Coronavirus COVID-19

[AZGrizFan]

We are about to have a test as to whether or not relaxing things faster than epidemiologists would have us relax them turns out to be a net benefit or not. I do not know what is going to happen. But I do think there is a risk that having the thing really explode will end up doing even more economic damage than staying locked down for a longer period would have.

At the same time I am hoping that there is a seasonal aspect to this thing so that relaxing things at this point won't cause a big spike in cases.

It’s refreshing to see someone admit they don’t know for sure. Equally refreshing to consider ALL of the economic possibilities rather than just the short term.

There won’t BE a long term if we don’t consider the short term.

[SDHornet]

And then there's this, 20-40% might not take the vaccine. That's about par for the course with only 37% getting the flu vaccine during a recent bad flu year.

So once again it's just like the flu.

[SDHornet]

So now talk is about shutting down for a "2nd wave"?

So people still don't realize the Chinese Flu will be a part of the "normal" flu season from here on out. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that people are this stupid.

[kalm]

Trump and his little dancing bear. There is literally no one behind the wheel in the Whitehouse. Even to do just a little research to avoid getting the story wrong for politics sake not to mention, you know, trying to fight the virus......

Matt Gaetz on "Tucker Carlson Tonight": The NIH gives this $3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, they then advertise that they need coronavirus researchers. Following that, coronavirus erupts in Wuhan.

There never was a $3.7 million U.S. grant to the Wuhan lab. But, the falsehood spread like a virus, in the White House, and without verification, in the briefing room.

Reporter in White House press briefing: There's also another report that the NIH, under the Obama administration, in 2015 gave that lab $3.7 million in a grant. Why would the U.S. give a grant like that to China?

President Trump: The Obama administration gave them a grant of $3.7 million? I've been hearing about that. And we've instructed that if any grants are going to that area – we're looking at it, literally, about an hour ago, and also early in the morning. We will end that grant very quickly.



That grant was to Peter Daszak's U.S.-based EcoHealth Alliance for disease prevention it does throughout the world. His work was considered so important that, last year, the grant was reauthorized and increased by the Trump administration.


Daszak had been spending about $100,000 a year collaborating with the Wuhan lab.

Peter Daszak: I can't just show up in China and say, "Hi, I wanna work on your viruses." I have to do this through the correct channels. So, what we do is we talk to NIH, and they approve the people we can work with in China. And that happened. And our collaboration with Wuhan was preapproved by NIH

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-admi ... nutes/#app

[Ibanez]

Yeah, except I've literally said NONE of that--in fact I've said exactly the opposite. You're sounding more and more like Trip lately.

AZ - I said open things back up with precautions/protocols. You want to keep things closed down.
Kalm - AZ - I said open things back up with precautions/protocols. You want everything wide open.

Why don't the two of you actually listen to each other so you can focus your debate on the likely differences in opinion (what precautions/protocols and timeline we should follow)?

Otherwise we're going to have to put out a BOLO for Bench to counsel you through this troubled point in your relationship because we certainly don't want to put it on IT to mediate this dispute.

Don't yell at me with beer breath, daddy!

[∞∞∞]

Good criticism regarding a recent NYT piece:

The New York Times recently published a list of ‘true leaders’ in the fight against COVID-19. They spend exactly one sentence on Asia and the rest on white leaders that mostly did worse than Iran. The structural racism is mind-boggling, and it’s getting people killed.

According to the NYTimes, Iran Completely and Utterly Botched Its Response to the Coronavirus, but countries with higher mortality rates like Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Denmark are listed as true leaders. It makes no sense. It’s just racism, so structural that the Editorial Board can’t even see it. It’s built into the edifice of the paper itself.

By any objective measure, the true leaders are all in Asia, with an asterisk for New Zealand and Australia and participation points for Iceland and Greece. That’s it. Every major western leader has failed and this list is actively making people stupider.

[mainejeff]

Where are all of these mass suicides that the Trumptards keep throwing out there.....and hoping for.

Did I say mass suicides?

OK....suicides. Can I get an actual LINK? LINK....LINK...LINK...LINK....I am a CS.com bot.....

[mainejeff]

They involve job loss, depression, suicide, etc. by regular people.

According to a few law enforcement friends of mine they are seeing a sharp rise in domestic violence.

Link please.

[Gil Dobie]

They involve job loss, depression, suicide, etc. by regular people.

According to a few law enforcement friends of mine they are seeing a sharp rise in domestic violence.

I am sure it's exponential.

[Winterborn]

According to a few law enforcement friends of mine they are seeing a sharp rise in domestic violence.

I am sure it's exponential.

It is a straight line going up right now, but then I only have a sample size of two.

[Ibanez]

Good criticism regarding a recent NYT piece:

The New York Times recently published a list of ‘true leaders’ in the fight against COVID-19. They spend exactly one sentence on Asia and the rest on white leaders that mostly did worse than Iran. The structural racism is mind-boggling, and it’s getting people killed.

According to the NYTimes, Iran Completely and Utterly Botched Its Response to the Coronavirus, but countries with higher mortality rates like Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Denmark are listed as true leaders. It makes no sense. It’s just racism, so structural that the Editorial Board can’t even see it. It’s built into the edifice of the paper itself.

By any objective measure, the true leaders are all in Asia, with an asterisk for New Zealand and Australia and participation points for Iceland and Greece. That’s it. Every major western leader has failed and this list is actively making people stupider.

The problem with Medium.com is that I can write an article saying that COVID-19 deaths are due to people listening to Nickleback albums and there's nobody there to edit or fact-check me.

Also - how in the same paragraph can you say true leaders have zero deaths...and then call the leader of S. Korea with it's 250 deaths a true leader?

[UNI88]

According to a few law enforcement friends of mine they are seeing a sharp rise in domestic violence.

Link please.

"According to a few law enforcement friends of mine" = anecdotal.

[Winterborn]

According to a few law enforcement friends of mine they are seeing a sharp rise in domestic violence.

Link please.

There is no link and nor did I claim there was one. It is based on private, anecdotal information that you can take at face value or not.

[mainejeff]

Link please.

There is no link and nor did I claim there was one. It is based on private, anecdotal information that you can take at face value or not.

I've got a lot of anecdotal information as well.

[Winterborn]

If anybody wants some reading on the potential secondary effects of a shutdown. All data is based on published CDC information.

Highlights are (for those that are risk adverse to clicking links):

1 point increase in unemployment yields a 1 to 1.3 increase in suicides (one study mentioned a 1.6% increase)
1 point increase in unemployment yields a 3% increase in drug related deaths (3.9% increase for opioid deaths)

2nd table on page 11 is also interesting in that best case over the next 10 years (assuming a 1% increase in mortality for a 1 point increase in unemployment) is an additional ~27K deaths, worst case for the same assumption, ~96k deaths. If one assumes just a 1.6% increase, it increases the best case scenario to ~44k deaths and worst case ~154k deaths.


https://wellbeingtrust.org/wp-content/u ... -FINAL.pdf

Overall I think they made some reasonable assumptions in projecting out the future "Deaths of Despair" based on studies that were conducted during and after the Great Recession. Of what they actually will be remains to be seen.

I found the study through this article.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/we ... of-despair

[kalm]

If anybody wants some reading on the potential secondary effects of a shutdown. All data is based on published CDC information.

Highlights are (for those that are risk adverse to clicking links):

1 point increase in unemployment yields a 1 to 1.3 increase in suicides (one study mentioned a 1.6% increase)
1 point increase in unemployment yields a 3% increase in drug related deaths (3.9% increase for opioid deaths)

2nd table on page 11 is also interesting in that best case over the next 10 years (assuming a 1% increase in mortality for a 1 point increase in unemployment) is an additional ~27K deaths, worst case for the same assumption, ~96k deaths. If one assumes just a 1.6% increase, it increases the best case scenario to ~44k deaths and worst case ~154k deaths.


https://wellbeingtrust.org/wp-content/u ... -FINAL.pdf

Overall I think they made some reasonable assumptions in projecting out the future "Deaths of Despair" based on studies that were conducted during and after the Great Recession. Of what they actually will be remains to be seen.

I found the study through this article.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/we ... of-despair

Very cool! Thanks for posting, WB.

[89Hen]

Very cool! Thanks for posting, WB.

Heartless.

[∞∞∞]

Thanks for that info WB.

It'd be interesting to see how many people won't die due to better air quality and lighter traffic. Currently those are 90,000/yr and 40,000/yr, respectively (edit: in the US). Of course, pollution is typically cumulative over years.

There's probably a lot of other random effects on mortality well (people not seeing doctors out of fear, people losing their insurance, etc).

The US would have been much better prepared had we some sort of universal healthcare.

[CID1990]

I don’t know what you people keep whining about

We need our world mortality rate to be WAY higher

climate change and all yknow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[89Hen]

The US would have been much better prepared had we some sort of universal healthcare.

In what way(s)? Serious question.

[∞∞∞]

The US would have been much better prepared had we some sort of universal healthcare.

In what way? Serious question.

Less of an impact on health if you lose your job. Regarding the pandemic itself, people wouldn't be hesitant to seek out treatment if they can't afford it (better tracking/treatment of the virus). It also give employees a little more breathing room if they want to quit an unsafe work environment and not worry about losing their healthcare (ex. factories who aren't following suggestions to curb viral spread).

It would also help businesses save money during this time (no medical costs and any associated administrative costs).

[Winterborn]

Thanks for that info WB.

It'd be interesting to see how many people won't die due to better air quality and lighter traffic. Currently those are 90,000/yr and 40,000/yr, respectively (edit: in the US). Of course, pollution is typically cumulative over years.

There's probably a lot of other random effects on mortality well (people not seeing doctors out of fear, people losing their insurance, etc).

The US would have been much better prepared had we some sort of universal healthcare.

The traffic one will be interesting because while there is lighter traffic, the average speeds have increased (which leads to more fatalities).

Air quality is going to be more tricky I think, as that is hard to quantity the effects in the short term (outside of the obvious air quality itself) verses other environmental impacts that affect us long term. If air quality keeps improving (due to less traffic and change in consumer patterns) I think you would be able to isolate the different environmental aspects to see exactly what the improving air quality does for us. Right now there isn't a long enough data sample to draw any long term conclusions on that point, IMHO.

As for the last point, we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

[Winterborn]

I don’t know what you people keep whining about

We need our world mortality rate to be WAY higher

climate change and all yknow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Green Peace or any of the other extremist environmental groups should be rejoicing in this as it helps reduce the biggest "polluters"......humans.

Was reading awhile back that some of the more radical founders of the environmentalists were all for reducing the human population by any means necessary to reduce pollution. As long as they were some of the individuals to survive, to "help guide" the future generations.....

[89Hen]

In what way? Serious question.

Less of an impact on health if you lose your job. Regarding the pandemic itself, people wouldn't be hesitant to seek out treatment if they can't afford it (better tracking/treatment of the virus). It also give employees a little more breathing room if they want to quit an unsafe work environment and not worry about losing their healthcare (ex. factories who aren't following suggestions to curb viral spread).

It would also help businesses save money during this time (no medical costs and any associated administrative costs).

I'm not sure if any but the first would fall under the "much" category and the first doesn't speak at all to "prepared". I think folks aren't going to hospitals or doctors because they're afraid of catching it more than can't afford it. And quitting because you won't lose health insurance... that would be a tough case to make IMO. I don't know if the folks at the meat processing plants would have quit because they would still have insurance and no paycheck.


https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/14/doctors ... -stop.html

His brother-in-law isn’t the only patient afraid to go to the hospital in the middle of the Covid-19 pandemic. Emergency room and other doctor’s visits at Providence’s 51 hospitals are way down, reflecting a broader trend across the U.S. as people steer clear of hospitals for sometimes necessary and emergency care, even for mild heart attacks.

Physicians worry that patients with severe illnesses may suffer permanent damage by avoiding the ER.

[∞∞∞]

The environmental one is a bit trickier because air pollution effects Americans less proportionately than poorer nations. We don't really see the effects because we have the wealth to curb the effects, but we are one of the worst per capita in terms of contributing to the problem. That said, our poor are certainly more effected than middle-class or rich Americans.

At the global level though, I've read numbers ranging anywhere from as "low" as 400,000 to as high as 1M+ that may have saved.