COVID-19

[Jason]

They have moved well beyond replication in technology. Their robotics, AI rival, if not exceed ours. They are arguably in a better position to live without us then us without them. We are already highly dependent upon them for drugs (my MIL always says how hers are from China) as well as medical supplies. I think the situation is so dire economically, I don't think people would care if it was made of bat shit if it got everybody back to work.

Edit: And don't forget, people were drinking fish tank cleaner to avoid this which I'm assuming was made in China. Dying people or people with dying family members have no problems being guinea pigs. It just takes one rich fuck to have it smuggled in and have it work.

[jacob]

@thrifty++ - It's probably true that a Chinese vaccine would be met with skepticism. There's also a strong "not invented here" effect, at least in the US. Just look at the testing. Both the US bungling the initial development, but also China flooding the markets with tests that didn't work. The vaccine could go the same way ...

However, it's incorrect to say that China is "just" the world's manufacturing plant which incidentally is not a bad foundation to build on. That might have been true twenty or even ten years ago, but assuming that now would be underestimating the country. They're competitive with the US in supercomputing in terms of total capacity and top spot(s). They have developed their own chip sets. They're leading the world in drone technology (remote robotics) which translates into defense applications. Unlike the US, China can actually send astronauts into space. (The US has outsourced this to Russia but private companies are working to get the capability back.) Also, they have built their own fifth gen fighter which became operational not long after the F22 in the US.

Add: Jason beat me to it.

[George the original one]

Following the spread of COVID-19 via genetics
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/solvi ... r-BB131V90

Basically, we travel a lot!

[Bankai]

The spike in non-COVID-19 deaths is just a beginning, long term impact will be severe:

A drop-off in screening and referrals means roughly 2,700 fewer people are being diagnosed every week, Cancer Research UK says.

Cancer screening has paused in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, with few invitations sent out in England.

People are still advised to contact their GP with worrying symptoms.

But Richard Sullivan, professor of cancer and global health at King's College London, said there was more fear of Covid-19 than of having cancer at the moment. With GPs more difficult to contact than normal, this was resulting in a "dramatic drop-off" in referrals to specialists, he said.

"Most modellers in the UK estimate excess of deaths is going to be way greater than we are going to see with Covid-19," he said.

With cancer patients generally much younger, Prof Sullivan predicted "years of lost life will be quite dramatic" on top of "a huge amount of avoidable mortality".

[bostonimproper]

After poking millions of extra long Q-tips through people's noses: Saliva is more sensitive for SARS-CoV-2 detection in COVID-19 patients than nasopharyngeal swabs (prepub).

And apparently we've known this for months and still continue nasal swabs for some reason? (h/t Reddit)

[George the original one]

Reviewing where Great Britain is in relaxing their lockdown: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52374513

[steveo73]

The people with no real skin in this game are the upper classes who suffer no hardship from the continued lockdown and are coincidentally also the ones are turning adherence to the lockdown into a moral issue

I'm calling BS on this. Who are the upper classes ? Myself and my wife ? My parents ? It's not a class issue. It's more a extroverted versus introvert issue and then a spend all the money you have versus save for a rainy day people.

My parents have had their portfolio crash but they don't even think about it because they are loaded. My mum at the same time was crying the other day because she couldn't see us.

[steveo73]

Famines of “biblical proportions” are becoming a serious risk as the coronavirus crisis threatens to double the number of people nearing starvation, a U.N. body has warned.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/coronav ... warns.html

I saw this the recently. It sounds scary. It's the same argument people on here are making and it's hard to work out what we can do. If you focus on COVID-19 something isn't going to be focused on.

[ZAFCorrection]

I'm calling BS on this. Who are the upper classes ? Myself and my wife ? My parents ? It's not a class issue. It's more a extroverted versus introvert issue and then a spend all the money you have versus save for a rainy day people.

My parents have had their portfolio crash but they don't even think about it because they are loaded. My mum at the same time was crying the other day because she couldn't see us.

I didn't consider significantly the extrovert/introvert dimension. I'm not certain it is a larger factor than being able to put food on the table. But I underlined the point I think is salient. It is frequently the form of upper-middle class and above "who? me?" A number of factors go into it, but having the paycheck and other associated skills and cultural capital to save for a rainy day usually puts you close-ish to the top, if not in absolute dollars then at least culturally. That usually means white-collar wfh-type jobs are available to you.

[steveo73]

It is frequently the form of upper-middle class and above "who? me?" A number of factors go into it, but having the paycheck and other associated skills and cultural capital to save for a rainy day usually puts you close-ish to the top, if not in absolute dollars then at least culturally. That usually means white-collar wfh-type jobs are available to you.

I get what you are stating here and I guess that happens at times but I don't see it as that relevant in this situation. Some people like the lock downs and some don't. Some view it as a moral issue and some don't. I don't see the need to demonize one group.

Some of those American anti-lock down protestors did look pretty funny though. I saw the big InfoWars truck driving past rallying the troops. There are some lucky guys out there now who can fill their massive gas tanks up real cheap.

[classical_Liberal]

Why are active cases in the US not flattening?

Peak new diagnosis was more than two weeks ago, which is the max duration of a mild case. The best I can tell is that, a case is no longer considered active after two negative PCR's. Obviously, a lack of testing ability means we are not following up with PCR's on mild cases. A second recovery definition I've read is 7 or 14 days (depends on the source) after all symptoms have resolved. Are the hot spot areas even bothering to follow up and track this data? I kind-of doubt it given the numbers that are being shown. It seems crucial to have a set definition of recovery, and some means to track the recovered cases if we are to begin reopening the economy. How can accurate models be made if don't even know how many currently active cases exist?

Can anyone "in the know" shed some light on this subject?

[Jason]

Covid19 may cause brain damage

I should get tested then. Just to to make sure it wasn't caused from reading about it.

[George the original one]

Why are active cases in the US not flattening?
[...]
Are the hot spot areas even bothering to follow up and track this data?

Very few counties are tracking recoveries. Remember, there is no central coordination(*) of what is being reported except new cases & deaths and even those have varying standards. A greater awareness of tracking hospitalizations and the outcomes in hospitals has many counties tracking that since about April 1, but they aren't being centrally tracked.

(*) Trump's "I take no responsibity" in action. Ideally, the CDC should have had this on their list of must-do for any epidemic.

[Riggerjack]

I didn't consider significantly the extrovert/introvert dimension. I'm not certain it is a larger factor than being able to put food on the table. But I underlined the point I think is salient. It is frequently the form of upper-middle class and above "who? me?" A number of factors go into it, but having the paycheck and other associated skills and cultural capital to save for a rainy day usually puts you close-ish to the top, if not in absolute dollars then at least culturally. That usually means white-collar wfh-type jobs are available to you.

It may just be your bubble. Or maybe mine.

I know 4 people in my group of friends and family, who had jobs before the lockdown, and aren't currently doing those jobs. A hairdresser (sister), a Boeing worker (friend) manager of a local habitat for humanity store ( former neighbor, the one whose father died of the virus) and a construction worker who was working out of state at the start of the lockdown. Everyone else is essential, WFH, or retired. Though this may be because I am older, and work in an essential industry (Telecom), and mostly know blue collar workers.

Every one of those without work is getting unemployment... for now.

Everything we need is still being made. Food is still being grown. We have reserves.

I get it. Lots of people have done what they were told their whole lives, and thought that was their ticket to the good life. They never really had to be on the disproportionate side of disproportionate sacrifice, and never thought they would be. Often, these are the same people who use words like... meritocracy. And there is some cognitive dissonance going on. That which was once meritorious suddenly seems far less so. That's got to be rough.

The way I see it, things have changed.

We were due for a recession. It's been the longest period between recessions, in US history. We never really fixed the issues from the last one, see interest rates and Fed balance sheet. See every investment reference on this forum going back for years. To my mind, we were due for a bad recession, regardless of the virus. Nothing I am seeing is telling me it's not already here.

And we have kicked this one off with a hell of a kickstart. Closing businesses all at once, blowing our stimulous reserves at the start, and putting fear into the population, before an economic slowdown could have done it. Augustus keeps talking about the great depression, and this seems similar. Big run up, stock market crash, stimulous early...

So with those as the conditions, I find all the appeals to go back to the world of 2019 to be... confused.

Lift the lockdown today, and 2019 is still not coming back. There is no undoing what has been done. We need to let the past go, and focus on what to do today, for tomorrow.

If you aren't working, right now, that tells you something about your relationship with the world at large. In times of strife, what you are used to doing, may not have the value you have been used to. Will lifting the lockdown change that? How valuable is what you do, during a severe downturn? How can you change that? How can you compensate for the change? How can you move faster than your colleagues to the remaining opportunities? Should you be looking for different opportunities?

You can't change the world. You can't change the past. You can change your future. It's worth your time and effort. And right now, it seems like you have some time...

[Riggerjack]

You got me...

Yup.

I think you are right about the scale of the economic problem. But I strongly disagree with you about the lockdown, or what to do about it.

I think how far the death rate is below 2% is irrelevant. I find these economic arguments to be apples to cannonball comparisons. And when/how to lift the lockdown is a distraction from the far more important things we should be thinking about.

But sometimes a good distraction can be helpful, and I've been wrong plenty, so don't let me slow you down.

[M]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyre ... pdate.html

Surprised no one has brought this up yet. The results of yet more antibody tests. This time in New york. In the article they estimate 0.5% fatality rate.

[Bankai]

It's a trade-off.

Lockdown sooner and longer, you save more lives and have less people living with the consequences to their health (which we don't fully know yet). But more people loose jobs.

Lockdown later or never, less people loose jobs and more peoplel die.

I agree it's a trade-off, but it looks to me like it's the other way around - the longer and harder the lockdown, the more live-years you save in the short-term, but with the price to pay - ultimately more life-years lost in the mid- to long-term. Consider the link I posted earlier on this page - top cancer experts are warning that there will be more life-years lost from cancelled screenings and missed detections alone than what COVID would (realistically) claim. And that's on top of 3 months of life expectancy reduction from economic hardship due to 6.5% loss in GDP, which the UK (and likely most of the West) is already locked into.

[Riggerjack]

@ Augustus

The lockdown already has saved lives. And will continue to do so, for a while yet. Your simple models don't show it. That doesn't change anything.

The lockdown is not going to stop this virus. It was too late for that before we started. But while we sideline the inessential, we are learning about treatment, and retooling production lines. Lives ARE being saved by these actions. Every day of delays is in our favor.

We don't have a vaccine for lots of far deadlier viruses. If we get one that is safe and effective for C19, that would be nice. But I have no expectation that the lockdown will be extended until it is developed. Long enough for the PPE to be common and cheap seems a more reasonable goal.

I was surprised that the government reacted as it did, but I approve. Too bad they were as slow as they were, but better late than never.

I blame Inslee, not the orange man (though the Cheeto in Chief has been less than helpful). We had patient zero. Then at the end of February, we had an old folks home implode. Then, a few days later, we had genetic proof that the second outbreak was descended from the first, meaning the virus had been running rampant undetected for over a month.

This was a local emergency, that our governor treated with press conferences for weeks more. An emergency, with prior examples, with over a month to get a grip on the possibilities and options, and he didn't just drop the ball, he kicked it away from the goal. While demonstrating his only real ability, press conferences.

By the time he announced the lockdown, I had already pushed my way to work from home against a company that was dead set against it. I was willing to take a personal half million dollar hit to avoid this virus. Even though I have n95 masks, etc.

And though this virus seems to be more mild than predicted, I still think I made the right call. Though I am glad I didn't have to take the hit.

The way I see it, we have a virus and a lockdown. The lockdown won't stop the virus, even if it did, we would be subject to reinfection. Judging by the predictable and predicted objections to the lockdown, we won't get another, so I expect the reinfection to be far worse than the first.

All of ego's economic worries apply. But lifting the lockdown doesn't alleviate them. They just move the uncertainties in the direction of certainty.


People are acting like a new virus that doesn't kill you doesn't harm you. There is no evidence of this. Most viruses have long term health consequences.

40% of the Survivors of SARS 1 had PTSD. 40% chronic fatigue. 5-10% osteonecrosis.

What is your heart worth? Lungs? Kidneys? How much more are they worth in a world experiencing extreme shortages of each? How much would you pay to avoid the kinds of experience that cause PTSD? How much would you pay to live in a world where you don't have to worry about getting jumped for your organs?

Second order economic effects play both ways. And there is lots of room for this situation to get a LOT darker. Unemployment is just unemployment. People will find something else to do. They always have.


So, myself, I am focusing on what the world will look like. I am pretty confident that it won't be as bad as I can imagine, as nothing ever has. And when things get ugly, they are uglier for some than others. Being on the right side of that divide is worth the effort, to me. YMMV.

[Bankai]

What would be a possible alternative though, that would not have people avoiding hospitals now?

All cancer screenings were canceled so it doesn't matter if people avoid them or not they won't happen regardless.

Let's think of the scenario where we collectively give up trying to save covid19 patients and just let the virus run wild.

I don't want that and I don't see why it would be necessary or desirable. My goal would be to Pareto-optimize social distancing to slow down as much as possible while allowing normal life and economic activity as much as possible. There's nothing wrong with people social distancing on their own - quite the contrary, that's a very good thing to do. You seem to think that I want 1% to die and bodies lying on the streets, while all I'm thinking about is why the rest of the world doesn't do Sweden.

[George the original one]

Consider the link I posted earlier on this page - top cancer experts are warning that there will be more life-years lost from cancelled screenings and missed detections alone than what COVID would (realistically) claim.

Many states plan on taking on the hospital bits in the next couple of weeks. Texas already is and Oregon hospitals will be back to normal on May 1.