Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[crazy canuck]

FYI, I'm right here.  If you want to respond to what I write, first person will work just fine.

BC proves you wrong

[DGuller]

FYI, I'm right here.  If you want to respond to what I write, first person will work just fine.

BC proves you wrong

Insightful.

[The Brain]

A state making rules and not enforcing them sounds like a horrible idea.

[DGuller]

I haven't taken a look at the numbers in a while, so I just looked at them today.  The good news is that infections are decelerating in all of the current hot spot states.  The bad news is that things are accelerating again in most of the Northeastern states, New Jersey most of all, and New York is still just treading water.    New York is not getting worse, but it's also not getting better, and I would guess that the constant level of 1,000 infections a day is not something that allows you to step on the gas with reopening.

[crazy canuck]

FYI, I'm right here.  If you want to respond to what I write, first person will work just fine.

BC proves you wrong

Insightful.

Yes, thankfully we did not go down the disasterous route of only implementing guidelines that could be enforced and implemented guidelines that would be followed.

[merithyn]

I haven't taken a look at the numbers in a while, so I just looked at them today.  The good news is that infections are decelerating in all of the current hot spot states.  The bad news is that things are accelerating again in most of the Northeastern states, New Jersey most of all, and New York is still just treading water.    New York is not getting worse, but it's also not getting better, and I would guess that the constant level of 1,000 infections a day is not something that allows you to step on the gas with reopening.

Even at a fairly low hospitalization rate, that's going to start to get grim very quickly again.

[The Minsky Moment]

I have a 1-in-1000 chance of dying if I catch it? Damn. That's actually higher than I am comfortable with, if I am honest.

Are you comfortable with a 2-in-1000 chance of dying?  That's what you're living through every year at your age.

Your point being?

That you shouldn't worry about increasing your mortality rate by 50%  (??)

[DGuller]

FYI, I'm right here.  If you want to respond to what I write, first person will work just fine.

BC proves you wrong

Insightful.

Yes, thankfully we did not go down the disasterous route of only implementing guidelines that could be enforced and implemented guidelines that would be followed.

If you're not willing or able to express your thoughts coherently, you don't have to get into the discussion, first person or third person.

[DGuller]

I have a 1-in-1000 chance of dying if I catch it? Damn. That's actually higher than I am comfortable with, if I am honest.

Are you comfortable with a 2-in-1000 chance of dying?  That's what you're living through every year at your age.

Your point being?

That you shouldn't worry about increasing your mortality rate by 50%  (??)

The point is to put things in perspective, before we let anxiety take over. 

And Covid is not increasing your mortality rate by 50%.    You're a numbers kind of lawyer, Minsky, IIRC, you know better than that.  It's increasing Tamas's annual risk of death in one year by 50%.  It's increasing his monthly risk of death by 600%, during the one month in his life he's having it.  It decreases his overall life expectancy by about 0.05 years roughly, from mental back of the envelope calculations.  It's not nothing, but let's keep things in perspective.

[The Minsky Moment]

NJ is actually down slightly on the 7-day moving average as of yesterday. The NE states had small rises in July but at the moment are leveled off.  That may all change when the schools reopen.

[The Minsky Moment]

And Covid is not increasing your mortality rate by 50%.   

It is for the year if you get it.  The question is how one should behave this year.  If a 1 in 1000 risk is concerning, the fact that there is a background risk of 2 in 1000 that cant be controlled isn't really reassuring. 

[crazy canuck]

FYI, I'm right here.  If you want to respond to what I write, first person will work just fine.

BC proves you wrong

Insightful.

Yes, thankfully we did not go down the disasterous route of only implementing guidelines that could be enforced and implemented guidelines that would be followed.

If you're not willing or able to express your thoughts coherently, you don't have to get into the discussion, first person or third person.

I am not sure I can explain this to you.

[Sheilbh]

I'm talking about Covid rules.  There are only so many rules you can enforce, so pick the worthiest ones and go all-in on them .  You have make sure that everyone follows them, voluntarily or otherwise.

I disagree because I just don't think there is any society this side of China that could really actually enforce rules as sweeping as we've implemented to fight covid. There are not enough police to monitor compliance of mask-wearing, or social distancing/household meetings, or even lockdown when it was happening.

It's why I think communication and getting buy-in/support from people matters so much. It's also why the police should enforce but I actually think it should be done quite discreetly because there's loads of evidence that people's behaviour is influenced by what they think other people do. So yeah the police may well be issuing fines against people for breaking the rules, but they should focus on the very broad compliance because that's likely to encourage more compliance rather than the few rule-breakers because that's likely to encourage more rule-breaking.

[DGuller]

And Covid is not increasing your mortality rate by 50%.   

It is for the year if you get it.  The question is how one should behave this year.  If a 1 in 1000 risk is concerning, the fact that there is a background risk of 2 in 1000 that cant be controlled isn't really reassuring.

It's conceivable that it should be reassuring.  Sometimes people are worried about risks because they're not putting them in context, and once you make them consciously aware of the risks they are taking and not getting stressed over, it may help.  Also, Tamas surely has some control over that 2/1000 risk, at his age about half of it is due to accidents.  Also, sometimes 50% more of a negligible thing is still negligible.

[DGuller]

I am not sure I can explain this to you.

No shit.  Is there a person you can explain it to?  Give it a shot and I'll listen in.