Coronavirus pandemic

[jeffandnicole]

Here are the countries that saw a significant spike in daily cases yet were able to reduce them by over 90% in short order.  Of these, Switzerland had the biggest spike with daily new cases exceeding 1000 for several days before bringing things under control.

Personally, what I would like to see is how these countries were able to reduce them so fast, especially in regards to their Shutdown/Lockdown rules.

Did their shutdowns and lockdowns resemble true closures?  Meaning, nothing was open: Supermarkets were closed,  restaurants were closed, hardware and general stores were closed?  Were people not allowed to go outside for almost any reason, unless they had to get to a hospital?

In the US, our "Stay At Home" and "Shutdown" orders were so loose, that there appeared to be more exceptions than requirements.  Supermarkets experienced larger than normal sales.  Restaurants could do takeout, curbside and delivery.  People were allowed to go out and walk around.

While travel was supposedly restricted, you could basically travel the entire country on interstates and not be bothered. Many other counties are quite small, and can easily restrict travel between countries.  Some countries restricted travel between their states or regions.  The US never truly restricted travel between states, with the exception of a few states that may stop people with out of state tags on local roads.

Anytime anyone complains about our shutdown orders, they immediately bring up their constitutional rights.  The US tends to be a wide open country, and people don't like being told "No".   Heck, many stores and restaurants can't even kick out a group of people at closing in fear of losing their tips, their business, and online negative reviews.  When people don't want to respect closing hours, how are they going to respect the closing of the economy!

[kalvado]

Personally, what I would like to see is how these countries were able to reduce them so fast, especially in regards to their Shutdown/Lockdown rules.
....
When people don't want to respect closing hours, how are they going to respect the closing of the economy!

Well, SMS permits for leaving the home with start time, limited trip duration, and a limited number of trips per week were implemented in a few places. Supermarket admission tied to last name (along the lines of  "A-K can go on Monday" etc). Impossible to implement in the world of First and Second amendments.

Closing hours matter only that much, its not that virus becomes more active in the dark. Going to a public place is a risk by itself, though - and often avoidable risk..

[Roadgeekteen]

Personally, what I would like to see is how these countries were able to reduce them so fast, especially in regards to their Shutdown/Lockdown rules.
....
When people don't want to respect closing hours, how are they going to respect the closing of the economy!

Well, SMS permits for leaving the home with start time, limited trip duration, and a limited number of trips per week were implemented in a few places. Supermarket admission tied to last name (along the lines of  "A-K can go on Monday" etc). Impossible to implement in the world of First and Second amendments.

Closing hours matter only that much, its not that virus becomes more active in the dark. Going to a public place is a risk by itself, though - and often avoidable risk..

Who cares about the constitution people are dying Edit: sounded too harsh but look what happened after 9/11

[kalvado]

Personally, what I would like to see is how these countries were able to reduce them so fast, especially in regards to their Shutdown/Lockdown rules.
....
When people don't want to respect closing hours, how are they going to respect the closing of the economy!

Well, SMS permits for leaving the home with start time, limited trip duration, and a limited number of trips per week were implemented in a few places. Supermarket admission tied to last name (along the lines of  "A-K can go on Monday" etc). Impossible to implement in the world of First and Second amendments.

Closing hours matter only that much, its not that virus becomes more active in the dark. Going to a public place is a risk by itself, though - and often avoidable risk..

Who cares about the constitution people are dying Edit: sounded too harsh but look what happened after 9/11

The flip side of the coin - US is unable to meet new challenges. You know, those nuclear carriers did so much to combat this epidemic.
This sends a certain message to the world. And that message is going to be  much more devastating to economy than some restaurants going out of business.

[J N Winkler]

Idea that minimum clothing set of underwear and a gun now has to be supplemented with the mask may be hard to digest, so I don't expect such approach to work in US.

This is a bit of a tangent, but don't you need a holster as well?

[hbelkins]

If you have a health condition that precludes you from wearing a mask, it's a really bad idea to be going anywhere right now.  You should have a family member or freind be doing your shopping for you or having stuff delivered.

Claustrophobia, panic attacks, and such are what's being discussed here, not any kind of chronic breathing problems that would be exacerbated by the virus. I've never considered myself to be claustrophobic, but my hospital experience a few years ago when they put a temporary dialysis port in my neck was something I don't ever care to repeat. They had me reclined on the bed with my head lower than the rest of my body, with a sheet over my face to create a sterile field. I felt like I was suffocating and nearly went into a full-blown panic attack, and it seemed to take forever. They wouldn't even take the sheet off my nose for just a second to allow me to take a few breaths.

Of course, I have an allergy to heavy-handed government overreach, so that's my medical condition that will preclude my wearing a mask in public.

I haven't been able to get any clarification on this from someone who knows, but anyone who's spent any time on social media has probably seen those claims about stores not being able to stop you from entering without a mask if you say you have a medical condition that precludes it. The general line of this reasoning is that if you have a medical condition, the ADA prohibits stores from denying you entry, and HIPAA regulations mean they cannot ask what your condition is.

Kentucky is under a "wear a mask if you're in public" recommendation starting May 11. The governor has said that no one will be cited, but if law enforcement sees someone without a mask, that person will be asked to put one on. Seems to me that's like wearing a rubber after she's already pregnant. And why is May 11 the date that masks are "required?" Why not immediately?

Who cares about the constitution people are dying Edit: sounded too harsh but look what happened after 9/11

If our rules and guiding principles aren't equally as applicable in times of crisis as they are in normal times, then they are worthless. Times like these are precisely when they should matter most. Freedom isn't easy. It can be uncomfortable at times. But we're far removed from "give me liberty or give me death," "live free or die," or even "better dead than red." Most of what was done after 9/11 was overreach and there has been some pushback. I'm expecting even more after this. Already, many in Kentucky's legislature are proposing changes to the statute that gives the governor the authority to declare an emergency and issue some of the executive orders he's implemented. And more and more legislators are becoming involved in the reopen protests.

[tradephoric]

Personally, what I would like to see is how these countries were able to reduce them so fast, especially in regards to their Shutdown/Lockdown rules.

I took a look at how Switzerland responded to their outbreak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Switzerland ).  Switzerland's first confirmed case was on February 25th.  On February 28th when there was 8 confirmed cases (0.93 cases per million population) the national government banned all events with more than 1,000 participants.  Compare that to the US where the NBA and NHL played their last games on March 11th when there was 1,105 confirmed cases (3.35 cases per million population). 

Did their shutdowns and lockdowns resemble true closures?  Meaning, nothing was open: Supermarkets were closed,  restaurants were closed, hardware and general stores were closed?  Were people not allowed to go outside for almost any reason, unless they had to get to a hospital?

Switzerland had similar shut down orders as the US.  On 16 March 2020, the Federal Council announced measures that included the closure of bars, shops and other gathering places.  Essential services such as grocery shops, pharmacies, the postal service, and (reduced) public transport remained open.

[tradephoric]

It looks like geography may play a big role in managing the virus.  It appears island nations are having a better time limiting the spread of the virus as they are naturally isolated from the rest of the world and can better track who is coming in/out.  Also, while Switzerland and Austria are completely land locked, they have massive mountain ranges that cuts them off from their neighbors to some degree.  The more isolated a country is geographically maybe the better shot they have at containing and slowing the spread.

To that point the Associated Press just published an article describing how Hawaii and other island nations are tamping down the virus.  According to the article Hawaii has among the lowest COVID-19 infection and mortality rates in the U.S.

Isolated by oceans: Hawaii, other islands tamp down virus
https://apnews.com/158fbfc9ce2145d26940999a4f3bc3c5

[kalvado]

It looks like geography may play a big role in managing the virus.  It appears island nations are having a better time limiting the spread of the virus as they are naturally isolated from the rest of the world and can better track who is coming in/out.  Also, while Switzerland and Austria are completely land locked, they have massive mountain ranges that cuts them off from their neighbors to some degree.  The more isolated a country is geographically maybe the better shot they have at containing and slowing the spread.

To that point the Associated Press just published an article describing how Hawaii and other island nations are tamping down the virus.  According to the article Hawaii has among the lowest COVID-19 infection and mortality rates in the U.S.

Isolated by oceans: Hawaii, other islands tamp down virus
https://apnews.com/158fbfc9ce2145d26940999a4f3bc3c5

US as a whole had a huge advantage of being isolated from most of the world by oceans with most traffic funneled through a few entry points. Yet CDC worked hard to lose that advantage.
This is much better than "mountains cutting off" - but people still travelling from Villbach to Venecia on day trips

[SEWIGuy]

Of course, I have an allergy to heavy-handed government overreach, so that's my medical condition that will preclude my wearing a mask in public.

It would be logically much easier to simply say you're selfish.

[kphoger]

Who cares about the constitution people are dying

I do.  People die every day, from all sorts of things.  Epidemics happen every so often.  That doesn't mean I stop caring about liberty.

What about the people who died in order to establish those freedoms?  Do you care about them, or only the ones who are dying now?

If our rules and guiding principles aren't equally as applicable in times of crisis as they are in normal times, then they are worthless. Times like these are precisely when they should matter most. Freedom isn't easy. It can be uncomfortable at times.

Exactly.  The rights and freedoms we are guaranteed exist for precisely those times during which they might reasonably be taken away.  As an example, imagine if the Second Amendment could be repealed any time the government were worried people might take up arms against it.  That would completely negate the purpose of having the Amendment in the first place!  It's the same with the First Amendment:  "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" is most important during times of crisis.

[Roadgeekteen]

Who cares about the constitution people are dying

I do.  People die every day, from all sorts of things.  Epidemics happen every so often.  That doesn't mean I stop caring about liberty.

What about the people who died in order to establish those freedoms?  Do you care about them, or only the ones who are dying now?

If our rules and guiding principles aren't equally as applicable in times of crisis as they are in normal times, then they are worthless. Times like these are precisely when they should matter most. Freedom isn't easy. It can be uncomfortable at times.

Exactly.  The rights and freedoms we are guaranteed exist for precisely those times during which they might reasonably be taken away.  As an example, imagine if the Second Amendment could be repealed any time the government were worried people might take up arms against it.  That would completely negate the purpose of having the Amendment in the first place!  It's the same with the First Amendment:  "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" is most important during times of crisis.

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

[kphoger]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

[bandit957]

Kentucky is under a "wear a mask if you're in public" recommendation starting May 11. The governor has said that no one will be cited, but if law enforcement sees someone without a mask, that person will be asked to put one on. Seems to me that's like wearing a rubber after she's already pregnant. And why is May 11 the date that masks are "required?" Why not immediately?

I think it only applies in indoor businesses or similar buildings. Who's going to wear a mask outdoors?

I was able to get a bandana, but it's not for outdoor use.

[Max Rockatansky]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time. 

[kalvado]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

[Max Rockatansky]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day. 

[bandit957]

In mid-March, Imperial College put out a study that said something like 1.8 million deaths in the U.S. alone. This study was ripped to shreds by peer reviews, but still was cited as an excuse for all the lockdowns.

It wasn't going to be 1.8 million. It cannot, and it won't be. That is, unless you try very hard to make it that high. I know it won't get that high, because most of our public officials are incapable of trying very hard.

[kalvado]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day.

simple arithmetic. Uncontained epidemics - and seems we're heading that way - would take down 1% of population. Which is about 3 million.

[kalvado]

In mid-March, Imperial College put out a study that said something like 1.8 million deaths in the U.S. alone. This study was ripped to shreds by peer reviews, but still was cited as an excuse for all the lockdowns.

It wasn't going to be 1.8 million. It cannot, and it won't be. That is, unless you try very hard to make it that high. I know it won't get that high, because most of our public officials are incapable of trying very hard.

Oh they do. CDC did their best to get things out of control.
And I would trust imperial college numbers. They do have a clue.

[Max Rockatansky]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day.

simple arithmetic. Uncontained epidemics - and seems we're heading that way - would take down 1% of population. Which is about 3 million.

Where are you pulling 1% from?  Most sources (numerous found in the proceeding pages) are citing below a 1% mortality rate for cases contracted at this point. 

[kalvado]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day.

simple arithmetic. Uncontained epidemics - and seems we're heading that way - would take down 1% of population. Which is about 3 million.

Where are you pulling 1% from?  Most sources (numerous found in the proceeding pages) are citing below a 1% mortality rate for cases contracted at this point.

That is with available medical help. Once no oxygen is available, things will go much grimmer pretty quickly.

[Max Rockatansky]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day.

simple arithmetic. Uncontained epidemics - and seems we're heading that way - would take down 1% of population. Which is about 3 million.

Where are you pulling 1% from?  Most sources (numerous found in the proceeding pages) are citing below a 1% mortality rate for cases contracted at this point.

That is with available medical help. Once no oxygen is available, things will go much grimmer pretty quickly.

Is there some sort of evidence for reserve medical oxygen supply being in peril? 

[kalvado]

Hey, I do care about the constitution. I'm just saying that we can't be super strict about things when thousands upon millions could die. This isn't just the flu.

What good is the Constitution if not strictly applied in times of strife?  That's the point.

I don't think even the worst and doomsday oriented State Side projections anyone is saying "millions."   Ergo, people have made similar arguments about World War II when numerous constitutional right were waived.  A lot of people retroactively look back at some of those actions not so favorably and they weren't exactly universally praised at the time.

2-3 million deaths in US are feasible as worst case scenario

Who's actually saying that currently though?  The CDC came out with something that projected high deaths which a lot of media outlets are running with.  If I recall correctly the number most sources who are reported about what the CDC said cite a "possible"  3,000 deaths per day.

simple arithmetic. Uncontained epidemics - and seems we're heading that way - would take down 1% of population. Which is about 3 million.

Where are you pulling 1% from?  Most sources (numerous found in the proceeding pages) are citing below a 1% mortality rate for cases contracted at this point.

That is with available medical help. Once no oxygen is available, things will go much grimmer pretty quickly.

Is there some sort of evidence for reserve medical oxygen supply being in peril?

Oxygen is not the issue - at least as long as those cryogenic companies are running. Mask for supplying it to a patient, nurse to turn the valve on, access to the tap can easily be the limiting factors.  Home concentrators are available, but my understanding those are few and not sure they are stocked. We'll need millions, if not tens millions access point easily..

[jeffandnicole]

Of course, I have an allergy to heavy-handed government overreach, so that's my medical condition that will preclude my wearing a mask in public.

If that's the excuse you give to the cops when you're driving 80 mph in a 25 mph residential zone while snorting crack cocaine off a naked hooker in a convertible, then maybe that's reasonable.  But if you're just have opinions about it, then that's not an illness, and it takes away from those that do have true issues.

If your employer has said that you can work from home, have you protested saying that the government is overreaching and you demand to go into the office every day?