Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 03-24-2020, 07:46 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,144
I believe they were only saying Wuhan had no new cases, until this morning unfortunately.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52016139
Quote:
The lockdown in Wuhan, the Chinese city where the global coronavirus outbreak began, will be partially lifted on 8 April, officials say.

Travel restrictions in the rest of Hubei province, where Wuhan is located, will be lifted from midnight on Tuesday - for residents who are healthy.

A single new case of the virus was reported in Wuhan on Tuesday following almost a week of no new cases.
  #252  
Old 03-24-2020, 07:32 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
For the average person, the death rate is about 1 in 100. The problematic word here, though, is "average." The average death rate for someone who is in their 20s and in good health is quite low - perhaps as low or even lower than for seasonal flu (the data are not completely in).

I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but when I saw them broken down in detail by relatively small age ranges (10-20 years IIRC), what I found interesting that is not being widely reported is that, relative to the flu, this virus is actually proportionately MORE deadly for the relatively young vs. the very old. The important caveat there is "relative to the flu". Covid-19 definitely has a much higher death rate for the elderly than for the young. But the ratio between the flu's death rate for the elderly and the young is actually much higher in the case of the flu.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
IOW you probably don't need to worry about breathing the air in a room half an hour after a COVID-infected person has left.

The University of Minnesota's Center Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) published an editorial last week expressing some skepticism about this public health messaging that we don't have to worry about aerosol transmission:


http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-persp...-hinge-science


I wonder if a lot of this has to do with the propaganda coming from that sector telling people that masks are ineffectual except when used by healthcare workers. This is to my mind pretty obviously bullshit (and look at the Asian countries who have been most successful in curbing their caseload, where masks are ubiquitous), intended to keep laypeople from buying up all the masks and causing a shortage for doctors and nurses.

It all seems murky at best, and I'm just going to operate under the assumption that any indoor area where people have been breathing recently could have aerosol particles that could infect me--so I'm going to wear my N95 mask.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #253  
Old 03-25-2020, 12:03 AM
nelliebly is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 3,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but when I saw them broken down in detail by relatively small age ranges (10-20 years IIRC), what I found interesting that is not being widely reported is that, relative to the flu, this virus is actually proportionately MORE deadly for the relatively young vs. the very old. The important caveat there is "relative to the flu". Covid-19 definitely has a much higher death rate for the elderly than for the young. But the ratio between the flu's death rate for the elderly and the young is actually much higher in the case of the flu.





The University of Minnesota's Center Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) published an editorial last week expressing some skepticism about this public health messaging that we don't have to worry about aerosol transmission:


http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-persp...-hinge-science


I wonder if a lot of this has to do with the propaganda coming from that sector telling people that masks are ineffectual except when used by healthcare workers. This is to my mind pretty obviously bullshit (and look at the Asian countries who have been most successful in curbing their caseload, where masks are ubiquitous), intended to keep laypeople from buying up all the masks and causing a shortage for doctors and nurses.

It all seems murky at best, and I'm just going to operate under the assumption that any indoor area where people have been breathing recently could have aerosol particles that could infect me--so I'm going to wear my N95 mask.
First, where did you get your info that masks have been ubiquitous in Asia during the COVID pandemic? Second, you're using post hoc reasoning when you assume the Asian countries who curbed their caseload did so because people were wearing masks. If the masks were effective, there wouldn't have been a need for lockdowns.

The surgical masks were first created not to keep surgeons from inhaling patients' germs but to keep him from sneezing, coughing, or letting his nose drip into the surgical field. As has been conclusively established repeatedly, the masks are NOT very effective in preventing the wearer from inhaling the COVID-19 virus, though they're better than nothing. The n95 masks are effective, but there was no stockpile, and almost all of them are made in China, which stopped shipping masks during the pandemic there.

And for the record, it's more important that doctors and nurses have whatever protection is available than that you and I do. How many COVID-19 patients have you treated today?
  #254  
Old 03-25-2020, 01:20 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,498
I saw mention of the shelter in place order in the Bay Area. I just saw an article about the effectiveness of that order. It's still early days, but the Shelter in Place order appears to be flattening the curve of the spread of infection.

Bay Area is Flattening the Curve
Early data indicates effectiveness of Shelter in Place

by Sudha KV., Mar 23, 2020

The Shelter in place order was placed on March 17, 2020 right around the time this thread started.

Quote:
The latest such experiment is Shelter-in-Place, which the Bay Area was the first to institute in the entire country, without any federal support or mandate. So, I decided to take a look at how this experiment has played out. And so far, the numbers seem to indicate that this was not only a wise decision, but will help us come out of this far quicker than anyone else (provided we can limit people travelling into or outside of the bay area and continue to maintain social distancing), And quicker recovery will mean that the economic impact is likely to be much lower than what it would have been had we done this sometime later, after more cases were allowed to spread. Now, I must caveat this with it being early days. But the numbers appear to indicate that aggressive distancing and lock-down policies are highly effective when applied early.

The Bay Area put its Shelter in Place effective Mar 17. I have compared data from Mar 15 to about 6 pm PT on Mar, 22, which was the time of this writing. And, I will continue to update this article over the coming days with more data.
The author compared the number of infections from the Bay Area which had one of the highest rates of infection at that time to the rate of deaths and infection in New York.

Quote:
First, let us compare the Bay Area to New York. On Mar 16, before shelter in place, we had 310 cases in the Bay Area with 5 deaths, and 950 in New York with 6 deaths. Here is how much the virus has spread in the past 6 days in these regions. The Bay Area is now at 786 cases and 13 deaths, while New York has 15168 cases and 114 deaths.
Then the author compared the rate of new cases in the Bay Area versus all of California.

Quote:
On Mar 16, 310 of the 392 cases in California, or 79% of the cases, were in the Bay Area. Today, six days later, 786 of the 1555 cases in California, which is 50% of the cases, are from the Bay Area. The deaths have fallen from 83% (5 of 6 cases) to 44% (13 of 29 cases).
Then the author compared the Santa Clara County's (one of the shelter in place counties) stats to LA County.

Quote:
In the Bay Area, on Mar 16, Santa Clara county accounted for 138 of the 310 (44%) cases and 4 of the 5 (80%) deaths. Shelter in Place was instituted in the Bay Area and so we compared it to Los Angeles County, which had 94 cases and 1 death on Mar 16 and now has 409 cases with 5 deaths.
The graphs are stark and easier to see the picture than reading these numbers. If the trend continues in the same way for the next several weeks, it will show that the shelter in place order had a positive effect on containing the spread of the virus.

While it's true that New York and LA have different factors affecting their population such as more public transportation and the population density is higher in those areas in some parts, there's still a case to be made that the shelter in place order made a difference given the original spread of infection and the current rate of infection in those places.
  #255  
Old 03-25-2020, 07:28 AM
dorvann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Absolute View Post
Are those screws and bolts used to keep the nation's trains and trucks running? What about farm equipment? Are the specialty fittings used in sewage treatment plants? What about drug manufacturing?
Part of the problem there is everything is inter-connected in some way and and if some one doesn't make a decision the majority of the businesses in the country will decided they are "essential" and remain open.
  #256  
Old 03-25-2020, 09:22 AM
SingleMalt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Colorado Coast
Posts: 375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
I saw mention of the shelter in place order in the Bay Area. I just saw an article about the effectiveness of that order. It's still early days, but the Shelter in Place order appears to be flattening the curve of the spread of infection.

(snip)
Here's a graph comparing the curves of Kentucky (which introduced distancing measures early) vs. Tennessee (which was slower to respond).

More evidence that the earlier measures are put in place, the more effective they will be.
  #257  
Old 03-25-2020, 10:39 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingleMalt View Post
Here's a graph comparing the curves of Kentucky (which introduced distancing measures early) vs. Tennessee (which was slower to respond).

More evidence that the earlier measures are put in place, the more effective they will be.
That is QUITE a difference!
  #258  
Old 03-25-2020, 11:30 AM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,882
We’ll see how it shakes out in the next couple of months, but yes, basic education regarding public hygiene and social distancing goes a long way to blunting the spread of even a highly transmissible contagion. If this had been done at a Federal level starting back in January when the NIAID raised an alert about the potential for pandemic outbreak, we might have had more time to prepare businesses, acquire and allocate medical supplies and PPE, and develop and deploy testing kits and guidance to local and state governments and health officials.

Instead, the “do nothing and hope it all goes away by spring” is going to result in tens or hundreds of thousands of totally avoidable deaths among the millions who will eventually succumb in this country, and those deaths are the direct result of criminal negligence on the part of Trump and his political advisors who ignored and obstructed public health experts while spreading misinformation.

Once this crisis has passed, there needs to be an investigation into what could have been done and an explanation of why no effective action was taken, as well as the effects if Trump decides to cancel the national emergency by April as he has pledged to do. The people in charge of leading the nation and making decisions based upon fact and guidance from public health experts should be held to account for not performing the rational and responsible duties that they with which they have been entrusted.

Stranger
  #259  
Old 03-25-2020, 12:44 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
...
Once this crisis has passed, there needs to be an investigation into what could have been done and an explanation of why no effective action was taken, as well as the effects if Trump decides to cancel the national emergency by April as he has pledged to do. The people in charge of leading the nation and making decisions based upon fact and guidance from public health experts should be held to account for not performing the rational and responsible duties that they with which they have been entrusted.

Stranger
Of course, I completely agree with you in this.

But note what I have bolded... that pesky passive voice. WHO is going to do this if trump (GOD FORBID!) gets reelected? He will bury it all along with the bodies and rewrite history. The whole thing never happened. It was nothing but a double cheese nothingberder. And he's the short order cook who saved the bacon. Excuse my foodie metaphor festival. Must eat something soon. Been up since 4 am.

If it's Biden, by all means, an investigation and report, probably to be conducted over a period of months in the background, because there will be critical emergent issues to deal with moment to moment. But yeah, a new administration needs to hang this one out to dry.
  #260  
Old 03-25-2020, 06:01 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
That Kentucky/Tennessee graph really is something!


Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
And for the record, it's more important that doctors and nurses have whatever protection is available than that you and I do. How many COVID-19 patients have you treated today?

My masks are N95: I'm grateful to whomever it was on MSNBC who mentioned that this was the necessary standard back in February and I got some of the last ones available on Amazon.

The medical community should have their own stockpile of these masks. I shouldn't be expected to refrain from buying them to protect me and my family so they can have them instead.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #261  
Old 03-25-2020, 06:19 PM
madmonk28 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
That Kentucky/Tennessee graph really is something!





My masks are N95: I'm grateful to whomever it was on MSNBC who mentioned that this was the necessary standard back in February and I got some of the last ones available on Amazon.

The medical community should have their own stockpile of these masks. I shouldn't be expected to refrain from buying them to protect me and my family so they can have them instead.
What a telling statement.
  #262  
Old 03-25-2020, 06:24 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Just outside of Titletown
Posts: 24,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
The medical community should have their own stockpile of these masks. I shouldn't be expected to refrain from buying them to protect me and my family so they can have them instead.
They need them. You don't.
  #263  
Old 03-25-2020, 07:04 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by madmonk28 View Post
What a telling statement.

I support leaders who will enact robust public health policy so private citizens can buy products they wish to buy, without having to feel any need to refrain, so as to leave them for the health workers. Like Joe Biden, who as vice president was part of the administration who established a pandemic team in the White House that Trump subsequently disbanded--and whose chief of staff was the "Ebola czar" when Joe was veep.

But I'm not going to be shamed for not doing every last possible thing on a personal basis to contribute to the cause. That's true about anyone who doesn't contribute every dime they don't need for basic food and shelter to a malaria bed net charity. Those who subscribe to Peter Singer's "drowning child" philosophy may believe this for real, but only the tiniest fraction of us (doubt that includes anyone here) actually lives a life that is blameless by this ethical framework.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #264  
Old 03-25-2020, 07:41 PM
Eva Luna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago-ish, IL
Posts: 11,089
Even my (mildly intermittently) asthmatic self was willing to risk the occasional grocery run...until today, when my stepmother in NY tested positive and was hospitalized. She and my dad are both at risk because of age and medical conditions. No idea how she got infected; they had been quite cautious, wearing masks outside, etc. and are both pretty neurotic under normal circumstances. We are all crossing our collective fingers that my 79-year-old asthmatic dad doesn't get infected.

Now I am not so crazy about the idea of even brief grocery runs. There is going to be a CSA, a lot of vegetable gardening, some ordering of groceries for home delivery, and possibly the occasional round of curbside pickup by Tom Scud at one of the small local grocery stores.
  #265  
Old 03-26-2020, 08:46 PM
madmonk28 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I support leaders who will enact robust public health policy so private citizens can buy products they wish to buy, without having to feel any need to refrain, so as to leave them for the health workers. Like Joe Biden, who as vice president was part of the administration who established a pandemic team in the White House that Trump subsequently disbanded--and whose chief of staff was the "Ebola czar" when Joe was veep.

But I'm not going to be shamed for not doing every last possible thing on a personal basis to contribute to the cause. That's true about anyone who doesn't contribute every dime they don't need for basic food and shelter to a malaria bed net charity. Those who subscribe to Peter Singer's "drowning child" philosophy may believe this for real, but only the tiniest fraction of us (doubt that includes anyone here) actually lives a life that is blameless by this ethical framework.
All over the world, people are stepping up and making sacrifices for the greater good. Health care professionals are writing their wills and not hugging their children, lest they infect them. In Iran, an infected doctor continued her work with an IV in her arm and dropped dead on the job and you won’t accept the slightest sacrifice. I’ve been in a lot of crises and in the end, people are divided into two groups: the strong and the weak. You’re the weak, at least now you know.
  #266  
Old 03-26-2020, 09:15 PM
Francis Vaughan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 5,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
The medical community should have their own stockpile of these masks. I shouldn't be expected to refrain from buying them to protect me and my family so they can have them instead.
So it is their fault if they run out due to the massive overwhelming of the health system and the lack of preparedness of the government. Fine. The difference in value to a health professional working to both save lives and avoid additional transmission as they work on the front line of the pandemic, versus you being able to smugly walk down the street with a useless to you mask is insane.

The single best thing you could do to save lives is to carefully package up the unused masks and send them to your local hospital. But of course it is someone else's fault that they ran out, not yours. So let them stew.

Funny that the phrase "protect me and my family" is something that very quickly identifies the speaker as a US citizen. This isn't a good thing.
  #267  
Old 03-26-2020, 09:36 PM
Dr_Paprika is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South of Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,539
Canadian hospitals are running low on masks and rationing them strictly. Good to learn Canada donated 16 tons of PPE to China in February after slowly destroying its stockpile of 55 million masks since SARS. Masks expire, and generosity has its place. But China still is torturing two innocent Canadian political prisoners, and that’s not right.
__________________
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man"
  #268  
Old 03-26-2020, 10:09 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,489
I support the political party that supports greater preparedness for pandemics, using government mandates and tax dollars. Like Bernie Sanders, for this reason I do not support the concept of individual charity.

Our masks are not useless to us. We live in an apartment building where we are forced to walk through the same narrow unventilated spaces as hundreds of others. And we have one for each member of the family, that we take very careful care of and only wear for a few minutes per week as we pass through those areas or enter a building to do shopping for necessities. Not while “walking down the street”. There is nothing to “package up”.

But I see the latest argument along these lines is about CPAP machines, which some people believe users should donate to the cause. I actually have a more advanced machine because my apnea is more complex and I graduated from CPAP to BiPAP and then, after my third sleep study, to an actual state-of-the-art home ventilator. But there’s no way in hell I’m donating it. I would go back to having crappy sleep and possibly be in real trouble if I got the virus.

Again, I support Democrats and they insisted on adding hundreds of billions of dollars to help hospitals with much-needed supplies. Good for them and my conscience is clear.

And sure, I am among the “weak” majority. Which is why I never had any impulse to become a firefighter or police officer, but would not hesitate to call 911 if I needed help from either.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 03-26-2020 at 10:13 PM.
  #269  
Old 03-27-2020, 02:53 AM
GreenWyvern's Avatar
GreenWyvern is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 2,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I do not support the concept of individual charity.
It's one thing not to support individual charity as a replacement for social services, and another not to support helping your neighbors in time of need.

However, having a small number of masks for your family is reasonable, and I don't think anyone would suggest you should donate them unless you were hoarding a large number.

CPAP machines are not a replacement for ventilators.


You may be interested in this advice from the British OSA Alliance:

Guidance regarding coronavirus (COVID-19) and Obstructive Sleep Apnoea (OSA) [PDF]: for people who routinely use continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), their families and health care workers, 20 March 2020
  #270  
Old 03-27-2020, 04:28 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
How seriously are you taking the recommendations to socially isolate?
Since I'm considered "essential personnel" I can't isolate when I go to work.

Outside of work, though, I only go out for essential stuff, which means most of my very very few days off I don't go out at all. When I am out, I try to keep as much distance between me and others as possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
But I'm wondering what aspects of "normal living" ought to be avoided? For example, this evening I am planning on going to a friend's house where 3 of us will play music. Hearing people talk, I'm wondering if I should ask my 2 friends if they think we should cancel. But I really question whether the risk to us - or society - is more than infinitesimally negligible.
It's not negligible.

You should cancel.

You can't see who is and isn't infected and in the pre-symptomatic-but-infectious state.

It could be you. It could be one or both of the other two people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
I don't want to suggest that the loss of live from this will be traumatic to many people. But we don't have a good idea exactly what the mortality rate is. And if avoiding crowds/excessive contact, washing hands eliminates the vast majority of risk, how far should we go trying to eliminate the remaining portion?
You make it sound like the choice is between "some people die and the rest are perfectly fine". It's not. Even a "mild" case of this - largely defined as "does not need to be in a hospital" - can be a pretty nasty illness. Also, there are people who seem to have a "mild" case who suddenly die in their homes. In part I suspect this is because our medical system is already so overloaded that both the people doing the evaluating are overworked and are making mistakes, and also because people who ordinarily would be admitted a hospital for observation are being sent home for lack of room for even sicker people in hospitals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
If we are supposed to avoid crowds exceeding 10 (or 50, or 100), then why hasn't air travel and public transportation been shut down?
Because the people elected to be in charge of this country are in a massive state of denial. Absolutely air travel should be shut down. Public transportation should be restricted to just essential personnel going to and from work.

This does leave the problem that there are people who don't own cars and need public transportation to get groceries and medicine, but if the government was competent enough to shut down transportation I'd also assume they were competent enough to ramp up delivery services to such people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
I find myself drawing comparisons to 9/11, where IMO we grossly over-reacted to the threat. Feel free to call me irresponsible or whatever if you wish, but I'm really trying to figure out what is a reasonable and responsible approach, balancing between living life as normal, or hoarding and hunkering down like survivalists.
The reasonable and responsible approach:

Hunker down. Stay inside. Don't visit ANYONE you aren't already living with. The only exception is if you actually must go out for food/medicine. If you do, keep your distance. Wash your hands.

Anything else and you risk getting and/or giving the virus.

No, I'm not kidding.

If I didn't have my job to do I'd be inside for the next two weeks barring one or two absolutely mandatory trips outside. I might even forgo laundry (for which I must leave my apartment) and wash underwear in the sink.

Yes, we really are at that point, at least until the new cases come down and the hospitals can handle the influx again.

Last edited by Broomstick; 03-27-2020 at 04:28 AM.
  #271  
Old 03-27-2020, 04:35 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 30,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
IHowever, having a small number of masks for your family is reasonable, and I don't think anyone would suggest you should donate them unless you were hoarding a large number.
Except, of course, for the people in this very thread who did just that...

It's like at work when someone young shows up at the "senior shopping hour" - it's not the "senior shopping hour", it's the "seniors and high risk shopping hour" and people at risk can be any age. I see people wearing N95 masks at work and I don't say anything because some people do have legitimate need for them - before this we had two regulars at the store wearing them due to suppressed immune systems.

We can't tell from posts who has a medical vulnerability and who doesn't. Let's be careful about making assumptions.
  #272  
Old 03-27-2020, 07:19 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Vaughan View Post
Funny that the phrase "protect me and my family" is something that very quickly identifies the speaker as a US citizen. This isn't a good thing.
Ouch. Quoted for truth.

(I’m a US citizen - I teach undergrads a class on World Cultural Regions. When we get to the US, I tell them about our off-the-charts incarceration rate, our ecological footprint (though that’s no longer so unusual, and we’re slowly getting a bit better), our drug consumption, and our larger (and growing) economic inequality compared to most developed states — and ask them to find a common thread. We then discuss “individual” vs. “community” — while acknowledging that all cultures struggle with balancing these, the US geography and history is rather unusual in its emphasis on the former).

Last edited by JKellyMap; 03-27-2020 at 07:22 AM.
  #273  
Old 03-27-2020, 07:43 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
Since I'm considered "essential personnel" I can't isolate when I go to work.

Outside of work, though, I only go out for essential stuff, which means most of my very very few days off I don't go out at all. When I am out, I try to keep as much distance between me and others as possible.


It's not negligible.

You should cancel.

You can't see who is and isn't infected and in the pre-symptomatic-but-infectious state.

It could be you. It could be one or both of the other two people.


You make it sound like the choice is between "some people die and the rest are perfectly fine". It's not. Even a "mild" case of this - largely defined as "does not need to be in a hospital" - can be a pretty nasty illness. Also, there are people who seem to have a "mild" case who suddenly die in their homes. In part I suspect this is because our medical system is already so overloaded that both the people doing the evaluating are overworked and are making mistakes, and also because people who ordinarily would be admitted a hospital for observation are being sent home for lack of room for even sicker people in hospitals.


Because the people elected to be in charge of this country are in a massive state of denial. Absolutely air travel should be shut down. Public transportation should be restricted to just essential personnel going to and from work.

This does leave the problem that there are people who don't own cars and need public transportation to get groceries and medicine, but if the government was competent enough to shut down transportation I'd also assume they were competent enough to ramp up delivery services to such people.


The reasonable and responsible approach:

Hunker down. Stay inside. Don't visit ANYONE you aren't already living with. The only exception is if you actually must go out for food/medicine. If you do, keep your distance. Wash your hands.

Anything else and you risk getting and/or giving the virus.

No, I'm not kidding.

If I didn't have my job to do I'd be inside for the next two weeks barring one or two absolutely mandatory trips outside. I might even forgo laundry (for which I must leave my apartment) and wash underwear in the sink.

Yes, we really are at that point, at least until the new cases come down and the hospitals can handle the influx again.
Brilliant, no-nonsense post! Will it be heeded?
  #274  
Old 03-27-2020, 08:20 AM
Frankenstein Monster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 871
I guess this is the thread to post this to.

Finland and Sweden are interesting to compare.

Sweden decided early on to be relatively loose on their restrictions and to stress individual responsibility.

Finland did too, but to a specifically lesser extent than Sweden.

Article: Sweden’s coronavirus approach different from Finland

Both are in the same phase of the pandemic. Sweden crossed the 10 confirmed cases mark on March 4, Finland on March 6. (Both have a restricted testing policy and have acknowledged to have many more infections in reality.)

Today: Sweden has EIGHT TIMES the number of deaths and five times the number of serious cases relative to the population. (Sweden has twice the population.)

Wonder what they will think of "overreacting" to the pandemic or "questioning" the restrictions when all this is over.
  #275  
Old 03-27-2020, 08:28 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,462
FM, that’s super interesting.
  #276  
Old 03-27-2020, 08:51 AM
monstro is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 21,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankenstein Monster View Post
I guess this is the thread to post this to.

Finland and Sweden are interesting to compare.

Sweden decided early on to be relatively loose on their restrictions and to stress individual responsibility.

Finland did too, but to a specifically lesser extent than Sweden.

Article: Sweden’s coronavirus approach different from Finland

Both are in the same phase of the pandemic. Sweden crossed the 10 confirmed cases mark on March 4, Finland on March 6. (Both have a restricted testing policy and have acknowledged to have many more infections in reality.)

Today: Sweden has EIGHT TIMES the number of deaths and five times the number of serious cases relative to the population. (Sweden has twice the population.)

Wonder what they will think of "overreacting" to the pandemic or "questioning" the restrictions when all this is over.
Unfortunately we will be able to do similar comparisons in the US between cities/states with differing levels of mitigation.
  #277  
Old 03-27-2020, 08:57 AM
steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,444
OK or Not OK: Happy hour with the neighbors in my front yard, 10 foot minimum distance, BYOB.
  #278  
Old 03-27-2020, 09:07 AM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 17,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
OK or Not OK: Happy hour with the neighbors in my front yard, 10 foot minimum distance, BYOB.
OK, in my view, as long as you're truly staying at least 10 feet away from the neighbors. One issue I've read about (which may or may not be relevant to your situation) is if there are kids involved -- even if the adults are being careful and maintaining distance, kids (especially little kids) just aren't able to do that willingly.

So, if it's just adults, probably fine. If kids are in the equation, it might well be asking for trouble.
  #279  
Old 03-27-2020, 09:15 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
OK or Not OK: Happy hour with the neighbors in my front yard, 10 foot minimum distance, BYOB.
NOT. OKAY.

Have a Zoom Happy Hour instead.
  #280  
Old 03-27-2020, 10:34 AM
PoppaSan's Avatar
PoppaSan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West shore Lake Michigan
Posts: 2,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
Brilliant, no-nonsense post! Will it be heeded?
No. My area, while not in denial, is not very observant yet. Until yesterday, I had enough fingers to account for every confirmed case in my county plus all the adjacent counties. If I added my toes I could add the counties adjacent to those counties. This area is one that Trump wants to get to work while the numbers are low. Rural, agricultural, heavy industry in spots. The governor may have shut us down, and the populace is restricting itself, but the mindset is I'm doing it because "they" are making me, not because I want to or even agree with it.
__________________
The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly flat dishwatery utterances of a man who has to be pointed out to intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States. --Chicago Times review of the Gettysburg address
  #281  
Old 03-27-2020, 10:57 AM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
NOT. OKAY.

Have a Zoom Happy Hour instead.
Two days ago you were asking if you could have your housekeeper come in. Compared to that, this is incredibly low risk, if people are actually ten feet apart and bring their own chair and booze. I don't think yelling at him like he's an idiot to consider it is appropriate.
  #282  
Old 03-27-2020, 11:17 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 18,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Two days ago you were asking if you could have your housekeeper come in. Compared to that, this is incredibly low risk, if people are actually ten feet apart and bring their own chair and booze. I don't think yelling at him like he's an idiot to consider it is appropriate.
That was two days ago. And I got shut down, as I'm shutting you down. Things are moving quickly.
  #283  
Old 03-27-2020, 11:29 AM
suranyi is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 8,032
We’re doing social isolation very seriously. My wife has not stepped foot outside our house for almost two weeks.
__________________
Right now, it’s Girls’ Generation. Tomorrow, it’s Girls’ Generation. Forever, it’s Girls’ Generation!
  #284  
Old 03-27-2020, 12:36 PM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Two days ago you were asking if you could have your housekeeper come in. Compared to that, this is incredibly low risk, if people are actually ten feet apart and bring their own chair and booze. I don't think yelling at him like he's an idiot to consider it is appropriate.
In what way do you quantify this as "incredibly low risk", and how are you going to ensure that people respect this hypothetically safe 10 foot distance? When people need to use the restroom, do they walk home or pee behind a bush? What happens the first time wants to show someone else a video on their phone and everyone clusters around to see?

We are incredibly social animals, and this instinct is difficult to fight in the presence of other people. This is true even for physicians, nurses, and epidemiologists who live with the reality of infectious disease by occupation. We naturally gather in groups because it feels warm and safe even though that is the very means by which infection spreads.

Dr. John Campbell on the state of contagion, morbidity, and mortality around the world.

Stranger
  #285  
Old 03-27-2020, 12:47 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 29,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
In what way do you quantify this as "incredibly low risk", and how are you going to ensure that people respect this hypothetically safe 10 foot distance? When people need to use the restroom, do they walk home or pee behind a bush? What happens the first time wants to show someone else a video on their phone and everyone clusters around to see?
If steronz's question was a hypothetical one, I'd say you were fighting the hypothetical. Manda JO, on the other hand, was taking it at face value ("if people are actually ten feet apart...").

I appreciate you and kenobi 65 explaining why it's a bad idea, but your reasons basically hinge on: "because people wouldn't stay 10 feet apart."
  #286  
Old 03-27-2020, 12:52 PM
steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,444
Right. They're neighbors so if they have to use the restroom they'd walk home. They're adults so I'd trust to them to not hover around phones looking at cat memes. Right now we've stopped to chat with neighbors on walks, the weather has been nice so many of us are outside with dogs and/or exercising, and standing 6-10 feet apart while catching up is not in violation of any guidelines I've seen.

However Stranger does touch on my concern -- not so much actual transmission risk or even bad optics, but more like, do we want to avoid anything that feels like socializing just to avoid normalizing it?

eta: We've been on some form of lockdown here for 2 weeks, we're adhering to all state and Fauci guidelines. I canceled my houescleaner (still paying though) 2 weeks ago. We're being good citizens, nearest I can tell. I'm not trying to skirt the system, but I think maintaining sanity is going to be important.

Last edited by steronz; 03-27-2020 at 12:54 PM.
  #287  
Old 03-27-2020, 01:10 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
In what way do you quantify this as "incredibly low risk", and how are you going to ensure that people respect this hypothetically safe 10 foot distance? When people need to use the restroom, do they walk home or pee behind a bush? What happens the first time wants to show someone else a video on their phone and everyone clusters around to see?
That wasn't the question. Taken as asked: are two people sitting 10 feet apart on lawn chairs outdoor, and never coming any closer, engaging in socially irresponsible behavior?

I mean, to me, if you are actually doing that, it's not socially irresponsible. I guess it's legitimate to ask if people will actually abide by the parameters, but I think most neighbors can.

If it's not safe to sit on at one end of your driveway and shout at a neighbor at the other, then lock-down orders need to quit telling people it's okay to go outside for solitary exercise. Because I am going on a walk every day, and even though I detour off the sidewalk and walk around people I see, I do come within 10 ft of them. Is that really unwise, when out of doors?
  #288  
Old 03-27-2020, 02:27 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,106
I think telling people they can't have a 10ft away happy hour, where you have adult neighbors who are actually following the rules seriously (and will go home to go to the bathroom), is a great way to have people go nuts. Especially when we probably have 2 months to go with this. The guidelines state stay 6 feet away from each other - if you are actually following it, I see nothing wrong with the 10ft away happy hour.
  #289  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:17 PM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
If it's not safe to sit on at one end of your driveway and shout at a neighbor at the other, then lock-down orders need to quit telling people it's okay to go outside for solitary exercise. Because I am going on a walk every day, and even though I detour off the sidewalk and walk around people I see, I do come within 10 ft of them. Is that really unwise, when out of doors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
I think telling people they can't have a 10ft away happy hour, where you have adult neighbors who are actually following the rules seriously (and will go home to go to the bathroom), is a great way to have people go nuts. Especially when we probably have 2 months to go with this. The guidelines state stay 6 feet away from each other - if you are actually following it, I see nothing wrong with the 10ft away happy hour.
Since nothing I say seems to have any impact (and honestly, I am not a medical authority, just someone who happens to be well-read in epidemiology and virology), I'll just encourage you to watch this: Dr. John Campbell, Friday 27 March Update: "Our health depends on everyone else."

Make your own decisions but realize that those decisions impact people beyond yourself.

Stranger
  #290  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:22 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
I think telling people they can't have a 10ft away happy hour, where you have adult neighbors who are actually following the rules seriously (and will go home to go to the bathroom), is a great way to have people go nuts. Especially when we probably have 2 months to go with this. The guidelines state stay 6 feet away from each other - if you are actually following it, I see nothing wrong with the 10ft away happy hour.
The problem is that people aren't nearly as awesome as they think. No, I can guarantee you that they will not all go home and wash their hands immediately. They will not even all stay 10' apart. People are just not that reliable. So it's better for people to try and hit a higher level of care so it's not so bad when people miss the mark.

Last edited by CarnalK; 03-27-2020 at 03:23 PM.
  #291  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:24 PM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 5,093
It's real simple. Would you have a 10ft away happy hour with the neighbors if the virus was Ebola?

CMC fnord!
  #292  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:35 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
Since nothing I say seems to have any impact (and honestly, I am not a medical authority, just someone who happens to be well-read in epidemiology and virology), I'll just encourage you to watch this: Dr. John Campbell, Friday 27 March Update: "Our health depends on everyone else."

Make your own decisions but realize that those decisions impact people beyond yourself.

Stranger
Do you think people who are walking alone outside right now are being socially irresponsible?
  #293  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:43 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Do you think people who are walking alone outside right now are being socially irresponsible?
Here's the what you need to realize: if they actually have the virus then yes they are being horribly irresponsible. If they think they only might be infected, then they are gambling on whether they are being horribly irresponsible or not.

So when you went out to buy essentials last week, are you unshakeably positive you didn't pick it up?

Last edited by CarnalK; 03-27-2020 at 03:46 PM.
  #294  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:46 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 29,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Here's the what you need to realize: if they actually have the virus then yes they are being horribly irresponsible. If they think they only might be infected, then they are gambling on whether they are being horribly irresponsible or not.
Why? How are they risking spreading the infection by walking alone outside?
  #295  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:49 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,144
Because they will touch stuff and talk to people. If you are perfectly reliable then of course this doesn't apply to you.
  #296  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:49 PM
Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,863
Did China and/or Italy or anywhere else have a blanket ban on going outdoors for any reason besides necessity? I vaguely recall the former having one and the latter not, but I don’t know if I’m remembering right.
  #297  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:49 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Here's the what you need to realize: if they actually have the virus then yes they are being horribly irresponsible. If they think they only might be infected, then they are gambling on whether they are being horribly irresponsible or not.
I'm not trying to be difficult. I am trying to find the edges of this. If I leave my house and walk around the block, in the open air with a slight breeze, where is the method whereby I could transmit the virus to someone else? I have no reason to suspect I am sick, but I also really want to be socially responsible. But I can't see how in that action I am raising anyone else's risk at all.
  #298  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:51 PM
Manda JO is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Because they will touch stuff and talk to people. If you are perfectly reliable then of course this doesn't apply to you.
There's nothing to touch. I'm walking down a sidewalk. There's no one to talk to, except people sitting on their porch, 25 or more feet back. I understand saying "if you go the store, you can't help touching things". But on a walk around the block?
  #299  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:54 PM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manda JO View Post
Do you think people who are walking alone outside right now are being socially irresponsible?
There is a qualitative difference between people walking outside by themselves or members of their household who might have incidental contact with someone else at a reasonable distance to prevent aerosol transmission, and people sitting around for hours in close proximity. There is nothing magical about a 6 ft (or 10 ft) separation that will assure that no transmission occurs; it is just an easy-to-remember figure that people can make a best effort to follow in regular contact (and that you still violate every time you go to the grocery store or pick up food at a restaurant) which seeks to minimize the potential for being infected. If you decide that this risk is worth it so you can drink and socialize, well, that is your choice, but consider that if one person in this gathering is unknowingly infected, and despite best efforts to maintain distance infects two or three other people, that means the virus is transmitted to those households, and from there potentially to anyone else (grocery clerks, delivery people, EMTs, et cetera) that they are in contact with.

I'm done responding for now because I've hit my limit of trying to maintain a patient, factual tone with people who continue to insist that they should be able to do as they please, epidemic be damned. I will just encourage you to watch the John Campbell videos because he lays it all out in stark figures and data on what is actually happening in countries where the social isolation was too late or relaxed. You can choose to live in reality or ignore it, but consider that what you do affects other people as well.

Stranger
  #300  
Old 03-27-2020, 03:57 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20,144
A slight breeze should push your distance between people, first off.

I am sure if you're careful that you can responsibly take a walk around the block. I'm just saying, take it seriously still.

Eta: I think part of my impatience, and I suspect Stranger's too, is that "I gotta go for a walk or SOMETHING" is just not a way I ever think. I have a feeling if the health advisory was "don't read the internet" we would all have great justifications for exceptions.

Last edited by CarnalK; 03-27-2020 at 04:01 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017