|
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 August 18 2020 02:18 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 02:08 Danglars wrote:
The intolerance of other risk/reward calculations sounds like the pandemic has revealed some surprising attitudes towards sharing a country with people that think differently than them. It's kind of declaring that "My plan" (cLutZ might say absence of a plan) "is the correct risk/reward to approach the pandemic, and other plans are made by ignorant people using difference of values as an excuse to kill and sicken people for their personal convenience."
They ironically should be more accepting of the other extreme, which might be characterized, "People in favor of massive, indefinite lockdowns ignore the science or are generally ignorant of the science, and prioritize a false sense of causing near-zero risk. They would see children, businesses, economies, and national unity die before yielding an inch on their safety neuroses."
This is one of the reasons why I'm glad the American response to COVID-19 is comprised of 50 separate state responses. One state where the fearmongers hold supreme can compare their results to laissez-faire states in deaths/100k and closed businesses/suicides/emigration. Why? Who’s pushing indefinite lockdown? Transitioning from lockdown to pseudo-normality with mask wearing seems to be the order of the day. You do that you can re-open things with far less risk no?
Not really. You basically are describing what Illinois tried to do, and instead the politicians largely freaked out at rising case numbers and shifted back to an earlier phase. Corona is like water, it finds its level for the given populace. Masks slow it from getting there as quickly, but it still seems to find its level unless you do permanent lockdown. This is one, of many, reasons I continue to accuse people of not having a plan. Transition from lockdown has consistently been followed by large spikes in infections which continue until the cases start to kind of naturally taper off. The only exception is if you had huge infections before lockdown as in Italy or NYC.
|
My work announced on friday that they have no plans to stop WFH until a vaccine is available
|
On August 18 2020 03:43 Nevuk wrote:
My work announced on friday that they have no plans to stop WFH until a vaccine is available
Congratulations!
|
United States43989 Posts
On August 18 2020 03:25 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 02:18 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 18 2020 02:08 Danglars wrote:
The intolerance of other risk/reward calculations sounds like the pandemic has revealed some surprising attitudes towards sharing a country with people that think differently than them. It's kind of declaring that "My plan" (cLutZ might say absence of a plan) "is the correct risk/reward to approach the pandemic, and other plans are made by ignorant people using difference of values as an excuse to kill and sicken people for their personal convenience."
They ironically should be more accepting of the other extreme, which might be characterized, "People in favor of massive, indefinite lockdowns ignore the science or are generally ignorant of the science, and prioritize a false sense of causing near-zero risk. They would see children, businesses, economies, and national unity die before yielding an inch on their safety neuroses."
This is one of the reasons why I'm glad the American response to COVID-19 is comprised of 50 separate state responses. One state where the fearmongers hold supreme can compare their results to laissez-faire states in deaths/100k and closed businesses/suicides/emigration. Why? Who’s pushing indefinite lockdown? Transitioning from lockdown to pseudo-normality with mask wearing seems to be the order of the day. You do that you can re-open things with far less risk no? Not really. You basically are describing what Illinois tried to do, and instead the politicians largely freaked out at rising case numbers and shifted back to an earlier phase. Corona is like water, it finds its level for the given populace. Masks slow it from getting there as quickly, but it still seems to find its level unless you do permanent lockdown. This is one, of many, reasons I continue to accuse people of not having a plan. Transition from lockdown has consistently been followed by large spikes in infections which continue until the cases start to kind of naturally taper off. The only exception is if you had huge infections before lockdown as in Italy or NYC.
This assumption is valid only in cases where track and trace fails which is, unfortunately, almost everywhere because people aren’t good at complying with it and the infrastructure is insufficient to pursue it.
Ideally we would be able to follow a positive test with an alert to quarantine on the smartphones of people who had come into contact with the positive person in the past few days, protected job status while paid to stay home by the gov, a scheduled test within a day and a result on that test within hours. If positive, repeat, if negative, back to work etc.
But the app to trace contact isn’t used, contacting people is impossible with current data collection, getting tested is very hard, getting employee accommodations without a positive test already is hard, getting compliance without financial assistance is unlikely, and the test results take so long that people expose others before they know about their positive so containment becomes simply following the course of the snowball.
It sucks because we both know how to do this and have the means but as a society we’re still failing.
What annoys me more though is the failures in education. As far as I know despite months of time to put something together there is still no centrally issued home school toolkit. It’s baffling because it seems such an easy thing to do. Get some people who have experience producing YouTube videos, get some experienced kids teachers, get some writers from kids tv shows, and have the teachers tell the writers what should be in the lessons, the writers put it in a more engaging format, and the YouTube producers get it filmed in a way that gets eyeballs. Couple the 30 minute lessons with printouts and worksheets etc. Have some group work bits so kids can talk with their friends about it or whatever. Have some challenges on the app that test knowledge of the material. Send free devices with it saved on to low income families. Send the printouts plus pens or whatever to low income families. Offer it at public libraries. Have it work offline once installed.
I feel like the entire project could have been done in a month for a negligible fraction of education spending but that we’re only now considering how to keep kids learning during a pandemic after 7 months. It’s bizarrely incompetent. It wouldn’t need to be perfect, just something. Hell, paying Duolingo to give everyone a free subscription to Spanish classes so at least that could continue would be closer to a plan than what we have.
|
On August 18 2020 03:43 Nevuk wrote:
My work announced on friday that they have no plans to stop WFH until a vaccine is available
Nice.
For my company (global), CEO has said in general, everyone at the company should wfh til next year, and this will be re-evaluated as conditions change. The head of Canada has said at an all-hands that the "unofficial" line is that we should all expect to wfh til a vaccine is available, and widely deployed. Even then, we'd likely still be primarily WFH as the pandemic has shown there are serious benefits to doing so, If you're immunocompromised, it's indefinite WFH from here on out if you want.
|
On August 18 2020 02:59 BigFan wrote:
Maybe I haven't been paying attention to other countries, but up here in Canada, my province has been reducing cases pretty well and we've already transitioned into a stage where dine-in restaurants are open again at 50% occupancy. Stores are open and things are just opening up overall. You don't have to wear a mask outside, but are expected to if you use public transit or if you go into a store though I haven't seen many forceful interactions in either. People are generally respectful of wearing a mask though some will not cover their nose as a form of rebellion I presume.
The real question will be what happens when schools open up? People aren't happy with the current school reopening plans so we'll see how things progress from there.
Ontario I'm guessing?
Overall we've done well. I am pretty worried about schools reopening since kids spread germs like crazy, and my mom is a teacher 3 months away from retiring. Luckily she can teach online for some reason, I think maybe just because she's in a vulnerable group. Kids themselves don't seem to get affected by COVID much at all, but it will lead to the disease getting spread every which way. Hopefully they can do a trial run while keeping most kids at home until we get data on how dangerous it's going to be.
I think it's going to be a shitshow and we'll see a huge spike and then DoFo will be like "who knew viruses could be this complicated?"
|
|
|
|
|
On August 18 2020 04:08 KwarK wrote:
It sucks because we both know how to do this and have the means but as a society we’re still failing.
I think this is part of my disagreement. I think people think they know how to do it, but they really don't because they aren't actually confronting the real world situation wherein there are lots of Americans that are generally antisocially inclined whether or not there is a pandemic. And maybe there is this nice way on paper to track and trace, in reality you are probably going to have to use mass incarceration to get the gains you think you would be getting.
On August 18 2020 05:40 JimmiC wrote:
I am not a "lock down leaning person" sounds like a made up position to rally against. Lock downs suck for everyone.
My issue is there is a large portion of the population, even more so in the states, that whats "freedom" without responsibility. With some missing that with more freedom comes more responsibility (or spiderman for that matter). Like when you got your first car was your dad or mom like, go have fun don't worry about the safety rules?
The people against masks are also against social distancing and they are also the group that is most likely to refuse a vaccine.
The reality is they do not value freedom, they value themselves over the betterment of the whole group. In layman's terms they are very selfish.
If you would rather not wear a mask because it is slightly uncomfortable rather than not kill someones grandparent or brother or sister with Asthma, or the cases of people that have long term issues but don't die with no preexisting conditions. (I just finished reading about a 26 year old MMA guy and personal trainer, who was in ICE for months and now may have lifelong lung issues).
Any risk reward analysis that says I value my own comfort (no mask) or want to be within 6 feet of people (minor inconvenience in almost every situation), then killing, and maiming many. Is not my type of person.
And to the wonderful Sweden examples, you don't have to make laws, fines, and so on if people follow the best practices on their own. Sadly this seems impossible for a large group of American's and sadly also for smaller but still too big a group of Canadians.
The reason there is speed limits, seat-belt laws, distracted driving, impaired driving and so on rules is because to many people won't do it without them. Same thing is happening here. There is just some weird logical in-congruence by the folks that don't want rules imposed but also are not willing to do the suggested rules without them. It annoys people like me that we have to make these rules, and suffer the costs and pain in the ass because there is so many selfish people who cant' figure it out.
I think this framing as selfishness is wrong. Its antisociality. Which is basically the mindset behind criminality. There are many people for whom long term thinking and impulse control are very unnatural. Mostly this is not a static thing, people usually age out of this bracket. Now what happens in America (and a lot of internet stuff becomes overly Amero-centric) is this is basically a lot of the lockdown/open up divide on Covid where one side keep pretending this is a solvable problem (but the plan is always vague and utopian, whence me saying "they have no plan") while the other wants to make rules knowing that this cohort exists.
|
On August 18 2020 04:08 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 03:25 cLutZ wrote:On August 18 2020 02:18 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 18 2020 02:08 Danglars wrote:
The intolerance of other risk/reward calculations sounds like the pandemic has revealed some surprising attitudes towards sharing a country with people that think differently than them. It's kind of declaring that "My plan" (cLutZ might say absence of a plan) "is the correct risk/reward to approach the pandemic, and other plans are made by ignorant people using difference of values as an excuse to kill and sicken people for their personal convenience."
They ironically should be more accepting of the other extreme, which might be characterized, "People in favor of massive, indefinite lockdowns ignore the science or are generally ignorant of the science, and prioritize a false sense of causing near-zero risk. They would see children, businesses, economies, and national unity die before yielding an inch on their safety neuroses."
This is one of the reasons why I'm glad the American response to COVID-19 is comprised of 50 separate state responses. One state where the fearmongers hold supreme can compare their results to laissez-faire states in deaths/100k and closed businesses/suicides/emigration. Why? Who’s pushing indefinite lockdown? Transitioning from lockdown to pseudo-normality with mask wearing seems to be the order of the day. You do that you can re-open things with far less risk no? Not really. You basically are describing what Illinois tried to do, and instead the politicians largely freaked out at rising case numbers and shifted back to an earlier phase. Corona is like water, it finds its level for the given populace. Masks slow it from getting there as quickly, but it still seems to find its level unless you do permanent lockdown. This is one, of many, reasons I continue to accuse people of not having a plan. Transition from lockdown has consistently been followed by large spikes in infections which continue until the cases start to kind of naturally taper off. The only exception is if you had huge infections before lockdown as in Italy or NYC. This assumption is valid only in cases where track and trace fails which is, unfortunately, almost everywhere because people aren’t good at complying with it and the infrastructure is insufficient to pursue it. Ideally we would be able to follow a positive test with an alert to quarantine on the smartphones of people who had come into contact with the positive person in the past few days, protected job status while paid to stay home by the gov, a scheduled test within a day and a result on that test within hours. If positive, repeat, if negative, back to work etc. But the app to trace contact isn’t used, contacting people is impossible with current data collection, getting tested is very hard, getting employee accommodations without a positive test already is hard, getting compliance without financial assistance is unlikely, and the test results take so long that people expose others before they know about their positive so containment becomes simply following the course of the snowball. It sucks because we both know how to do this and have the means but as a society we’re still failing. What annoys me more though is the failures in education. As far as I know despite months of time to put something together there is still no centrally issued home school toolkit. It’s baffling because it seems such an easy thing to do. Get some people who have experience producing YouTube videos, get some experienced kids teachers, get some writers from kids tv shows, and have the teachers tell the writers what should be in the lessons, the writers put it in a more engaging format, and the YouTube producers get it filmed in a way that gets eyeballs. Couple the 30 minute lessons with printouts and worksheets etc. Have some group work bits so kids can talk with their friends about it or whatever. Have some challenges on the app that test knowledge of the material. Send free devices with it saved on to low income families. Send the printouts plus pens or whatever to low income families. Offer it at public libraries. Have it work offline once installed. I feel like the entire project could have been done in a month for a negligible fraction of education spending but that we’re only now considering how to keep kids learning during a pandemic after 7 months. It’s bizarrely incompetent. It wouldn’t need to be perfect, just something. Hell, paying Duolingo to give everyone a free subscription to Spanish classes so at least that could continue would be closer to a plan than what we have.
My impression has been that we are scared as a nation of making significant changes to systemic problems COVID-19 has exposed.
We've known for decades we need smaller class sizes, remote learning options, building renovations, more staffing, more funding, etc. The issue as I've seen it is a fear that making these sorts of changes to accommodate corona concerns could result in people expecting them to be permanent.
People end up somewhat cornered into making the argument that the US is reasonably (perhaps laudably) incapable of joining the developed world in the 21st century when it comes to this stuff.
|
What are you on about? Are Americans somehow that much dumber than the rest of the world that you'll need to lock them up to obey the rules? Somehow every other country that imposed restrictions didn't use more coercion than fines.
|
|
|
On August 18 2020 06:23 maybenexttime wrote:
What are you on about? Are Americans somehow that much dumber than the rest of the world that you'll need to lock them up to obey the rules? Somehow every other country that imposed restrictions didn't use more coercion than fines.
Have people not been watching American TV coverage? People were marching in the streets with mixed to low mask usage in thousands when there was a a state order against outdoor gatherings of less than 1% that size. But no governor or mayor or county wants to be seen impoverishing through fines or locking up large populations, and in some places, significant minority populations.
I wager people in this very thread have seen the same with gun laws. Stiff fines and sentences, yet major problems persist and they’re still used in crimes. I wouldn’t have thought there was a large leap in logic between civil disobedience of current laws with new orders regarding pandemics. But apparently, everybody demands that the solution on paper work just as well as the solution in practice.
I argue once governors and mayors marched and created special exemptions, the country gained a second tack-on effect: our local and state government are acting like this isn’t a major problem (aka social justice rallies don’t have to wait its turn), so screw your gathering restrictions. You don’t regain the trust surrendered in the first months of arbitrary and capricious restrictions and exemptions. The game is up at this point, and the pandemic is officially over in deed if not word. America has a de-facto burn through in most states for the disobedient population, and a slower burn-through for the toggled restrictions states (with sometimes adequate protections on nursing homes and elderly).
|
On August 18 2020 06:23 maybenexttime wrote:
What are you on about? Are Americans somehow that much dumber than the rest of the world that you'll need to lock them up to obey the rules? Somehow every other country that imposed restrictions didn't use more coercion than fines.
Every major country that didn't have a huge early swell that opens up ends up having a big ole wave. Australia, Korea, etc. The list of countries that "did it right" shrinks every week.
Would I argue demographically the US is in worse position than most other modernized nations? For sure, black and hispanic populations appear to have higher transmission rates. America in general has a higher crime rate.
|
In my experience, framing it as selfishness is perfectly apt. I understand 'conservative' (read - change-averse) people having a reaction along the lines of 'I shouldn't have to do this, this change is stupid, look at XYZ reason I shouldn't have to wear a mask!' But ultimately these people need to recognize that their aversion to a percieved loss of control is their problem, and not one that should negatively impact others. You don't wear a mask to protect yourself, you wear it to protect the rest of the world.
'I don't want to wear a mask' is unacceptable to me. It's like 'I don't want to obey traffic signs' or a kid throwing a tantrum because they didn't get what they want. You're not that important - wear a fucking mask.
(This message brought to you by someone working in retail  )
|
I actually don't want to follow traffic signs (lights in general) because more often than not they slow me down unnecessarily. Also, I travel by bike.
|
|
|
On August 18 2020 07:29 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 06:56 cLutZ wrote:On August 18 2020 06:23 maybenexttime wrote:
What are you on about? Are Americans somehow that much dumber than the rest of the world that you'll need to lock them up to obey the rules? Somehow every other country that imposed restrictions didn't use more coercion than fines. Every major country that didn't have a huge early swell that opens up ends up having a big ole wave. Australia, Korea, etc. The list of countries that "did it right" shrinks every week. Would I argue demographically the US is in worse position than most other modernized nations? For sure, black and hispanic populations appear to have higher transmission rates. America in general has a higher crime rate. I bet that if you look at it more deeply it is going to be more socioeconomic than by race. It almost every time is. People fear of US hospitals not to mention the needing to work and often in high risk jobs all makes sense. Same thing holds true with crime rates.
No it does not hold true with crime rates. That you think that it does means you need to pause and re-evaluate the media you get social science from.
|
|
|
Adjusted for income, blacks have higher crime rates than whites who have higher crime rates than asians. Hispanics are do not have their own category in the FBI data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
