minimum spacing.  The technology already exists to allow people to order on their phones, to minimize interaction with the wait staff, you could even take the wait staff out of the equation all together and have a pickup counter.  Tables wiped down with disinfectant after each use, etc.

 

But I just cannot support shutting down the economy in the name of saving a hypothetical number of lives, or in some cases, just to spread out when those lives are taken.  We lose ~37,000 people annually due to car crashes.  Can we justify shutting down the economy to save those lives?  What about the tens of thousands each year that get the flu?  There has to be some middle ground.

Consider the situation of the T. Roosevelt which is full of young, formerly healthy men and women. It's economy isn't looking good at the moment.

 

You are worried about shutting down much of the economy. What epidemiologists and public health types are worried about is collapsing the medical system which if it does collapse will not do a lot for the economy.  The best way to prevent that is to not let the collapse happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

Consider the situation of the T. Roosevelt which is full of young, formerly healthy men and women. It's economy isn't looking good at the moment.

 

You are worried about shutting down much of the economy. What epidemiologists and public health types are worried about is collapsing the medical system which if it does collapse will not do a lot for the economy.  The best way to prevent that is to not let the collapse happen.


Yes, but the epidemiologists are concerned with only one thing, all other things be damned.  They cannot be the sole input for public policy, which appears to be the case right now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Army Frog Fan said:


Yes, but the epidemiologists are concerned with only one thing, all other things be damned.  They cannot be the sole input for public policy, which appears to be the case right now.  

You make a point but I don't really think you're considering what the failure of the health system would mean economically speaking. Your idea could easily shut the economy down just as surely just a bit later and with far more deaths.

 

I'm absolutely certain public health types are considering that as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

You make a point but I don't really think you're considering what the failure of the health system would mean economically speaking. Your idea could easily shut the economy down just as surely just a bit later and with far more deaths.

 

I'm absolutely certain public health types are considering that as well. 


I am just not accepting that the entire healthcare system will fail unless we put millions of Americans on unemployment and give them free money, while not forcing them to pay for rent, utilities, etc.  Especially since the experts have been moving the goalposts on their predictions since the get go.  A few weeks ago, we were looking at up to 2 million dead.  Now it’s up to 250k.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about the models. The one predicting millions are the ones which assume no public health measures. The ones predicting 100to 250 thousand assume our present somewhat late public health measures. It's not the epidemiologists changing their minds. It's the experts trying to match assumptions to reality. 

 

Do realize that if 100k die that means many times that many hospitalizations. That capacity even with the lower numbers probably isn't there As the USA ranks 32nd in the world for beds per capita and the utilization rate is already about 66 percent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NewfoundlandFreeFrog said:

One thing about the models. The one predicting millions are the ones which assume no public health measures. The ones predicting 100to 250 thousand assume our present somewhat late public health measures. It's not the epidemiologists changing their minds. It's the experts trying to match assumptions to reality. 

 

Do realize that if 100k die that means many times that many hospitalizations. That capacity even with the lower numbers probably isn't there As the USA ranks 32nd in the world for beds per capita and the utilization rate is already about 66 percent.


you are assuming we are not increasing the number of beds, which we are...every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read earlier today that Maimonides Hospital has stated they are actively exploring with community and religious leaders in the area instituting mandatory DNR orders. This is not a good sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...