COVID-19 - Links, Discussion,

[former1dog]

Pretty much the same as it was on October 31, 2019. What's your point? And I've barely given a thought to the personal risk involved here so much as the impact I might have as a spreader of the virus.

I'm interested in the society-wide impact of a unique virus. The daily risk we individually encounter is irrelevant when a unique factor that can quickly spread through human interaction comes into play.

OK, on November 1, 2019 what was the risk of your actions, conscious or not, of preventing someone else from walking in their door at the end of the day.

My point is simply this. There is a significant health risk to stopping life as we know it entirely, which is what we have effectively done. Virus or not, I'm certain you understand that?

The hippocratic oath says first, do no harm. The nation has been given a medical prescription and that tenant may have been broken.

[sonuvazag]

I still can't believe 3%. In the event one-fourth of the United States was infected, that would be 2.475 million deaths.

[former1dog]

It's aspirational, but clearly possible.

In the event that the serology tests prove out, you're suggesting we should have been more nuanced despite not having that foreknowledge, especially when in fact we knew hospital systems had the potential to be overrun not just as a theory but because it was something that had already happened, including in small towns.

Obviously, the hays in the barn. We can't have a more nuanced approach. That doesn't mean their couldn't have been one.

All we can do now is analyze the severity of the disease. What actions were taken and how we possibly could have done better, especially in the whole ruining our economy department.

[sonuvazag]

OK, on November 1, 2019 what was the risk of your actions, conscious or not, of preventing someone else from walking in their door at the end of the day.

My point is simply this. There is a significant health risk to stopping life as we know it entirely, which is what we have effectively done. Virus or not, I'm certain you understand that?

The hippocratic oath says first, do no harm. The nation has been given a medical prescription and that tenant may have been broken.

You don't seem to be acknowledging is that when a lot of people get sick at the same time, the economy is also disrupted, but in a way that can't be remedied with stimulus money. It's not as simple as having it one way or the other.

[former1dog]

You don't seem to be acknowledging is that when a lot of people get sick at the same time, the economy is also disrupted, but in a way that can't be remedied with stimulus money. It's not as simple as having it one way or the other.

We have identical objections to one anothers arguments.

[LongIslandZagFan]

You don't seem to be acknowledging is that when a lot of people get sick at the same time, the economy is also disrupted. It's not as simple as having it one way or the other.

This exactly. NY/LI was behind the curve early... like Louisiana... like Detroit.

I really dread to see what happens in Georgia... I got a sneaking suspicion it is going to explode like a wildfire if people start going out in public the way the governor wants them to.

A follow-up question on this for F1D. What good is opening up if people like me have no interest in being anywhere near other people I don't personally know? I hate going to the grocery store during this thing... it is like playing with fire, but necessary. You couldn't pay me to sit in a restaurant right now or in the next 2-3 months for that matter. Not until new cases is dropping to close to zero.

[sonuvazag]

We have identical objections to one anothers arguments.

I also don't think our thinking is very different. But we obviously have vastly different notions about what level of death and sickness we are willing to tolerate to let society be open and free.

How many lives do you think are going to be lost due to the economy being shut down? To me the number is certainly nonzero but I just can't visualize it even being even close to the 40,000 we've already lost or, more to your point, the additional hypothetical number we would lose if we never shut anything down.

[former1dog]

This exactly. NY/LI was behind the curve early... like Louisiana... like Detroit.

I really dread to see what happens in Georgia... I got a sneaking suspicion it is going to explode like a wildfire if people start going out in public the way the governor wants them to.

A follow-up question on this for F1D. What good is opening up if people like me have no interest in being anywhere near other people I don't personally know? I hate going to the grocery store during this thing... it is like playing with fire, but necessary. You couldn't pay me to sit in a restaurant right now or in the next 2-3 months for that matter. Not until new cases is dropping to close to zero.

I love this question!

You, LIZF (one of my favorite people on this board and probably in my top 100 overall) should be allowed to sit at home!! That is your right. (See what I did there)

[former1dog]

I also don't think our thinking is very different. But we obviously have vastly different notions about what level of death and sickness we are willing to tolerate to let society be open and free.

How many lives do you think are going to be lost due to the economy being shut down? To me the number is certainly nonzero but I just can't visualize it even being even close to the 40,000 we've already lost.

Good question. A number that we're likely not going to be able to quantify accurately.

Did Joe Smith commit suicide because of the economy or because he suffered from severe depression? Did Kenny beat his child into a coma because of economic stress or because he's a criminal psychopath? Did Mary die of alcohol poisoning because she was an alcoholic or because she lost her job?

I do know my friend who's a doctor on the front line and is much closer to your opinion on this issue than to mine, is extremely concerned about the health risks due to the shutdown.

[sonuvazag]

This exactly. NY/LI was behind the curve early... like Louisiana... like Detroit.

I really dread to see what happens in Georgia... I got a sneaking suspicion it is going to explode like a wildfire if people start going out in public the way the governor wants them to.

A follow-up question on this for F1D. What good is opening up if people like me have no interest in being anywhere near other people I don't personally know? I hate going to the grocery store during this thing... it is like playing with fire, but necessary. You couldn't pay me to sit in a restaurant right now or in the next 2-3 months for that matter. Not until new cases is dropping to close to zero.

This goes back to Reno's post and Markburn's objection to it. I'm different from Markburn in the sense I would love to be able to test myself regularly to know my antibody status and would prefer to have my status be known by all the people I come in contact with, especially if there was an app that could do it anonymously.

And no, in general, i don't like smartphones and all their tracking features, so this is an exception to my rule.

[LongIslandZagFan]

I love this question!

You, LIZF (one of my favorite people on this board and probably in my top 100 overall) should be allowed to sit at home!! That is your right. (See what I did there)

Thanks F1D and same back at ya'.

I think the point is that most people in urban/suburban areas where we all know at least one person that has died or lost loved ones... is that you can open up... but without any reassurances that this thing is remotely under control... opeing ain't worth a darn.

Again I want to loop back to one thing that really bothers me about the whole argument of "we've gone to far" is that it discounts the lives lost. It discounts the countless hours nurses/doctors/emts have put in over the last month and basically does a cost benefit analysis on human lives and human suffering. What IS the bar for this?

[sonuvazag]

Good question. A number that we're likely not going to be able to quantify accurately.

Did Joe Smith commit suicide because of the economy or because he suffered from severe depression? Did Kenny beat his child into a coma because of economic stress or because he's a criminal psychopath? Did Mary die of alcohol poisoning because she was an alcoholic or because she lost her job?

I do know my friend who's a doctor on the front line and is much closer to your opinion on this issue than to mine, is extremely concerned about the health risks due to the shutdown.

Trust me, it's not that I'm not concerned about these factors and, while it may be difficult to quantify, I absolutely believe it should be attempted. One point of contention is that we just haven't landed yet on a solid agreement of how much risk there is on either side of the equation.

[kitzbuel]

Well stated. The social contract we all have lived under is rife with risk, but because there is a new virus, we forget that.

Studies in Santa Clara county, amongst a growing number of others, will I believe eventually show that this virus, with no vaccine, has a mortality rate similar to that of the flu, which does have a vaccine.

We have forever lived with the risk of communicable disease and a hundred other factors in our daily lives that can kill us.

Unfortunately for economy and the millions who will now deal with distress, depression, increased rates of suicide, alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence and all the other issue that will come as a result of the shutdown, I firmly believe that the cure is going to be much worse than the disease.

Let me admit, I don't know what the alternative would have been to flatten the curve, so to speak, but I do believe a more thoughtful, nuanced approach can be found for the next time the world is presented with a crisis like this.

It should have been found this time. There was plenty of time. Germany has done a much better job at managing the whole crisis and are already starting to open their economy.

[sonuvazag]

I love this question!

You, LIZF (one of my favorite people on this board and probably in my top 100 overall) should be allowed to sit at home!! That is your right. (See what I did there)

Yes, the freedom to make this choice here is good, but we still end up with a pretty sour economy that will need federal stimulus.

[former1dog]

Trust me, it's not that I'm not concerned about these factors and, while it may be difficult to quantify, I absolutely believe it should be attempted. One point of contention is that we just haven't landed yet on a solid agreement of how much risk there is on either side of the equation.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...conomy/279961/

Roy was one of at least 40,000 Americans who took their own lives that year and the next, the two-year span that suicide rate spiked to its highest recorded level ever: more than 150 per 1 million annually.

God help us. I hope it doesn't get this bad. I guess some quantification studies have been attempted for past financial crises.

That number would be way worse than the virus, just from suicide. I hope we don't get anywhwere close to it.