|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On June 21 2020 18:42 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2020 10:48 StalkerTL wrote:
With America gaining like 33,000 cases, have we given up on containing the coronavirus? It seems like we’re going for herd immunity if Trump’s statements at his rally are anything to go by. Best way to go, unless you want to cripple your economy by keeping borders shut until this thing is eliminated worldwide. Here in Australia they just announced no international travel until next year now.2021! Pretty huge.
The assumption that letting covid run rampant killing hundreds of thousands is somehow a "better way to go" for the economy than containing it to point where it's manageable is nothing less than utterly moronic. Currently borders are slowly partially reopening in areas that have succeeded in reducing the number of cases, so good luck to America to convince anyone to open up to them. And obviously the most economically damaging measures, that is full lockdowns, are only necessary in areas where leadership has failed to contain the outbreak through other means. The nations that have handled the pandemic best and have also come out the best economically are those where lockdowns weren't necessary in the first place.
Almost all Western countries missed that bus several times over, but America's currently decided that they're not going to even try to catch the next one and will make the journey on foot instead.
|
United States43960 Posts
Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words.
|
Yeah I don't get it.
Research at this point has shown that wearing masks in public(sick or not) can reduce the infection rate below 1 (eg. it'll slowly die out on it's own).
Trump will never do it because he's got the brain of a wilted pea, but if you look at the asian countries that have it under control - heavy mask usage, good contact tracing protocols, and they can reduce it to tens of cases per day. It isn't magic, it's fucking hard work and smart decisions.
I don't think there's any scenario where killing off a percentage point of the population, and crippling several times that for the rest of their lives isn't going to cause more economic damage than listening to experts.
|
On June 22 2020 03:57 KwarK wrote:
Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words.
Yeah, calling it a "strategy" makes no sense. Herd immunity is an inevitability when the disease can't be contained, and pretending that waiting for the inevitable is a strategy is silly.
Sadly, in Brazil, we failed on multiple fronts and I feel our war on corona is one we're steadily losing. Not only did our president avoid taking leadership, he actually went against what were the best known responses of social distancing, quarantine and extensive tracking of cases. The hope for a while was that the state governers would step up and lead, but the last 3-4 weeks have had state after state declaring the reopening of businesses despite infection numbers looking worse then they did when lockdowns started, and the brazillian population, especially among lower classes are increasingly ignoring the most basic precautions like avoiding crowds and wearing masks, partially because of lack of leadership, partially because of ignorance, partially because of considering it a "political" issue and not a sanitary one.
|
On June 22 2020 04:14 Amui wrote:
Yeah I don't get it.
Research at this point has shown that wearing masks in public(sick or not) can reduce the infection rate below 1 (eg. it'll slowly die out on it's own).
Trump will never do it because he's got the brain of a wilted pea, but if you look at the asian countries that have it under control - heavy mask usage, good contact tracing protocols, and they can reduce it to tens of cases per day. It isn't magic, it's fucking hard work and smart decisions.
I don't think there's any scenario where killing off a percentage point of the population, and crippling several times that for the rest of their lives isn't going to cause more economic damage than listening to experts.
I am going to reply to this in the US politics thread because of the politics ban in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
On June 22 2020 03:57 KwarK wrote:
Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words.
No it isn't. The mortality this virus is extremely different depending of age, preexisting conditions and gender. Also, the mortality spikes if the healthcare system is overloaded, which fortunately has not happened that many places, but I believe we all know where it happened after being spammed with info about it for months.
That full herd immunity does not happen until 60%+ does not mean that lower %s can be a huge help keeping it in check long term. Mutations is still a theoretical problem at this point.
The virus does seem less contagious than expected, but we will not know how advantageous more antibodies in the population is for a while.
And where does this craze about masks come from? They are NOT needed for beating the virus, and should be deleted from the undeserved top spot as an anti-corona measure. They are super powerful as a symbol, but demanding millions to wear them even outside and in areas with very little virus around is a gigantic waste of resources and restricting personal freedom imo.
|
United States43960 Posts
On June 22 2020 07:12 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2020 03:57 KwarK wrote:
Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words. No it isn't. The mortality this virus is extremely different depending of age, preexisting conditions and gender. Also, the mortality spikes if the healthcare system is overloaded, which fortunately has not happened that many places, but I believe we all know where it happened after being spammed with info about it for months. That full herd immunity does not happen until 60%+ does not mean that lower %s can be a huge help keeping it in check long term. Mutations is still a theoretical problem at this point. The virus does seem less contagious than expected, but we will not know how advantageous more antibodies in the population is for a while. And where does this craze about masks come from? They are NOT needed for beating the virus, and should be deleted from the undeserved top spot as an anti-corona measure. They are super powerful as a symbol, but demanding millions to wear them even outside and in areas with very little virus around is a gigantic waste of resources and restricting personal freedom imo.
Herd immunity (assuming no vaccine) is achieved by letting people get sick. They either recover and have antibodies or they die. That’s what the herd immunity strategy means. It means people will stop dying once all the people who will die have died. Based on your response I honestly don’t think you understand what herd immunity means here. How do you think the herd becomes immune without first catching it?
|
On June 22 2020 07:12 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2020 03:57 KwarK wrote:
Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words. And where does this craze about masks come from? They are NOT needed for beating the virus, and should be deleted from the undeserved top spot as an anti-corona measure. They are super powerful as a symbol, but demanding millions to wear them even outside and in areas with very little virus around is a gigantic waste of resources and restricting personal freedom imo.
The "craze" comes from the effectiveness of masks in reducing transmission. I'm no expert, so I'm happy enough following the scientific consensus on this, but it seems to be insufficient for you. A cursory glance at google points to studies at respectable jornals converging on this point, so here you go.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.2020.0376
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext#
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6923e4.htm
|
Lalalaland34503 Posts
On June 22 2020 07:12 Slydie wrote:
And where does this craze about masks come from? They are NOT needed for beating the virus, and should be deleted from the undeserved top spot as an anti-corona measure. They are super powerful as a symbol, but demanding millions to wear them even outside and in areas with very little virus around is a gigantic waste of resources and restricting personal freedom imo.
I'm just gonna focus on this part of your post. Could you explain to me how masks are a gigantic waste of resources or a significant restriction of personal freedom?
My opinion is that if masks reduce the risk of spread even a small amount, the people who now do not catch covid who would've caught it if not for the mask can continue to work and contribute to the economy, without draining healthcare resources. All for the cost of a mask.
|
|
|
Reminder that Japan can not legally enforce a lockdown and has had one of the worst and weak responses to coronavirus. The government there has adopted a policy that object permanence is not a thing, they’re not really testing and haven’t ramped up testing either.
They’re doing better than the vast majority of Western country simply because a large majority of people wear masks. That’s the only reason, their demographics are old, they have high smoking rates, population density is high and their cities have some of the most heavily used public transport routes.
|
Northern Ireland26734 Posts
On June 22 2020 10:14 StalkerTL wrote:
Reminder that Japan can not legally enforce a lockdown and has had one of the worst and weak responses to coronavirus. The government there has adopted a policy that object permanence is not a thing, they’re not really testing and haven’t ramped up testing either.
They’re doing better than the vast majority of Western country simply because a large majority of people wear masks. That’s the only reason, their demographics are old, they have high smoking rates, population density is high and their cities have some of the most heavily used public transport routes.
Yeah Japan is a weird outlier in terms of their response and risk factors vs the impact and really the only factor that seems to potentially explain that is the cultural happiness to wear masks that was established way before this pandemic.
|
United States43960 Posts
On June 22 2020 10:20 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2020 10:14 StalkerTL wrote:
Reminder that Japan can not legally enforce a lockdown and has had one of the worst and weak responses to coronavirus. The government there has adopted a policy that object permanence is not a thing, they’re not really testing and haven’t ramped up testing either.
They’re doing better than the vast majority of Western country simply because a large majority of people wear masks. That’s the only reason, their demographics are old, they have high smoking rates, population density is high and their cities have some of the most heavily used public transport routes. Yeah Japan is a weird outlier in terms of their response and risk factors vs the impact and really the only factor that seems to potentially explain that is the cultural happiness to wear masks that was established way before this pandemic.
Multigeneral homes too, as opposed to cramming all the old people together. That’s got to make a big difference with morality rates.
|
On June 21 2020 12:57 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2020 11:53 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Did you stop counting deaths, or does the increase in new cases merely reflect increased testing? (I ask because cases was equally high for all of April, but the two week later stats for deaths is like 3x higher than it is now. )
So does the current increase in cases indicate that you're gonna go back to 2k+ deaths daily (from between 1000 and 350 for the past two weeks) or not? Overall testing has increased but the positive test rate has also been increasing over the past week which means that the cases are increasing faster than the testing in the us. Things are especially bad in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and California. Deaths from covid are still declining in the US for now, but given that deaths lag cases it's plausible that deaths might start trending upwards again. Most of the models seem to think that deaths will stay at the current rate, or slightly decline over the next few weeks though. The fatality rate is also lower now than it was earlier in the pandemic which likely means that it's mostly hitting younger people. So it's still a mixed bag of results, but the increase in cases over the past week has given a lot of reasons to be pessimistic for the future
I think the idea that deaths from COVID are declining is still up for debate, you would need to look at "excess deaths" to verify that. Excess death can be defined by looking at the delta between the "normal" number of deaths (average over 5 -10 years prior) during a certain time of the year with this year. There are many cases where theses excess deaths are not attributed to COVID but should be. (you can look at the number of deaths in NY where it was 19k but the excess deaths for the same period was 25k i think... i need to verify the numbers). This means that there are 6k unaccounted deaths which are probably related to COVID.
Many states have been botching their stats purposefully in order to open up more quickly. Florida is a prime example where the data scientist was fire because she didn't want to play with the numbers. This is where excess deaths is important. This also happened in Canada (looking at Alberta, British Colombia, Ontario and Quebec). It's bound to happen everywhere.
Although I agree with you with the fatality rate seems lower (based on the numbers that are given to us by the government), I would invite you to read this thread on twitter : https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1274129960710610945.html . I think it will help people see many aspect of the spread and so on. I had a thread specifically for the problem in the states but I can't seem to find it right now.
Also, for those of you that take CDC as a golden source, you should think twice. I would invite you to read this twitter thread: (am I allowed to put links like this?). It will explain some fundamental flaws and why the CDC cannot get good representation from states/counties.
|
On June 22 2020 02:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2020 18:42 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On June 21 2020 10:48 StalkerTL wrote:
With America gaining like 33,000 cases, have we given up on containing the coronavirus? It seems like we’re going for herd immunity if Trump’s statements at his rally are anything to go by. Best way to go, unless you want to cripple your economy by keeping borders shut until this thing is eliminated worldwide. Here in Australia they just announced no international travel until next year now.2021! Pretty huge. The assumption that letting covid run rampant killing hundreds of thousands is somehow a "better way to go" for the economy than containing it to point where it's manageable is nothing less than utterly moronic.
What are you basing that opinion on? Look at the % of deaths that happen to people 65+ years of age or % of deaths of people in nursing homes. If you're in a nursing home or retired you're by definition not providing as much to the economy as you are using in resources. I would not say it's moronic to think that more people working + less people collecting social security is better for the economy than less people working + more people collecting social security.
Disclaimer for any hyper-sensitive folks - I'm not talking about the ethics of letting granny die, I'm strictly talking about what's better for the economy.
|
About the masks... well, it is difficult! All the studies only tell us, that viruses will be blocked by masks! That is basically a no brainer!
The question is: are small aerosols infectious, that you even need that? And researchers all over the world are not sure about this for decades! (talking influenza, rhinovirus,... - yes this corona19 is a different virus, but if people are not sure about well researched viruses, you can't take those "fast forward" studies as "everything there is") Many researchers think that contact is more important than "air". I have to check, when I'm at home, there was a researcher that basically said, that kissing is probably less infectious than shaking hands...
So the chances if two persons - one with covid, one without, both without masks - are crossing paths while walking down the streets, chances are very high ... that nothing happens! It changes if you there would be some festival, where you have to press through the crowds (I never was in Japan, but because it was mentioned: I often see pictures, where there are A LOT of people on the streets on a normal day! so maybe we have something like that there...). Also if you are indoors! Or if you not ust walk about but do something together like singing or similar, where there are more droplets!
So where does the mask get us? I don't really know! For all there is hate to give: I don't wear masks if I just go for a walk, because I don't think it is in any way helpful there! I live basically quite "rural", so take that as it is!
|
On June 22 2020 15:48 Freaky[x] wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2020 12:57 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On June 21 2020 11:53 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Did you stop counting deaths, or does the increase in new cases merely reflect increased testing? (I ask because cases was equally high for all of April, but the two week later stats for deaths is like 3x higher than it is now. )
So does the current increase in cases indicate that you're gonna go back to 2k+ deaths daily (from between 1000 and 350 for the past two weeks) or not? Overall testing has increased but the positive test rate has also been increasing over the past week which means that the cases are increasing faster than the testing in the us. Things are especially bad in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and California. https://twitter.com/Crimealytics/status/1274383282080268288Deaths from covid are still declining in the US for now, but given that deaths lag cases it's plausible that deaths might start trending upwards again. Most of the models seem to think that deaths will stay at the current rate, or slightly decline over the next few weeks though. The fatality rate is also lower now than it was earlier in the pandemic which likely means that it's mostly hitting younger people. So it's still a mixed bag of results, but the increase in cases over the past week has given a lot of reasons to be pessimistic for the future I think the idea that deaths from COVID are declining is still up for debate, you would need to look at "excess deaths" to verify that. Excess death can be defined by looking at the delta between the "normal" number of deaths (average over 5 -10 years prior) during a certain time of the year with this year. There are many cases where theses excess deaths are not attributed to COVID but should be. (you can look at the number of deaths in NY where it was 19k but the excess deaths for the same period was 25k i think... i need to verify the numbers). This means that there are 6k unaccounted deaths which are probably related to COVID. Many states have been botching their stats purposefully in order to open up more quickly. Florida is a prime example where the data scientist was fire because she didn't want to play with the numbers. This is where excess deaths is important. This also happened in Canada (looking at Alberta, British Colombia, Ontario and Quebec). It's bound to happen everywhere. Although I agree with you with the fatality rate seems lower (based on the numbers that are given to us by the government), I would invite you to read this thread on twitter : https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1274129960710610945.html . I think it will help people see many aspect of the spread and so on. I had a thread specifically for the problem in the states but I can't seem to find it right now. Also, for those of you that take CDC as a golden source, you should think twice. I would invite you to read this twitter thread: + Show Spoiler +https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1274873331196596224 (am I allowed to put links like this?). It will explain some fundamental flaws and why the CDC cannot get good representation from states/counties.
I really dislike all the hate directed at Florida for a stellar data operation, viewed against other states. But since it's been repeated a few times, here's the full story (citing the emails and publicly available information):
It's a workplace story in tense times that resulted in data being delayed in release by a few hours. A delay before release for technical reasons is not widespread falsification, and it never was.
So keep on looking at Florida data and breakdowns. They're one of the best and most useful states around in terms of communicating it to the public.
I expected a bump as things go back to normal. One data point that's hard to quantify is the amount of people delaying non-critical hospital surgeries/tests/outpatient that are usually tested as part of it. Younger, likely more asymptomatic, likely not the type to normally get tested. It's hard to see the testing rates as a function of which age groups were more tested that week (trend is about a week old). The heavily tested people people are old, conditions, workers with vulnerable groups ... and the spike in younger people look like the asymptomatic people are finally part of the full data board.
|
On June 22 2020 19:41 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2020 02:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On June 21 2020 18:42 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On June 21 2020 10:48 StalkerTL wrote:
With America gaining like 33,000 cases, have we given up on containing the coronavirus? It seems like we’re going for herd immunity if Trump’s statements at his rally are anything to go by. Best way to go, unless you want to cripple your economy by keeping borders shut until this thing is eliminated worldwide. Here in Australia they just announced no international travel until next year now.2021! Pretty huge. The assumption that letting covid run rampant killing hundreds of thousands is somehow a "better way to go" for the economy than containing it to point where it's manageable is nothing less than utterly moronic. What are you basing that opinion on? Look at the % of deaths that happen to people 65+ years of age or % of deaths of people in nursing homes. If you're in a nursing home or retired you're by definition not providing as much to the economy as you are using in resources. I would not say it's moronic to think that more people working + less people collecting social security is better for the economy than less people working + more people collecting social security. Disclaimer for any hyper-sensitive folks - I'm not talking about the ethics of letting granny die, I'm strictly talking about what's better for the economy.
There's a lot of middle-ground between locking everything down (which has the most negative economic impact) and doing nothing. Mask wearing is the perfect example of a measure that has little to no economic impact, but potentially a big benefit in curbing the spread. Take Hong Kong which only partially locked down in the first place and used various other measures to halt the spread. There's talks of travel bubbles and other economically beneficial activity there. For a country like the US stuff like that is an impossibility for months or years to come. The shorter the outbreak, the shorter the path to economic recovery. Additionally there's still the ~20% of deaths that come from people under the age of 65 who do provide value to the economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
