Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[alfred russel]

As it turns out, one thing Canada can learn from Florida is that being hot and humid is better than being cold and dry. Ironically, the only way Canada can effectively do that is to accelerate global warming ... 

As it turns out, hot and humid places may well have the advantage, for the same reasons colds and flu is seasonal. This advantage is not of course absolute, lots of hot and humid places have been hit as well, but *all things being equal* (meaning the same measures are taken and the same factors operate) hot and humid places are likely to do better. Which may help to explain why Florida is better off than, say, New York, Coronavirus-wise. Even if everything else were equal between these two states, that's what you would expect; on average and in general, the North should fare worse than the south.

Of course, that cannot explain why Canada is, on average, better off than the US. If all else were equal, the reverse ought to be the case, as on average Canada is colder than the US.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200323-coronavirus-will-hot-weather-kill-covid-19

So if warmer regions are less prone to covid19 doesn't that justify a lighter response?

Canada is of course also far less densely populated than the US. Places like Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, the Dakotas, and Alaska are doing better than Canada and are plenty cold.

[Tamas]

Okay, so the stupidity of Southern Governors generally. Not sure what the relative populations of these southern states and Canada have to do with anything - I thought the point was that these actions somehow prove that the original lockdown measures were excessive.

Looks to me that these Governors are taking a huge chance, which will likely end badly.

Malthus, I realize that you were not a participant in this area, but weeks ago I was arguing that the lockdown was being too stringently applied and some of the less logical aspects were going to result in a blacklash that undermined the entire enterprise. The word I kept using was "sustainable" as we are going to be here for the long haul. One person called me an edgelord, another told me to be a big boy and do as I was told. Yet here we are--just 3 weeks after a lockdown order--with gyms, nail salons, massage parlors, etc. in wave 1 opening on Friday, with the rest (except bars and nightclubs on Monday).

I just mentioned relative populations because I assumed some non US posters would not really know the differences between states--Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana for instance are tiny even combined.

I am sorry but Trumpist governors following Trump's orders are not proof that they are following the correct policy.

[Admiral Yi]

Yeah Fredo, Trumpist governors and militia nutters does not make your case.

[Sheilbh]

Malthus, I realize that you were not a participant in this area, but weeks ago I was arguing that the lockdown was being too stringently applied and some of the less logical aspects were going to result in a blacklash that undermined the entire enterprise. The word I kept using was "sustainable" as we are going to be here for the long haul. One person called me an edgelord, another told me to be a big boy and do as I was told. Yet here we are--just 3 weeks after a lockdown order--with gyms, nail salons, massage parlors, etc. in wave 1 opening on Friday, with the rest (except bars and nightclubs on Monday).

I just mentioned relative populations because I assumed some non US posters would not really know the differences between states--Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana for instance are tiny even combined.

Although how much of that is sustainability v sort of culture war and politics?

Nowhere else in the world has lifted a lockdown after three weeks. And everywhere else that's lifting lockdown has been doing it gradually so starting with lower infection risks like non-essential business (non-retail) and schools first and building up to bars/restaurants and gyms which are probably higher risk in terms of transmission. This seems very quick and very focused on things people will notice - or have the other bits (stop from working from home and schools, say) already been reopened/never closed?

I don't disagree with you on sustainability but this looks like a slightly odd version of it.

[Tamas]

Malthus, I realize that you were not a participant in this area, but weeks ago I was arguing that the lockdown was being too stringently applied and some of the less logical aspects were going to result in a blacklash that undermined the entire enterprise. The word I kept using was "sustainable" as we are going to be here for the long haul. One person called me an edgelord, another told me to be a big boy and do as I was told. Yet here we are--just 3 weeks after a lockdown order--with gyms, nail salons, massage parlors, etc. in wave 1 opening on Friday, with the rest (except bars and nightclubs on Monday).

I just mentioned relative populations because I assumed some non US posters would not really know the differences between states--Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana for instance are tiny even combined.

Although how much of that is sustainability v sort of culture war and politics?

Nowhere else in the world has lifted a lockdown after three weeks. And everywhere else that's lifting lockdown has been doing it gradually so starting with lower infection risks like non-essential business (non-retail) and schools first and building up to bars/restaurants and gyms which are probably higher risk in terms of transmission. This seems very quick and very focused on things people will notice - or have the other bits (stop from working from home and schools, say) already been reopened/never closed?

I don't disagree with you on sustainability but this looks like a slightly odd version of it.

I think DGuller was spot on with this (maybe they ARE two different people? ), namely that politically this is a good move for this arseholes. If the pandemic escalates so what? Most of their voters will remain in tow with the usual messages of the liberals messing something up. And if the pandemic remains subdued, they will be proven right thanks to survivor bias and all.

[alfred russel]

Although how much of that is sustainability v sort of culture war and politics?

Nowhere else in the world has lifted a lockdown after three weeks. And everywhere else that's lifting lockdown has been doing it gradually so starting with lower infection risks like non-essential business (non-retail) and schools first and building up to bars/restaurants and gyms which are probably higher risk in terms of transmission. This seems very quick and very focused on things people will notice - or have the other bits (stop from working from home and schools, say) already been reopened/never closed?

I don't disagree with you on sustainability but this looks like a slightly odd version of it.

To be clear, this does not make sense. Cases are higher than they were before the lockdown went in place, and it seems like opening places like bowling alleys and massage parlors - which seem high risk and not essential - while leaving schools closed (which are lower risk) seems odd. It also seems odd that last weekend in the North Georgia mountains--where half the trails were closed (with almost no discernable reason for the closed trails versus open trails--I saw a Georgia State Trooper stationed at a trailhead to make sure no one started hiking there. The insanity of one weekend having police blocking a trailhead in an extremely rural area (that seemed senseless to close anyway) and the next weekend reopening bowling alleys in a major urban area...

That said, Tim posted something that something like 70/30 people are in favor of the lockdown. His point was that people are in favor and politically it is on strong footing. My point of view is that is disastrous if you want to have a long term lockdown/social distancing. You need broad buy in from society to make it work. You can't impose a lockdown with force--you aren't going to be able to throw people in jail to make this happen. If you have 70/30 as a split, in some areas (but not most) the 30% will control government and actually end the lockdown. But if you start having widespread civil disobedience in a month--where the 30% just ignores the rules--that goes a long way to nullifying the lockdown as well.

[Sheilbh]

70/30 is strikingly low. Here the last polling I saw had 70% strongly supporting extending lockdown for another three weeks, with another 25% somewhat supporting it. At the minute 90% think it would be wrong to lift restrictions and 5% think it would be right.

But as I say I do think part of this is more political/culture war than anything else. This doesn't necessarily speak to the sustainability of lockdown measures so much as it's about the sustainability of lockdown measures in a country as polarised as the US where one party and leader has decided to be ambivalent at best about the whole thing. So lockdowns may be less sustainable in the US because Trump and the GOP rather than because of the measures.

[Tamas]

70/30 is strikingly low. Here the last polling I saw had 70% strongly supporting extending lockdown for another three weeks, with another 25% somewhat supporting it. At the minute 90% think it would be wrong to lift restrictions and 5% think it would be right.

But as I say I do think part of this is more political/culture war than anything else. This doesn't necessarily speak to the sustainability of lockdown measures so much as it's about the sustainability of lockdown measures in a country as polarised as the US where one party and leader has decided to be ambivalent at best about the whole thing. So lockdowns may be less sustainable in the US because Trump and the GOP rather than because of the measures.

Yeah, a country dominated by a nihilistic death cult is a bit of a special case.

[mongers]

70/30 is strikingly low. Here the last polling I saw had 70% strongly supporting extending lockdown for another three weeks, with another 25% somewhat supporting it. At the minute 90% think it would be wrong to lift restrictions and 5% think it would be right.

But as I say I do think part of this is more political/culture war than anything else. This doesn't necessarily speak to the sustainability of lockdown measures so much as it's about the sustainability of lockdown measures in a country as polarised as the US where one party and leader has decided to be ambivalent at best about the whole thing. So lockdowns may be less sustainable in the US because Trump and the GOP rather than because of the measures.

Shelf, that's a very good summary of the situation/crisis the US is now facing and one I hope we'll not have to confront.

As you 'say' the UK social cohesion on this is surprisingly solid.

[Malthus]

So if warmer regions are less prone to covid19 doesn't that justify a lighter response?

The issue is that warm weather is only one factor. It provides an advantage to be sure, but it is clearly an advantage that may be overridden by following the wrong policies - as the virus has, despite the weather, hit places with warm weather. True, the danger appears to be greater in cold weather places, but to what extent will only be known in the future. Gambling with that advantage is pretty risky.

Canada is of course also far less densely populated than the US. Places like Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, the Dakotas, and Alaska are doing better than Canada and are plenty cold.

Again, Canada is on average far less densely populated, but I'm not convinced that fact is relevant. The vast majority of the Canadian population is urban - over 82%. What counts is how densely populated its cities are, and, as it turns out, how it's old age homes are organized. Places like Montana cannot really compare with, say, Southern Ontario - which is full of cities and towns.

You have to look at all the salient information together. Some things add risk (like many people living in cities). Others can ameliorate risk (like warm vs cold weather). We can't change these things. The things we have control over are things like how the population behaves and government policies.

[Malthus]

70/30 is strikingly low. Here the last polling I saw had 70% strongly supporting extending lockdown for another three weeks, with another 25% somewhat supporting it. At the minute 90% think it would be wrong to lift restrictions and 5% think it would be right.

But as I say I do think part of this is more political/culture war than anything else. This doesn't necessarily speak to the sustainability of lockdown measures so much as it's about the sustainability of lockdown measures in a country as polarised as the US where one party and leader has decided to be ambivalent at best about the whole thing. So lockdowns may be less sustainable in the US because Trump and the GOP rather than because of the measures.

Shelf, that's a very good summary of the situation/crisis the US is now facing and one I hope we'll not have to confront.

As you 'say' the UK social cohesion on this is surprisingly solid.

Similarly in Canada. Here, protesting against lockdown is culturally very unlikely at the moment - the vast majority of Canadians find the notion utterly weird. The consensus view is that saving lives is important and we will deal with the financial fallout later.

[Zanza]

There are anti lockdown protests in Germany, but so far it is limited to very small numbers. A 50 person protest in my city was allowed by our federal constitutional court as the city made a formal mistake in its rejection of the application. The protesters took care to keep 2 meters apart though.

[Iormlund]

The protesters took care to keep 2 meters apart though.

Ordnung uber alles. 

[Maladict]

First step to recovery, lower schools to reopen in two weeks. Kids also allowed to do team sports, but no matches.

Otherwise no changes until mid May at least, time to get a hair trimmer. All sports leagues cancelled, no major events until September at least.

[Zanza]

German authorities believe that reproduction rate here is now below 1, meaning there is a decline in infections. They will try to track it while slowly opening up again. Some biologists and epidemiologists are sceptical though as they predict a harder second wave.

I think it's clear from the charts below that the situation in Western Europe has been stabilized now. But the current level of lockdown is unsustainable. So let's see if those curves stay like that when opening up again.