Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[alfred russel]

Then if we declare meat packing to be essential, how about we pay a lot more per hour, give benefits, and institute proper PPE and the like - I mean, it is essential, so therefore valuable.  This is all about the workers being safe, secure, and willing to brave the risks of infection, right?

There is no way to pay the unemployed significantly juiced benefits, "non essential" businesses to pay employees that are not working versus laying them off, and essential workers juiced salaries and benefits as well. Plus give money to industries like airlines to prevent their collapse, and financing to financial institutions and the like.

Illinois is asking for $41 billion of federal support to get through this. While Illinois is perhaps not the most frugal of states, it has about 13 million people of a population of 330 million--per capita that would mean over $1 trillion to the states, and we haven't even gotten to the municipalities. The result is going to be massive local and state layoffs if something isn't done.

Tax revenues are going to plummet, and government expenses are going to skyrocket. We've gone from 3.2% unemployment a couple months ago to probably 15%-20% today. There is a good chance unemployment is going to exceed that of the great depression if this continues for a few more months. There are second quarter GDP forecasts showing annualized contraction ~40%.

[Grey Fox]

It's like UBI would fix everything, or something.

[DGuller]

Not representative, but still interesting:

In Hungary, there have been 12,440 tests done privately (if I understand the timeframe correctly, between early March and 16 April), mostly two big corporations paying to have all (well, most) of their employees tested. So, as opposed to other tests where usually you had to at least show some symptoms or been exposed to an infected person to be tested, these were across the board and no regard to your confirmed exposure.

55 of hose 12 thousand tests came back positive, so 0.4%. I guess the tests used might just suck, but it seems to put a bit of a dent into the assumptions/hopes of the hordes of asymptomatic cases.

Anecdotical "dragnet" style testing over here has yielded similar results over here. Right now we've a more serious serological study going so we'll see I guess. NY figures were actually quite high by comparison.

New York's testing figures were also high, given the context.  I think something like 2% were diagnosed, which coupled with a positive rate of 50%-60% with a little fudge math implied about 10% real infection rate right off the bat.  NYC numbers were off by a degree, but not a completely unexpected degree.

[crazy canuck]

Case of reinfection or relapse. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/covid-19-relapse-or-reinfection-1.5546771

[PDH]

Then if we declare meat packing to be essential, how about we pay a lot more per hour, give benefits, and institute proper PPE and the like - I mean, it is essential, so therefore valuable.  This is all about the workers being safe, secure, and willing to brave the risks of infection, right?

There is no way to pay the unemployed significantly juiced benefits, "non essential" businesses to pay employees that are not working versus laying them off, and essential workers juiced salaries and benefits as well. Plus give money to industries like airlines to prevent their collapse, and financing to financial institutions and the like.

Illinois is asking for $41 billion of federal support to get through this. While Illinois is perhaps not the most frugal of states, it has about 13 million people of a population of 330 million--per capita that would mean over $1 trillion to the states, and we haven't even gotten to the municipalities. The result is going to be massive local and state layoffs if something isn't done.

Tax revenues are going to plummet, and government expenses are going to skyrocket. We've gone from 3.2% unemployment a couple months ago to probably 15%-20% today. There is a good chance unemployment is going to exceed that of the great depression if this continues for a few more months. There are second quarter GDP forecasts showing annualized contraction ~40%.

So that fifty year plan of killing benefits and not raising wages is paying off after all!

[crazy canuck]

Then if we declare meat packing to be essential, how about we pay a lot more per hour, give benefits, and institute proper PPE and the like - I mean, it is essential, so therefore valuable.  This is all about the workers being safe, secure, and willing to brave the risks of infection, right?

There is no way to pay the unemployed significantly juiced benefits, "non essential" businesses to pay employees that are not working versus laying them off, and essential workers juiced salaries and benefits as well. Plus give money to industries like airlines to prevent their collapse, and financing to financial institutions and the like.

Illinois is asking for $41 billion of federal support to get through this. While Illinois is perhaps not the most frugal of states, it has about 13 million people of a population of 330 million--per capita that would mean over $1 trillion to the states, and we haven't even gotten to the municipalities. The result is going to be massive local and state layoffs if something isn't done.

Tax revenues are going to plummet, and government expenses are going to skyrocket. We've gone from 3.2% unemployment a couple months ago to probably 15%-20% today. There is a good chance unemployment is going to exceed that of the great depression if this continues for a few more months. There are second quarter GDP forecasts showing annualized contraction ~40%.

So that fifty year plan of killing benefits and not raising wages is paying off after all!

Somehow Dorsey lacks the ability to imagine a better society.  Or the ability to simply look beyond his own country to see what a country just to the North of his is doing, where the unemployed are receiving "significantly juiced benefits", "non essential" businesses are receiving a wage subsidy to pay employees that are not working the same as before so that they do not have to be laid off and essential workers are receiving increased salaries.

Perhaps if people like Dorsey recognized the problem in your country's political priorities they might be able to manage better solutions.

[Iormlund]

Yeah. I've no issues with a spad attending to listen in, maybe ask the odd question. But they shouldn't be going beyond that.

Having a high-ranking outsider tends to stifle discussion, especially around lines participants think said person might disagree with.

If the meetings were about science and not politics Cummings would have done better by sitting out, or at least simply eavesdropping.

[Tamas]

Yeah. I've no issues with a spad attending to listen in, maybe ask the odd question. But they shouldn't be going beyond that.

Having a high-ranking outsider tends to stifle discussion, especially around lines participants think said person might disagree with.

If the meetings were about science and not politics Cummings would have done better by sitting out, or at least simply eavesdropping.

He is quite clearly the type who understands everything better than anyone else, especially things like science.

[alfred russel]

Then if we declare meat packing to be essential, how about we pay a lot more per hour, give benefits, and institute proper PPE and the like - I mean, it is essential, so therefore valuable.  This is all about the workers being safe, secure, and willing to brave the risks of infection, right?

There is no way to pay the unemployed significantly juiced benefits, "non essential" businesses to pay employees that are not working versus laying them off, and essential workers juiced salaries and benefits as well. Plus give money to industries like airlines to prevent their collapse, and financing to financial institutions and the like.

Illinois is asking for $41 billion of federal support to get through this. While Illinois is perhaps not the most frugal of states, it has about 13 million people of a population of 330 million--per capita that would mean over $1 trillion to the states, and we haven't even gotten to the municipalities. The result is going to be massive local and state layoffs if something isn't done.

Tax revenues are going to plummet, and government expenses are going to skyrocket. We've gone from 3.2% unemployment a couple months ago to probably 15%-20% today. There is a good chance unemployment is going to exceed that of the great depression if this continues for a few more months. There are second quarter GDP forecasts showing annualized contraction ~40%.

So that fifty year plan of killing benefits and not raising wages is paying off after all!

Somehow Dorsey lacks the ability to imagine a better society.  Or the ability to simply look beyond his own country to see what a country just to the North of his is doing, where the unemployed are receiving "significantly juiced benefits", "non essential" businesses are receiving a wage subsidy to pay employees that are not working the same as before so that they do not have to be laid off and essential workers are receiving increased salaries.

Perhaps if people like Dorsey recognized the problem in your country's political priorities they might be able to manage better solutions.

We can both imagine such a society, but that society appears to be in the realm of the imagination rather than real life Canada. Your GDP is expected to get nuked in line with ours, and there aren't universal increases to pay for essential workers.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah. I've no issues with a spad attending to listen in, maybe ask the odd question. But they shouldn't be going beyond that.

Having a high-ranking outsider tends to stifle discussion, especially around lines participants think said person might disagree with.

If the meetings were about science and not politics Cummings would have done better by sitting out, or at least simply eavesdropping.

I can see that but I think there is a benefit in having a spad on those meetings in two ways.

The meetings are scientists among themselves and chaired by the Chief Scientific Advisor who then presents a consensus opinion/advice to the politicians who are the decision makers. I think there's a benefit in having someone else in both meetings just to make sure the consensus (and level of consensus) isn't mischaracterised. So they can flag if there is actually a very strong minority opinion that it might be worth hearing more of. It ensures the advice the decision makers hear reflects the debate by the advisors.

The other benefit is I think it's probably helpful for the scientific advisors to be aware of what's worrying the politicians/decision makers. Arguably lockdown is a an example of this - there was pressure for a lockdown politically, especially around schools. The only country in the world with scientific decision makers - that I know of - is Sweden. So it's useful to have someone in the room who is saying - there is pressure for lockdown politically, are we looking at it; or the evidence on schools is weak (even weaker now) but we look like an outlier, what is the impact of closing them.

I'm not entirely convinced it's a good idea for scientists (or any other advisors impacting policy: generals, intelligence chiefs etc) to have an internal debate that is then reported and summarised by one advisor, or to have it entirely divorced from what the politicians/decision makers are worrying about. Seniority is an issue because on the one hand, as you say, it could influence the discussion (although I'd note the scientists are almost all academics - not direct employees of the government - because the members change depending on the nature of the "emergency"). On the other hand for the scientists as advisors part of the value is knowing what decision makers are thinking that's probably diluted if they just have a junior member of the team there to take notes.

As I say I'm not sure on it. I think it's fair to have a spad there to observe and ask questions. I'm more uncomfotable with the idea of them sort of leading the discussion or the like.

[alfred russel]

Making the rounds on Twitter - video of Captain Crozier debarking his ship.

https://twitter.com/HelenKennedy/status/1246069318128930816

Everyone in that crowd is probably COVID-19 positive now. 

It was about 940 out of the crew of about 4800.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_USS_Theodore_Roosevelt

Which brings us to an interesting case study...

[alfred russel]

Less anecdotal, might help convince any young people you know to be careful. Death is rare, but hospitalization rates are 14%. This data is only current to mid March and likely understates the case as we go deeper into the outbreak.

Why do you think that the data understates the case? The cruise ship data indicated that something like half the positive results were asymptomatic. If that is the case, you can divide the numbers by 2. Also, testing has been limited, and disproportionately provided to the more seriously ill. That will also make the rates go higher.

Mortality would theoretically go higher as we get deeper into the crisis, but the other numbers should go down as well, as hospital beds and ventilators become more scarce resources and marginal cases get sent home or there aren't ventilators available.

Mainly because the data in Italy are worse and I don't see places like NYC avoiding that fate. In Lombardia the case fatality rate is 13.8%, 30% of all cases require hospitalization, and the ICUs (even with expansion) are totally saturated.

Even if you quibble with the rates, let's say 7% of all young people need hospitalization. If 30% of the USA gets COVID-19 in the first yearly outbreak season, 7% of 20-45 people (who comprise ~30% of the total population) get hospitalized, then that alone is 2 million needing hospitalization and ~293k need ICU level care/ventilation. Stay home.

Fate, the data is now in and it conclusively shows you are completely off base. For young healthy people, the risks from COVID19 are in line, and perhaps less than, the risks for the flu for the general population.

It has now been almost a month since the USS Theodore Roosevelt was evacuated. 940 positive COVID 19 cases were identified after testing the entire crew. 60% of those were asymptomatic. Only 2 of the positive cases required hospitalization, and there was 1 death. That is a death rate of about 0.1%, and a hospitalization rate of about 0.2%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_USS_Theodore_Roosevelt

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-military-sympt/coronavirus-clue-most-cases-aboard-u-s-aircraft-carrier-are-symptom-free-idUSKCN21Y2GB

If anything, this appears to be an outlier—the death rate appears much too high versus the rest of the military.

There have been 4,265 positive cases in the military, with only 91 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths (one of the deaths being from the Theodore Roosevelt, the other being in the national guard). Those 4,265 cases are likely significantly understated because the asymptomatics are not going to be picked up the way they were from a carrier where everyone was tested.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

[crazy canuck]

Your GDP is expected to get nuked in line with ours, and there aren't universal increases to pay for essential workers.

You are correct.  All nations are experiencing COVID but some are dealing with it better than others.  Also, nice move of the goal posts.  You are right pay increases are not universal in Canada.  But in BC all nurses and grocery store workers received wage increases - to name a few.  So tell me again how it is simply not possible.

[DGuller]

Fate, the data is now in and it conclusively shows you are completely off base. For young healthy people, the risks from COVID19 are in line, and perhaps less than, the risks for the flu for the general population.

It has now been almost a month since the USS Theodore Roosevelt was evacuated. 940 positive COVID 19 cases were identified after testing the entire crew. 60% of those were asymptomatic. Only 2 of the positive cases required hospitalization, and there was 1 death. That is a death rate of about 0.1%, and a hospitalization rate of about 0.2%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coronavirus_pandemic_on_USS_Theodore_Roosevelt

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-military-sympt/coronavirus-clue-most-cases-aboard-u-s-aircraft-carrier-are-symptom-free-idUSKCN21Y2GB

If anything, this appears to be an outlier—the death rate appears much too high versus the rest of the military.

There have been 4,265 positive cases in the military, with only 91 hospitalizations, and 2 deaths (one of the deaths being from the Theodore Roosevelt, the other being in the national guard). Those 4,265 cases are likely significantly understated because the asymptomatics are not going to be picked up the way they were from a carrier where everyone was tested.

https://www.airforcemag.com/snapshot-dod-and-covid-19/

Why are you comparing death rate of young people for one illness against death rate of general population for another illness?

[Sheilbh]

Apparently a friend's had two old colleagues who died of this - one in their sixties and one about my age