COVID-19 Thread [V2.0]

[OldSchoolSnapper]

 

If this stretches 16 months, it means the medical research industry that is racing to produce a viable vaccine has failed miserably.

 

I don't think that's true, I think politicians have been writing checks they can't cash. There were early reports we could have one by August. I strongly doubt we have a widely distributed vaccine by July, and would not be surprised at all if we have nothing. The most recent things I've read have said Q2/Q3 of next year would be an achievement. I'm not holding my breath for any movement on this soon.

[homer]

Small point of contention: Illinois banned indoor dining in Chicago. The edict came from the governor, not the mayor.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I don't think that's true. Chicago just banned indoor dining again last night. More kids are getting sent back to virtual school daily. There are countless conventions and festivals cancelled, tons of restrictions on sporting events, we don't have concerts, Broadway shows, etc. I realize that people like dismissing these as elective things we don't "need," but tell that to the people whose livelihood is rooted in them. After a calendar year goes by, I would say that yes, you do need those things, as they are vital parts of being human. I am just saying that you can dismiss someone prioritizing those things as "selfish" after a month, or two months, but it becomes a bit more muddled when a year has gone by.

 

Sorry, but this seems fairly tone-deaf considering the current spike in infections/hospitalizations that is taking place right now. If we had 1)done better at actually implementing/listening to/complying with restrictions earlier on, perhaps we'd be better off now, and 2)Large amounts of people are still ignoring the severity because of nothing more than partisan politics. It truly is surreal.

 

Perhaps we wouldn't be talking about the 'cure' taking over a year if people on the whole had helped more along the way?

 

I don't get how it's tone-deaf, I'm simply saying what is happening. You said that people are doing whatever they want and it just isn't accurate. Things are not normal, particularly not in large cities.

 

On your first point, I thought I addressed that in my original post. We can complain about that all we want, but it is a reality of the situation. Does anyone think we will have widespread compliance with any kind of government order? Like millions and millions of people aren't going to spread this over Thanksgiving against the advice of the CDC? I don't think it's productive at this point to keep planning to beat this as if suddenly people are going to wake up and start strictly following the guidance. They just won't. We have 8 months of evidence to prove it.

[PeaveyFury]

I don't get how it's tone-deaf, I'm simply saying what is happening.

 

Tone-deaf because complaining about the length of restrictions while the effects of the virus are ballooning. If we were in a lull and case were staying level or declining, I'd actually agree with you.

 

You said that people are doing whatever they want and it just isn't accurate. Things are not normal, particularly not in large cities.

 

Businesses are being closed BECAUSE people are doing whatever they want, so those businesses have to be closed to protect society from itself.

 

Does anyone think we will have widespread compliance with any kind of government order? Like millions and millions of people aren't going to spread this over Thanksgiving against the advice of the CDC? I don't think it's productive at this point to keep planning to beat this as if suddenly people are going to wake up and start strictly following the guidance. They just won't. We have 8 months of evidence to prove it.

 

We certainly agree on this point. But I don't know how opening everything back up helps in any way, other than to make people feel better about their poor personal choices.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It keeps businesses alive and people employed that are 100% going to fold with another round of closures, which is something that you can't really argue for without being called cold or pro-death or something, except the only reason I'm considering that is because the complete lack of our ability to contain it makes the loss of life a sunken cost.

 

Basically, my belief is that if you quarantine, you have to actually enforce it with the military in the streets for it to actually work as designed. This thing where you close stuff, destroy the service industry, and leave people to their own devices (where 1/2 "adapt" and spread it anyway) is the worst of both worlds.

 

This country just does not have the cohesion to wave this thing away with mandates and stern letters from the CDC. The government isn't capable of protecting society from itself, as you say.

[jjfanec]

It keeps businesses alive and people employed that are 100% going to fold with another round of closures, which is something that you can't really argue for without being called cold or pro-death or something, except the only reason I'm considering that is because the complete lack of our ability to contain it makes the loss of life a sunken cost.

 

Basically, my belief is that if you quarantine, you have to actually enforce it with the military in the streets for it to actually work as designed. This thing where you close stuff, destroy the service industry, and leave people to their own devices (where 1/2 "adapt" and spread it anyway) is the worst of both worlds.

 

This country just does not have the cohesion to wave this thing away with mandates and stern letters from the CDC. The government isn't capable of protecting society from itself, as you say.

 

It is a false narrative to say opening things back up will automatically save businesses. After places were opened up this summer many still were struggling to see people come back. Many people dont feel comfortable attending indoor gathers. Look at churches. There are many churches that are open but much of the congregation simply hasnt come back. I know numerous churches that were making people reserve spots to help with occupancy but quite doing it because they were never close to their max number. Another example is my son's flag football league. Last year we had 8 teams for 2 grades. Each team had 12 kids. So roughly 100 kids. This year the league had to be 3 grades and only had 16 kids! There are other businesses that are not opening not because the government says they cant but because they dont think they will get enough business to justify costs - look at how little money movies are making each week. Theaters dont foot that whole bill but they are losing money just the same. They are open. People just arent coming. It would be the exact same way with musicals and some concerts - although I think some bands draw a crowd who wouldnt care.

 

Businesses will also have to figure out how to function with massive amounts of employees out sick at a given time. Right now they cannot find subs for schools in my area and half the schools are virtual. Imagine the insane level of shortage there would be if all schools were in session with that many more staff having to miss time due exposure to covid.

 

That doesnt even begin to factor in the intense pressure this would put under and already overwhelmed medical field.

 

I completely understand where you are coming from and I feel just terrible for businesses right now, but simply put during a pandemic businesses are going to struggle with and without government restrictions on what we people can do. If you are a health official looking at the spread and looking at the lack of hospital beds and looking at how many people are not willing to do things as simple as wear masks and socially distance what would you propose?

[nate82]

Europe is already seeing riots over the lockdowns there if the US locksdown again you will see riots.

 

We are on a brink of another civil war and the continuation or remergence of lockdowns may be the spark that sets off the powder keg.

 

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

[PeaveyFury]

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

Can you provide studies that show this data from reputable sources? We'd all like to see the backing of this claim.

[tmwiese55]

Lockdown absolutely work in terms of limiting the spread. Its essentially what stopped all the initial outbreaks and the lifting of them which has led to the increases all over the world now. A disease spread by human interaction will slow spread if you massively reduce human interaction. It's the discussion on if there is better alternatives or hybrid type ways that are less harmful to the economy, mindsets, etc. But of course everyone has to be so extreme on it all.

 

The business failing aspect is exactly what the federal govt programs should be addressing, but of course they just continue to fight with each other.

[jjfanec]

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

Can you provide studies that show this data from reputable sources? We'd all like to see the backing of this claim.

 

Keep waiting. For people who need facts on how lockdowns work look at Australia. The federated state of Victoria where Melbourne is has been in a long lockdown - just ended yesterday actually. Melbourne alone is almost the same size as Wisconsin. They just posted a day with ZERO new cases! They have had 50 or less daily for almost two months. Wisconsin had 5,000 plus yesterday.

 

Lockdowns are not fun. Lockdowns have economic impacts. Lockdowns definitely slow the spread of covid. All three can be true

 

Here is an article on Melboure - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54654646

[jjfanec]

Lockdown absolutely work in terms of limiting the spread. Its essentially what stopped all the initial outbreaks and the lifting of them which has led to the increases all over the world now. A disease spread by human interaction will slow spread if you massively reduce human interaction. It's the discussion on if there is better alternatives or hybrid type ways that are less harmful to the economy, mindsets, etc. But of course everyone has to be so extreme on it all.

 

The business failing aspect is exactly what the federal govt programs should be addressing, but of course they just continue to fight with each other.

 

This post is so good. I couldnt agree more. I was going to bold what I really loved but honestly I would have just bolded it all.

[Machu Peach]

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

Can you provide studies that show this data from reputable sources? We'd all like to see the backing of this claim.

 

Keep waiting. For people who need facts on how lockdowns work look at Australia. The federated state of Victoria where Melbourne is has been in a long lockdown - just ended yesterday actually. Melbourne alone is almost the same size as Wisconsin. They just posted a day with ZERO new cases! They have had 50 or less daily for almost two months. Wisconsin had 5,000 plus yesterday.

An island nation entering its summer season on the other side of the world probably isn't a good comp for WI.

[nate82]

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

Can you provide studies that show this data from reputable sources? We'd all like to see the backing of this claim.

 

 

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1

https://gbdeclaration.org/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-failed-experiment-of-covid-lockdowns-11599000890

https://www.wsj.com/articles/public-health-experts-rethink-lockdowns-as-covid-cases-surge-11602514769

https://www.aier.org/article/experience-from-other-countries-show-lockdowns-dont-work/

 

There are more....

[jjfanec]

An island nation entering its summer season on the other side of the world probably isn't a good comp for WI.

 

I get no comparison works perfectly but the post was a reply to someone who said lockdowns dont work to stop the spread. Melbourne's numbers sure seem to show that lockdowns work. Maybe I should not have included the Wisconsin comparison

 

I have read most your posts and you seem to know a lot on the topic. A lot more than me.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

 

It is a false narrative to say opening things back up will automatically save businesses. After places were opened up this summer many still were struggling to see people come back.

 

No it isn't, but that's not what I said anyway. I said there are businesses that 100% are done if they are forced closed for 2 months again. That's just a fact. Mandates or not, yes some will fail, but others won't. You remove their fighting chance with a government-mandated closure. I can't stress this to you enough, as an employee of a F500 retailer, seeing brick and mortar sales fall to literal 0 overnight and stay there for weeks is crippling. It directly led to mass layoff. You can bandage bleeding and adapt to a reduced guidance, what you cannot do is handle a literal 0.

 

If you are a health official looking at the spread and looking at the lack of hospital beds and looking at how many people are not willing to do things as simple as wear masks and socially distance what would you propose?

 

This is exactly what I'm saying though. Without a VAST majority of voluntary participants, the measures are minimally effective at best. My point is continually being misconstrued into "people are dying and you would rather grab a burger," when my point is that people are dying regardless of getting the burger because they are finding another place to transmit. Publicly accepting death isn't a viable option for public leaders so they can't say it, they have to enact something or they aren't doing anything.

 

For the lockdown to work it had to be swift, forced, and early. Half-hearted stuff eight months too late is just a waste of time and, in my opinion, going to do a lot of harm for little to no benefit. Frankly, I think banning dining and such this late in the game is just kind of a joke. We're about to enter winter, which we have not dealt with at all in a Covid world. Millions of people are about to be home from work and school and hosting Covid superspreader parties.

[jjfanec]

 

It is a false narrative to say opening things back up will automatically save businesses. After places were opened up this summer many still were struggling to see people come back.

 

No it isn't, but that's not what I said anyway. I said there are businesses that 100% are done if they are forced closed for 2 months again. That's just a fact. Mandates or not, yes some will fail, but others won't. You remove their fighting chance with a government-mandated closure. I can't stress this to you enough, as an employee of a F500 retailer, seeing brick and mortar sales fall to literal 0 overnight and stay there for weeks is crippling. It directly led to mass layoff. You can bandage bleeding and adapt to a reduced guidance, what you cannot do is handle a literal 0.

 

If you are a health official looking at the spread and looking at the lack of hospital beds and looking at how many people are not willing to do things as simple as wear masks and socially distance what would you propose?

 

This is exactly what I'm saying though. Without a VAST majority of voluntary participants, the measures are minimally effective at best. My point is continually being misconstrued into "people are dying and you would rather grab a burger," when my point is that people are dying regardless of getting the burger because they are finding another place to transmit. Publicly accepting death isn't a viable option for public leaders so they can't say it, they have to enact something or they aren't doing anything.

 

For the lockdown to work it had to be swift, forced, and early. Half-hearted stuff eight months too late is just a waste of time and, in my opinion, going to do a lot of harm for little to no benefit. Frankly, I think banning dining and such this late in the game is just kind of a joke. We're about to enter winter, which we have not dealt with at all in a Covid world. Millions of people are about to be home from work and school and hosting Covid superspreader parties.

 

I get your tension. I dont think you are being heartless if you feel like you are getting that vibe from me. I dont have time to sort through all your past posts but would you simply let things stay open completely, be open with mandatory restrictions, have voluntary restrictions in place, or something else?

 

I think we had a pretty strict, not half-hearted lockdown in wisconsin pretty early on but that got lifted by our supreme court right? Or would have you deemed that unhelpful at that point?

[Machu Peach]

A couple things that could be helpful to keep in mind...

 

There's a difference between voluntary lockdowns and mandated lockdowns. Both have occurred.

 

Region to region comparisons are difficult. Straight up, single variable comparisons (such as comparing the effects of lockdowns between two countries or states while looking at no other variables) are mostly useless from a scientific point of view. A multivariable statistical analysis could be useful, but it's difficult to acquire a good enough data set to do so.

 

Confirmed case numbers are not a very good stat to use when comparing different regions or the same region during different time periods. Testing protocols are different everywhere and evolve over time. Mortality rate may be a better option.

 

It's very helpful to mention what geographical area one is talking about when they make statements about viral spread. I understand that most people here are from WI and therefore are going to be highly interested in discussing WI, but for the sake of clarity it would be helpful to add "in WI" or "in the US" somewhere in statements.

 

It's also usually not a good idea to question the motives of the person you're interacting with. The overwhelming majority of the humanity doesn't want people to die or businesses to close. Play the odds and assume you're interacting with a decent human being that has reached a different conclusion than you. ...and if it 'seems like' you're interacting with a dirtbag at least be open to the idea that you're misunderstanding their point.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Personally I don't think the mandates work because the people willing to have 8 beers at a pub right now are going to do that somewhere else as well as any other high-risk activity they feel like doing, and they will not be alone when they do so. I don't think they work because the people who take it seriously participate in far fewer high-risk activities. As you said yourself, the numbers at church and restaurants are down anyway.

 

It all just feels like "Duck & Cover" at this point. They can't say nothing. Even if they knew we were trying to stop tidal waves with paper plates, nobody is going to say that.

 

This thing is going run its course in the US. I just don't understand how anyone thinks closures and masks are still going to do a thing in this country. We are this far in and they haven't worked; you can argue until you're blue in the face that they work, and it's the people that don't, but my point is that it's the same outcome.

 

The lack of participation is an actual variable in the problem; it's not something you can just say "people are selfish" and toss aside. It's as real a problem as the virus and the plan forward has to take it into consideration.

[jjfanec]

A couple things that could be helpful to keep in mind...

 

There's a difference between voluntary lockdowns and mandated lockdowns. Both have occurred.

 

Region to region comparisons are difficult. Straight up, single variable comparisons (such as comparing the effects of lockdowns between two countries or states while looking at no other variables) are mostly useless from a scientific point of view. A multivariable statistical analysis could be useful, but it's difficult to acquire a good enough data set to do so.

 

Confirmed case numbers are not a very good stat to use when comparing different regions or the same region during different time periods. Testing protocols are different everywhere and evolve over time. Mortality rate may be a better option.

 

It's very helpful to mention what geographical area one is talking about when they make statements about viral spread. I understand that most people here are from WI and therefore are going to be highly interested in discussing WI, but for the sake of clarity it would be helpful to add "in WI" or "in the US" somewhere in statements.

 

It's also usually not a good idea to question the motives of the person you're interacting with. The overwhelming majority of the humanity doesn't want people to die or businesses to close. Play the odds and assume you're interacting with a decent human being that has reached a different conclusion than you. ...and if it 'seems like' you're interacting with a dirtbag at least be open to the idea that you're misunderstanding their point.

 

This are really good things for me to remember. After reading this I should probably go delete some of posts or at least edit them. Or else I will just keep them there and let people read your post and then mine and see the mistakes I have made!

[jjfanec]

Personally I don't think the mandates work because the people willing to have 8 beers at a pub right now are going to do that somewhere else as well as any other high-risk activity they feel like doing, and they will not be alone when they do so. I don't think they work because the people who take it seriously participate in far fewer high-risk activities. As you said yourself, the numbers at church and restaurants are down anyway.

 

It all just feels like "Duck & Cover" at this point. They can't say nothing. Even if they knew we were trying to stop tidal waves with paper plates, nobody is going to say that.

 

This thing is going run its course in the US. I just don't understand how anyone thinks closures and masks are still going to do a thing in this country. We are this far in and they haven't worked; you can argue until you're blue in the face that they work, and it's the people that don't, but my point is that it's the same outcome.

 

The lack of participation is an actual variable in the problem; it's not something you can just say "people are selfish" and toss aside. It's as real a problem as the virus and the plan forward has to take it into consideration.

 

Thanks for your thoughts. I think it is good to see where someone is coming from. I do think even people who may say lockdowns are good think covid will run it course. For some lockdowns make sense to slow the spread to ease the flow of people to hospitals. For some lockdown makes sense to slow the spread in order limit casualties until a vaccine is ready. For some a lockdown makes sense to limit the spread until we understand the virus better and what other steps we can take. For some mandatory lockdowns make sense because some people simply are not going to do something unless they have to, and while they might still gather with others it will vastly limit super-spreader events.

 

You can disagree with any or all of those reason but I dont think most people think lockdowns are good but the virus will just go away and we wont have to worry about it anymore

[homer]

A couple things that could be helpful to keep in mind...

 

There's a difference between voluntary lockdowns and mandated lockdowns. Both have occurred.

 

Region to region comparisons are difficult. Straight up, single variable comparisons (such as comparing the effects of lockdowns between two countries or states while looking at no other variables) are mostly useless from a scientific point of view. A multivariable statistical analysis could be useful, but it's difficult to acquire a good enough data set to do so.

 

Confirmed case numbers are not a very good stat to use when comparing different regions or the same region during different time periods. Testing protocols are different everywhere and evolve over time. Mortality rate may be a better option.

 

It's very helpful to mention what geographical area one is talking about when they make statements about viral spread. I understand that most people here are from WI and therefore are going to be highly interested in discussing WI, but for the sake of clarity it would be helpful to add "in WI" or "in the US" somewhere in statements.

 

It's also usually not a good idea to question the motives of the person you're interacting with. The overwhelming majority of the humanity doesn't want people to die or businesses to close. Play the odds and assume you're interacting with a decent human being that has reached a different conclusion than you. ...and if it 'seems like' you're interacting with a dirtbag at least be open to the idea that you're misunderstanding their point.

 

 

Great post. Thanks.

[PeaveyFury]

We also have evidence the lockdowns do not work and have not worked. The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

Can you provide studies that show this data from reputable sources? We'd all like to see the backing of this claim.

 

Sadly, these miss the mark:

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.20078717v1 -Published 5/1/2020. Things have changed a bit since then.

https://gbdeclaration.org/ - Impartial? A quick look at the backing org: "The declaration was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian, free-market think tank headquartered in western Massachusetts."

 

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-failed-experiment-of-covid-lockdowns-11599000890 Paywall

https://www.wsj.com/articles/public-health-experts-rethink-lockdowns-as-covid-cases-surge-11602514769 Paywall

https://www.aier.org/article/experience-from-other-countries-show-lockdowns-dont-work/- Again, impartial? It is a 501©(3) nonprofit[4] that partners with the Atlas Network and other Koch-funded think tanks."

 

 

There are more....

 

Hopefully either not behind a paywall (or directly linked to the backing data) or impartial/reputable?

[PeaveyFury]

It's also usually not a good idea to question the motives of the person you're interacting with. The overwhelming majority of the humanity doesn't want people to die or businesses to close. Play the odds and assume you're interacting with a decent human being that has reached a different conclusion than you. ...and if it 'seems like' you're interacting with a dirtbag at least be open to the idea that you're misunderstanding their point.

 

I think your point is valid, though perhaps an overly optimistic view of society as a whole. I'd agree wholeheartedly with your view if people had drawn a conclusion based on their own review of data and reputable sources. Sadly, I believe that views on this are largely derived from what 'their side' tells them to believe/think, and subsequently how to act, and is often based on inaccurate or blatantly misleading 'reporting' on social media, cable news channels du jour, etc.

 

I actually thing OSS has made one of the better arguments at this point that I've been presented with regarding the state of things- there's literally nothing we can do to prevent up to 45% of the population from acting in a risky, dangerous way. Are we better to just let them Darwin themselves at this point and open back up while those that take a different view duck and cover and try to avoid being collateral damage? You still have an ethical dilemma with those that have to work in the industries that can't allow people to themselves to be safe and have other people making that choice for them, but that's the only real counter-argument I have.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I think expecting someone to post a link proving lockdowns do or do not work is a bit of a fool's errand. I believe his claim is fair, there is evidence they don't work, and also evidence they do. There is evidence that obesity, weather and GDP are better indicators of what happens versus a lockdown. I'm not sure how you would gauge the effectiveness of them either with terrible tracing data, massive numbers of under-reported cases or people lying about their behavior.

 

It will probably be years until there is any kind of agreement as to how effective they were. Nearly everything we have right now is half a story, "i.e., cases dropped, but it was also 78 degrees" kind of thing.

 

We don't need a study to tell us that if everyone locks indoors for 1 month there is nowhere for a virus to go, but that's not how this unfolds in reality.

[PeaveyFury]

I think expecting someone to post a link proving lockdowns do or do not work is a bit of a fool's errand. I believe his claim is fair, there is evidence they don't work, and also evidence they do.

 

That's not what the claim was. A link was asked because of this direct quote:

The data points to the lockdowns as an absolute failure and should not be an option ever.

 

I think there's plenty of room for debate and it will certainly be a part of 'infectious disease 101' going forward, but to speak in such an absolute is just illustrative of the point I made in my previous post.