Author Topic: Is it time to reopen the country? (Read 43635 times)

moko · « **Reply #320 on:** May 21, 2020, 09:56:40 PM »

Quote from: ExGingi on May 21, 2020, 06:49:50 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-21/coronavirus-lockdowns-haven-t-proved-they-re-worth-the-havoc

fascinating. I'm genuinely curious what the medical community's rebuttal to this is.

Afrages6 · « **Reply #321 on:** May 21, 2020, 10:16:32 PM »

Quote from: moko on May 21, 2020, 09:56:40 PM

fascinating. I'm genuinely curious what the medical community's rebuttal to this is.

They won’t rebut. The medical community isn’t supposed to make policy. They try to save every life policy and couldn’t care less about the economic impact. I am not saying that in a bad way at all.

Rand Paul was alluding to that when he questioning Fauci.

ari3 · « **Reply #322 on:** May 21, 2020, 10:16:49 PM »

Quote from: ExGingi on May 21, 2020, 06:49:50 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-21/coronavirus-lockdowns-haven-t-proved-they-re-worth-the-havoc

While he brings up interesting points he is using fuzzy math comparing Belgium which is much more dense to Sweden, comparing USA which did a terrible job (or none at all) tracking cases to Taiwan that was very proactive and aggressive tracking cases.

Also as far as comparing corona to Hong Kong Flu goes you would have to know if it spreads as easily as corona before you can compare

Kobe Bryant · « **Reply #323 on:** May 21, 2020, 10:18:43 PM »

Quote from: moko on May 21, 2020, 09:56:40 PM

fascinating. I'm genuinely curious what the medical community's rebuttal to this is.

Same here.
Ikar Choser Min Hsefer the point the writer is making is that we had a pandemic in 1968 that killed 1 million people in the world, 100,000 in the US and he hardly recalls it, cause there was no lockdown.
(Today it's another strain of the seasonal flu)

Kobe Bryant · « **Reply #324 on:** May 21, 2020, 10:23:21 PM »

Quote from: Afrages6 on May 21, 2020, 10:16:32 PM

They won’t rebut. The medical community isn’t supposed to make policy. They try to save every life possible, and it's not their job to factor in the economic impact, I am not saying that in a bad way at all.

Rand Paul was alluding to that when he questioning Fauci.

FTFY

AsherO · « **Reply #325 on:** May 22, 2020, 08:05:31 AM »

Quote from: ExGingi on May 21, 2020, 06:49:50 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-21/coronavirus-lockdowns-haven-t-proved-they-re-worth-the-havoc

But we’re had nearly 100k deaths R”L with the lockdown, without having flattened the curve, it’s scary to try and quantify what that number would look like now.

Ergel · « **Reply #326 on:** May 22, 2020, 08:17:18 AM »

Quote from: AsherO on May 22, 2020, 08:05:31 AM

But we’re had nearly 100k deaths R”L with the lockdown, without having flattened the curve, it’s scary to try and quantify what that number would look like now.

Unless it wouldn't look different, we have no way of knowing

AsherO · « **Reply #327 on:** May 22, 2020, 09:15:19 AM »

Quote from: Ergel on May 22, 2020, 08:17:18 AM

Unless it wouldn't look different, we have no way of knowing

The R number fell significantly due to the curve flattening, why wouldn’t it keep going without lockdown if only 5-10% of the population got infected?

Ergel · « **Reply #328 on:** May 22, 2020, 09:20:50 AM »

Quote from: AsherO on May 22, 2020, 09:15:19 AM

The R number fell significantly due to the curve flattening,

How do we know the R number fell significantly? How does it compare to the R number in Sweden? I'm just saying we haven no proof of causation between lockdown and R number

Quote

why wouldn’t it keep going without lockdown if only 5-10% of the population got infected?

Did you mean why would it?

S209 · « **Reply #329 on:** May 22, 2020, 09:51:31 AM »

Quote from: Ergel on May 22, 2020, 09:20:50 AM

How do we know the R number fell significantly? How does it compare to the R number in Sweden? I'm just saying we haven no proof of causation between lockdown and R number
Did you mean why would it?

Are you suggesting that forms of social distancing doesn’t have an effect on R0 numbers? That concept has been proven by science many times over, and it’s also just plain logic.

There’s an entire thread on this: Compare Sweden to its Nordic counterparts and you’ll see the difference. It’s night and day. Not to mention Sweden does have many social distancing laws in effect, as well as pretty high voluntary compliance.

Different areas and countries seem to be impacted in different ways for reasons unknown. But without comparing apples to apples you’ll never know what would have been. 100K deaths in a first wave with the strictest universal social distancing in modern history...

There is every chance it’s more about timing than anything else.

Afrages6 · « **Reply #330 on:** May 22, 2020, 09:56:59 AM »

Quote from: S209 on May 22, 2020, 09:51:31 AM

Are you suggesting that forms of social distancing doesn’t have an effect on R0 numbers? That concept has been proven by science many times over, and it’s also just plain logic.

There’s an entire thread on this: Compare Sweden to its Nordic counterparts and you’ll see the difference. It’s night and day. Not to mention Sweden does have many social distancing laws in effect, as well as pretty high voluntary compliance.

Different areas and countries seem to be impacted in different ways for reasons unknown. But without comparing apples to apples you’ll never know what would have been. 100K deaths in a first wave with the strictest universal social distancing in modern history...

There is every chance it’s more about timing than anything else.

It is very possible that in NY the lockdown had very little effect on the R number.

S209 · « **Reply #331 on:** May 22, 2020, 09:59:16 AM »

Quote from: AsherO on May 22, 2020, 08:05:31 AM

But we’re had nearly 100k deaths R”L with the lockdown, without having flattened the curve, it’s scary to try and quantify what that number would look like now.

Another couple of points:
1) It seems it was 100K total flu deaths that year, not in addition to other flus. This coronavirus has had 100K deaths aside from the regular annual flu deaths in a matter of months. As @AsherO points out, that was without any locking down or slowing of the spread. This is with severe slowing mechanisms in place.
2) That was the sum total after two distinct waves, over the course of a year, with the second wave being deadlier. This coronavirus has not yet finished its first wave, it’s only been a couple of months and we’re already at 100K..

S209 · « **Reply #332 on:** May 22, 2020, 10:01:38 AM »

Quote from: Afrages6 on May 22, 2020, 09:56:59 AM

It is very possible that in NY the lockdown had very little effect on the R number.

It’s possible that they screwed it up. That doesn’t mean lockdowns don’t work, it means their lockdown didn’t work. An easy reason would be they were way too late: at some point, perhaps a lockdown is moot.

Then again, there really is no way to know if it did or didn’t work, because we don’t have an easy place to compare it to. It stands to reason that it did have an effect, but we’ll probably never have distinct data to prove either way.

Ergel · « **Reply #333 on:** May 22, 2020, 10:19:34 AM »

Quote from: S209 on May 22, 2020, 10:01:38 AM

Then again, there really is no way to know if it did or didn’t work, because we don’t have an easy place to compare it to. It stands to reason that it did have an effect,

You keep saying this. I heard a study regarding 120 army camps studied during the 1918 flu pandemic. 99 had social distancing measures and 21 did not. There was no statistical different in outcome between the two groups. It's not a huge sample size, but it's pretty big.

Quote

but we’ll probably never have distinct data to prove either way.

This

Lurker · « **Reply #334 on:** May 22, 2020, 10:31:27 AM »

Quote from: Ergel on May 22, 2020, 10:19:34 AM

You keep saying this. I heard a study regarding 120 army camps studied during the 1918 flu pandemic. 99 had social distancing measures and 21 did not. There was no statistical different in outcome between the two groups. It's not a huge sample size, but it's pretty big.

Look at the follow up study about those 99 bases that "had social distancing."

yelped · « **Reply #335 on:** May 22, 2020, 10:37:11 AM »

To all those saying there is no difference between being locked down and not, give me a break. The reason why in NY it didn't help as much because the government was way too late to implement it. It's obvious as day, and I'm not sure why this had to be said.

aygart · « **Reply #336 on:** May 22, 2020, 11:27:50 AM »

Quote from: yelped on May 22, 2020, 10:37:11 AM

To all those saying there is no difference between being locked down and not, give me a break. The reason why in NY it didn't help as much because the government was way too late to implement it. It's obvious as day, and I'm not sure why this had to be said.

Not to mention that they implemented it backwards. Subways, which were likely a MAJOR point of contagion were running while parks which had limited contagion were closed. They spent their time busy with outdoor funerals which seem to be limited in their danger.

aygart · « **Reply #337 on:** May 22, 2020, 11:28:29 AM »

Quote from: Afrages6 on May 22, 2020, 09:56:59 AM

It is very possible that in NY the lockdown had very little effect on the R number.

Anything is possible until you have numbers to prove it, but this is highly unlikely.

S209 · « **Reply #338 on:** May 22, 2020, 02:15:56 PM »

Quote from: Ergel on May 22, 2020, 10:19:34 AM

You keep saying this. I heard a study regarding 120 army camps studied during the 1918 flu pandemic. 99 had social distancing measures and 21 did not. There was no statistical different in outcome between the two groups. It's not a huge sample size, but it's pretty big.This

Did you read the articles I linked to earlier contrasting places that enforced SD in 1918 with those that didn’t?

Kobe Bryant · « **Reply #339 on:** May 22, 2020, 03:29:31 PM »

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/22/dr-anthony-fauci-says-staying-closed-for-too-long-could-cause-irreparable-damage.html