Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[viper37]

I don't know what the rate is for a bad year of the seasonal flu: say it is 0.1%.

That's 0,1%, with a vaccine and meds readily available.  Something we do not have right now for covid-19.

The same individual appeals to life viper was making with coronavirus can be made with seasonal flu.

Ah, but we mostly do it.  I don't allow anyone to come to my office or visit me when they have the flu.  But is it like 70% of the population getting the flu in one season?  Nope.  Not by far.

Is there a significant proportion of people requiring hospital resources to survice the flu?  No.

The arguments that I'm making are presumably the ones he would be making if someone was arguing about locking down for the seasonal flu in bad years. There is a tipping point and a balance to be reached, where that is: reasonable people can disagree.

Let's say there's 10% chances I',m getting shot if I go outside of my house today.  I'll take that chance.

Let's there's 10% chances I'll kill someone if I go outside of my house today.  Am I taking chances?  Not everyday.

It's like driving drunk.  The vast majority of drunk drivers aren't killing anyone.  Only a minority will end up killing someone.  Yet, we forbide this activity, at the inconvenience of a crucial economic sectors: bars&nigthclub are much less profitable today than they were in the 70s&80s.  My own hometown had 5 bars, 3 nightclubs and 1 stripper club when I was a teen. Today, only 3 bars left, no nightclub, no strippers.  Ever since the government implemented a zero tolerance on dui for anyone under 21 (18 is the legal limit to dring, but the rules weren't really that enforced in the past, and myself started going out regularly in bars&nightclub around the age of 15), the bars&nightclub started to shutdown. that's not just for small cities, many places shut down in Quebec city too as they found themselves deserted.

We made a choice for society by crippling an entire economic sector forever, and we now have much less deaths.

By refusing containment with covid-19, what you are basically doing is playing russian roulette with someone else's life, without their consent.

If I want to kill myself, I'll do it.  It's not up to you are any politician to decide wether or not my life or my quality of life is worthless.

[The Larch]

Btw Maladict, you should know that the Netherlands have featured heavily in our coronavirus-related news cycle today. 

[Legbiter]

Btw Maladict, you should know that the Netherlands have featured heavily in our coronavirus-related news cycle today. 

Why?

[DGuller]

We made a choice for society by crippling an entire economic sector forever, and we now have much less deaths.

By refusing containment with covid-19, what you are basically doing is playing russian roulette with someone else's life, without their consent.

If I want to kill myself, I'll do it.  It's not up to you are any politician to decide wether or not my life or my quality of life is worthless.

The point is that it kind of is up to politicians to some extent.  Policy decisions that balance lives and economical outcomes are being made all the time, and if you're not happy with the deal made on your behalf, too bad.  You can engage in the political process to find politicians who advocate trade-offs more to your liking, but in the mean time you'll have to abide by their judgment of where the trade-off should be.

[crazy canuck]

For those of you who are interested, here is the data BC release today.  It looks like the curve here is flattening. Some of the other country comparators, well they have too many Dorsey's I guess.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/files/COVID19_Technical_Briefing_Condensed.pdf

[Legbiter]

The point is that it kind of is up to politicians to some extent.  Policy decisions that balance lives and economical outcomes are being made all the time, and if you're not happy with the deal made on your behalf, too bad.  You can engage in the political process to find politicians who advocate trade-offs more to your liking, but in the mean time you'll have to abide by their judgment of where the trade-off should be.

Yeah, it's not an easy choice now. I do know the economic cessation we're in will devaste people's health and well-being in fairly short order. A month of total lockdown, sure, it'll be a very severe temporary recession, but things can bounce back fairly quickly. A 2 month lockdown? Jesus, that will be tough. Like government ration cards tough.

[alfred russel]

He is presenting it as one data point, without implying anything about how that data point compares to COVID-19.  He's basically making a "we've already established that, now we're just negotiating" point, which is a valid point to make.

I don't see how that is helpful. Of course there are cost-benefit tradeoffs.  But it's not helpful to analyze the tradeoff for activity X by looking at activity Y that has a far different risk profile.  Either take a position on value-of-life generally based on all potential risks or find a more realistic comparator.

I was responding to Viper who was giving hypotheticals of a 75 year old who wants to live, and a forum member with risk factors, from the perspective of whether it should be allowed for others to essentially make life and death decisions for those individuals.

My point with the flu is that this is in fact the case. We know thousands will die from influenza every year, some of them may want us to take stronger action (such as we are doing today) to stop the infectious disease. We don't live our lives in quarantine, and in cases those people die. We have decided that the cost of protecting them from disease is not worth their lives.

That in no way means that the death rate, or infection rate, from the seasonal flu equals covid 19.

[merithyn]

MM--go fuck yourself if you think I in any way implied that COVID-19 mortality rates are on par with seasonal flu.

I think a lot of people here are in the mood to pile on, and thus are reading your posts with the mindset of finding something to be indignant about, rather than reading your arguments for what they are.  I disagree with you, but I find this treatment of you downright disgusting.  We have Twitter for this kind of discourse.

I apologize if I was being unfair. I mean we already went through this weeks ago with another poster and I was just a little tired of being lectured by people who I don't think know anything.

And there's the whole his taking my life (and people like me) into his hands. I find that a bit... problematic.

[Habbaku]

Till Lindemann tested negative for corona.

[merithyn]

For the record, it looks like the death rate worldwide of the seasonal flu last year was 0.0616%, looking at the lowest potential numbers.

10% go into the hospital.

Only 47% seek medical care for the regular flu.

So if we could please stop even bringing this up, it would be great. This is not anymore like the seasonal flu than it's like a building collapsing.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm

[celedhring]

The point is that it kind of is up to politicians to some extent.  Policy decisions that balance lives and economical outcomes are being made all the time, and if you're not happy with the deal made on your behalf, too bad.  You can engage in the political process to find politicians who advocate trade-offs more to your liking, but in the mean time you'll have to abide by their judgment of where the trade-off should be.

Yeah, it's not an easy choice now. I do know the economic cessation we're in will devaste people's health and well-being in fairly short order. A month of total lockdown, sure, it'll be a very severe temporary recession, but things can bounce back fairly quickly. A 2 month lockdown? Jesus, that will be tough. Like government ration cards tough.

What worries me if the aftermath. I mean, say in May we bring outbreaks under control in most of the West.  Then what next? If we lift up restrictions we'll probably get another outbreak in the following weeks, and we just can't shut down again. All these grandiose plans of massive testing and selective isolation to nip future outbreaks in the bud seem a bit unrealistic. It seems we are entirely dependant on finding a working medical solution in the short term or we're fucked.

[Sheilbh]

The point is that it kind of is up to politicians to some extent.  Policy decisions that balance lives and economical outcomes are being made all the time, and if you're not happy with the deal made on your behalf, too bad.  You can engage in the political process to find politicians who advocate trade-offs more to your liking, but in the mean time you'll have to abide by their judgment of where the trade-off should be.

Yeah, it's not an easy choice now. I do know the economic cessation we're in will devaste people's health and well-being in fairly short order. A month of total lockdown, sure, it'll be a very severe temporary recession, but things can bounce back fairly quickly. A 2 month lockdown? Jesus, that will be tough. Like government ration cards tough.

What worries me if the aftermath. I mean, say in May we bring outbreaks under control in most of the West.  Then what next? If we lift up restrictions we'll probably get another outbreak in the following weeks, and we just can't shut down again. All these grandiose plans of massive testing and selective isolation to nip future outbreaks in the bud seem a bit unrealistic. It seems we are entirely dependant on finding a working medical solution in the short term or we're fucked.

And I think there is a real risk around bio-surveillance:
https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2020/03/rise-bio-surveillance-state

So countries are faced with what one might call the "coronavirus trilemma". They can pick two of three things but cannot have them all: limit deaths, gradually lift lockdowns, or uphold cherished civil liberties. Not all countries are facing up to this reality – the US remains a notable laggard – but most will have to eventually. Those countries that have recognised the choices before them are picking the first two options at the cost of the third, bio-surveillance. It is a choice that has most clearly been made in east Asia. But it is coming to much of the rest of the world too – and will transform the role and reach of the state. 

[Josquius]

It had to be done

https://youtu.be/y5h-T2S2Ko4

[Iormlund]

And I think there is a real risk around bio-surveillance:

It doesn't have to become an issue. We have legal mechanisms to deal with temporary restriction of basic liberties. In fact we are already using them to curtail assembly, for example. Sure, governments will want to make these apps permanent, but they really don't have to be.

[Maladict]

Btw Maladict, you should know that the Netherlands have featured heavily in our coronavirus-related news cycle today. 

Why?

Yeah, why?

edit: blocking the EU emergency aid fund of course. So much for unity