Coronavirus pandemic

[SSOWorld]

Cases still being reported - how is the curve flat?

[hotdogPi]

Cases still being reported - how is the curve flat?

Flat means that the number of cases per day is remaining constant, and then it starts to decrease after that.

[NWI_Irish96]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths. 

[hotdogPi]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths.

That's not how I see it. What is basically happening is that every day, new cases multiply by 0.97 (example; unsure of exact number) under current conditions and 1.1 with only partial closure (or partial reopening – looking at you, Brian Kemp), but with a 14-day delay. As soon as a stay-in-place order is enacted, that should move the peak to one delay period after the executive order.

[Brandon]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths. 

Maybe, maybe not.  In some ways, and I hate to say it, it seems like just kicking the can down the road.  Either spike with x number of deaths early on or have x number of deaths over time.  Did I mention that x is a constant?

To play devil's advocate here, is this really worth it?

[bandit957]

Cases still being reported - how is the curve flat?

Pretty much every state had a big backlog of cases that was released a few days ago. California actually just released about 3,000 new cases from weeks ago.

[Alps]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths. 

Maybe, maybe not.  In some ways, and I hate to say it, it seems like just kicking the can down the road.  Either spike with x number of deaths early on or have x number of deaths over time.  Did I mention that x is a constant?

To play devil's advocate here, is this really worth it?

You're missing the fact that if you spread out X number of cases (not deaths), hospitals are better equipped to handle it and potentially lower the number of deaths.

[hotdogPi]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths. 

Maybe, maybe not.  In some ways, and I hate to say it, it seems like just kicking the can down the road.  Either spike with x number of deaths early on or have x number of deaths over time.  Did I mention that x is a constant?

To play devil's advocate here, is this really worth it?

x is not a constant. If you're going for herd immunity (as Sweden and the Netherlands are), the number of cases is a constant, but too many at once and the hospitals get overwhelmed, leading to a higher death rate. Compare Sweden with Norway; Norway matches most of the rest of the world regarding strategy, unlike Sweden.

There is an R0 value for any virus that indicates the average number of people each infected person will spread the virus to. (This refers back to my prior post, except it's per virus life cycle instead of per day). If R0 is more than 1, the virus will spread more. If R0 is less than 1, it will spread less and less with each cycle. Estimated values are 2.2-2.7 with life as usual and 0.9 with current conditions, but it also depends on population density.

If 20% of the population is immune (using 20% as an example number), R0 will be reduced by 20%. This is what herd immunity does. However, you can see that 20% is not high enough to get R0 below 1 with no social distancing.

[Max Rockatansky]

Has anyone who's been replying to this topic actually been tested or suspected they caught COVID-19?  I'm fairly certain at this point I caught the virus in late December/early January but that's probably something I'll never have the chance to actually prove. 

I was tested on March 27th after exhibiting symptoms for over a week (shortness of breath, fever, chills).  The test came back negative.

We've had a couple family members tested here in California and at least one in Michigan.  I'm to understand the swabbing process is quite the "experience" .

[Bruce]

Washington was on track to be able to ease out of our restrictions within a month or two, so long as the status quo of social distancing was maintained and upheld. Luckily, the vast majority of people have been doing so, but the hundred or so protesting in Olympia will inevitably cause it to spread and prolong the stay-home order. Because of a few nutjobs who think selfishly and consider themselves experts without being able to read anything longer than a Facebook post, we may be stuck for much longer.

This is what decades of dismantled education and anti-intellectualism gets us. Land of the Free, Home of the Braindead.

[Max Rockatansky]

Washington was on track to be able to ease out of our restrictions within a month or two, so long as the status quo of social distancing was maintained and upheld. Luckily, the vast majority of people have been doing so, but the hundred or so protesting in Olympia will inevitably cause it to spread and prolong the stay-home order. Because of a few nutjobs who think selfishly and consider themselves experts without being able to read anything longer than a Facebook post, we may be stuck for much longer.

This is what decades of dismantled education and anti-intellectualism gets us. Land of the Free, Home of the Braindead.

Anti-intellectualism?...I don't see that as much of a major thing anymore.  Maybe twenty years ago being intelligent or being something of a thinker (god help you if you were a kid with a computer in the 1980s) would make one  a social pariah.  I would chalk most of what you see in the news as just the same stupid people who are always running around doing things of the like all the times .  I don't know what anyone is surprised to see the same crowd freaking out again over something like a lock down.

[SEWIGuy]

Am I the only person who is terrified to even go into a store or a business now?

I don't know about that, but I'm not terrified. The likelihood that any one person you may encounter has the virus is extremely low, and the odds are that you will catch it from an encounter with them are even lower.

As for the protestors, I am firmly on their side. To me, it's not an issue of the economy, although I understand that people need to be able to work and pay their bills. To me, it's about freedom. How many constitutional rights have been cast aside because people are scared of getting sick? In Kentucky, three of the First Amendment freedoms have been violated -- freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and with the governor's decree banishing protestors to staying in their cars on the top level of the parking garage where they can't be seen or heard when he's doing his daily press conference/briefing, freedom to petition the governor for redress of grievances. The forced closure of businesses violates the "takings" clause because the government has taken away property from individuals by means other than eminent domain and has not offered just compensation. Restrictions on travel and store closures also likely violate the interstate commerce clause. I equate these protestors with the American revolutionaries of the 1770s because they are fighting for the same rights.

If basic rights aren't applicable in a time of crisis, they are worthless. They should especially be valid in times like these. The fact that people are voluntarily surrendering them for a false sense of safety scares me.

You have a very poor understanding of the Constitution.

First, no ones freedom of religion has been taken away. You can worship whatever you want. You can't do it in a church for the time being. Just like a zoning law. You don't have freedom to go to church.

Second, you haven't lost your right to assembly. No one is breaking up the political protests. And again, zoning laws are what's applicable here.

Third the takings clause applies when the government actually takes your property. Sales permits, liquor licsenses are all examples of limitations on commerce.

Everything is temporary. Nothing unconstitutional about any of it.

[SSOWorld]

[vdeane]

Because we've been staying home, fewer people have caught it, thus more people haven't caught it, so the peak of infections will be later, but the peak will also be lower which means fewer deaths. 

Maybe, maybe not.  In some ways, and I hate to say it, it seems like just kicking the can down the road.  Either spike with x number of deaths early on or have x number of deaths over time.  Did I mention that x is a constant?

To play devil's advocate here, is this really worth it?

As was mentioned, cases, not deaths.  The idea is to avoid what happened to Italy, where people who otherwise could have been saved were just left to die because the medical system was overwhelmed.

Even with a flatter curve, NYC hospitals still had to line the hallways with beds to fit everyone in.

[oscar]

Washington was on track to be able to ease out of our restrictions within a month or two, so long as the status quo of social distancing was maintained and upheld. Luckily, the vast majority of people have been doing so, but the hundred or so protesting in Olympia will inevitably cause it to spread and prolong the stay-home order. Because of a few nutjobs who think selfishly and consider themselves experts without being able to read anything longer than a Facebook post, we may be stuck for much longer.

So millions of people are more or less following social distancing rules, but a hundred or so who (I assume) on this one occasion didn't, are enough to undo the progress made so far? Maybe, but that seems a reach. Not helping, and not setting a good example, but ISTM not a disaster either.

I'm not really sympathetic to the protesters. They have a point about some states' restrictions (can't speak to your state) that seem more painful than helpful -- for example, the nonsense in some places about trying to prohibit drive-up (but fully socially-distant) church services, that thankfully got the pushback it deserved. OTOH, they say plenty of stupid or offensive things, especially attitudes unsympathetic to vulnerable populations (such as my elderly aunts, and to a lesser extent me, who I'd like to live) who they seem to treat as obstacles to economic recovery.

[bandit957]

Part of the problem is that people keep saying "reopen the economy" instead of "reopen society." Economic losses can be quantified and remedied. Societal losses can't. You can't put a price tag on the fact that our social institutions have been pretty much destroyed by lockdowns.

[Revive 755]

Shouldn't I be free to not catch the virus? As long as there's a lockdown, I'm free from the tyranny of the economy forcing me to interact with the dipshit general public.

There are some people who are not so lucky and are still having to go out for jobs.

Wasn't one of rally cries around the American Revolution "Give me liberty or give me death"?

[Roadgeekteen]

Shouldn't I be free to not catch the virus? As long as there's a lockdown, I'm free from the tyranny of the economy forcing me to interact with the dipshit general public.

There are some people who are not so lucky and are still having to go out for jobs.

Wasn't one of rally cries around the American Revolution "Give me liberty or give me death"?

That's why we should be remedying that by giving benefits to workers out of a job so they don't have to work and spread the virus.

[NWI_Irish96]

Your rights end when exercising them injures or kills another person, which is fairly universally accepted.

Ending lockdowns now will create a spike in the number of cases, which you would have to have your head buried pretty deep in the sand not to understand.

Where people have trouble drawing the line is that ending the lockdown doesn't just put the people going out at risk.  The resulting increase in the number of cases creates more illness and death for health care workers, among others. 

If you wouldn't go to a hospital and shoot a health care worker, then you shouldn't be pushing to have lockdowns ended right now.

[kalvado]

Washington was on track to be able to ease out of our restrictions within a month or two, so long as the status quo of social distancing was maintained and upheld. Luckily, the vast majority of people have been doing so, but the hundred or so protesting in Olympia will inevitably cause it to spread and prolong the stay-home order. Because of a few nutjobs who think selfishly and consider themselves experts without being able to read anything longer than a Facebook post, we may be stuck for much longer.

So millions of people are more or less following social distancing rules, but a hundred or so who (I assume) on this one occasion didn't, are enough to undo the progress made so far? Maybe, but that seems a reach. Not helping, and not setting a good example, but ISTM not a disaster either.

I'm not really sympathetic to the protesters. They have a point about some states' restrictions (can't speak to your state) that seem more painful than helpful -- for example, the nonsense in some places about trying to prohibit drive-up (but fully socially-distant) church services, that thankfully got the pushback it deserved. OTOH, they say plenty of stupid or offensive things, especially attitudes unsympathetic to vulnerable populations (such as my elderly aunts, and to a lesser extent me, who I'd like to live) who they seem to treat as obstacles to economic recovery.

There was a fascinating story about one - ONE! - person in South Korea who got pretty much entirely responsible for a city-wide outbreak, infecting couple hundred people by ignoring recommendation and going to the church and busy restaurant.
Here we're talking about a hundred - most likely not most compliant people - who can easily double the case count in a city.
If you think about it, there is about 0.1-0.2% diagnosed infections, so ~1% infected in non-hot spot areas, few thousand in a mid-size city. These 100 people, plus their immediate family members,  plus incidental contacts...

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Shouldn't I be free to not catch the virus? As long as there's a lockdown, I'm free from the tyranny of the economy forcing me to interact with the dipshit general public.

There are some people who are not so lucky and are still having to go out for jobs.

Wasn't one of rally cries around the American Revolution "Give me liberty or give me death"?

Should people be honored at the idea of dying for "liberty"  on a ventilator in a hospital, that this is an honorable death in the name of American values?

[ozarkman417]

One of these protests are coming to my area soon... to the "abandoned" mall of all places, with 44 out of 10 going. Oddly enough, the guy hosting is lives at least two hours away from Springfield. The Ohio governor said that protesting was fine, as long as protesters stayed six feet apart.. seems like a good compromise between exercising the first and staying safe as first, but are people actually going to follow this, given they are protesting the very law that is making them stay that far apart? Probably not.

After SARS only seventeen years ago, then Swine flu ten years ago, I'm quite sure there will be another pandemic like this sometime in my lifetime. Considering the virus has had us spend three trillion, it may not be too bad of an idea to gradually start putting federal dollars aside in an untouchable fund reserved for another event like this? Start by fixing our budget. I'm looking at you, military.

My state was the first to bring legal action against China, claiming the virus had escaped from a lab. Do we have enough evidence on if that is true yet? No, Most scientists say it wasn't.       

[tradephoric]

Cases peaked in Michigan on April 3rd with 1,242 confirmed cases on that day.  On April 20th there were only 469 confirmed cases which is a 62% reduction in the number of daily cases.  Beaumont health just announced they are laying off nearly 2500 hundred workers as the hospitals are emptying out.  Based on the guidelines set forth by the Coronavirus task force, Michigan should begin Phase 1 in reopening the economy and begin easing restrictions.

[oscar]

There was a fascinating story about one - ONE! - person in South Korea who got pretty much entirely responsible for a city-wide outbreak, infecting couple hundred people by ignoring recommendation and going to the church and busy restaurant.

Of course, here and now that guy would've had less success spreading the virus, with in-person church services about as uncommon as busy restaurants, and widespread social distancing also limiting the spread.

[Duke87]

Has anyone who's been replying to this topic actually been tested or suspected they caught COVID-19?

I've had a few random bouts of coughing over the past month or so, though no fever or any other symptoms.

For a while I was assuming the idea I might have caught it was ridiculous, but the stats are now showing that >1.5% of the residents of the city I live in have explicitly tested positive - which means the actual percentage of the local population who've caught it is some amount greater than that.

Given the number of trips to the grocery store I've made since early March (once every 5-6 days), along with multiple trips to grab restaurant takeout and a trip to Home Depot a few weeks ago, I'd say it's statistically inevitable that I've been in close proximity to someone who was infected at least once, probably multiple times. This makes the idea that I may have had an asymptomatic/barely symptomatic case start to seem plausible, though without a serology test it's all speculative.