COVID-19 thread

[Travis B.]

The idiotic conservatives on the WI Supreme Court shot down the Save at Home order here at the instigation of the Republicans in the state legislator... and immediately tons of people immediately headed to the local bar...

[Moose-tache]

On the other hand, an estimate by the University of Manchester for the UK, which used desktop modelling and did not involve actually testing anyone, suggested 25% of the UK population had already had corona virus. If this were true, then the true UK death rate would be somewhere in the region of 0.2 - 0.3% depending on whether you look at confirmed COVID cases or excess deaths.

Now, I'm much more inclined to trust the Spanish numbers because they were based on actually testing a subset of the population for antibodies, whereas the UK estimate that got the red top papers excited was not. Of course, there might be differences between countries, but given that the UK response has been generally perceived to be bad internationally, can we really be doing 5 times better than Spain when you look at the mortality rate?

I would expect a high number of undetected cases would imply a lower mortality rate, since the people who die of Corona are mostly a subset of people with recognizable symptoms. Having more cases beyond the confirmed ones probably means having more asymptomatic people, perhaps because the disease has spread better among young and healthy people. Not sure if that could explain the discrepancy between these two estimates, but it could explain how the mortality in the UK could be lower without the UK doing anything "better" than Spain.

[chris_notts]

On the other hand, an estimate by the University of Manchester for the UK, which used desktop modelling and did not involve actually testing anyone, suggested 25% of the UK population had already had corona virus. If this were true, then the true UK death rate would be somewhere in the region of 0.2 - 0.3% depending on whether you look at confirmed COVID cases or excess deaths.

Now, I'm much more inclined to trust the Spanish numbers because they were based on actually testing a subset of the population for antibodies, whereas the UK estimate that got the red top papers excited was not. Of course, there might be differences between countries, but given that the UK response has been generally perceived to be bad internationally, can we really be doing 5 times better than Spain when you look at the mortality rate?

I would expect a high number of undetected cases would imply a lower mortality rate, since the people who die of Corona are mostly a subset of people with recognizable symptoms. Having more cases beyond the confirmed ones probably means having more asymptomatic people, perhaps because the disease has spread better among young and healthy people. Not sure if that could explain the discrepancy between these two estimates, but it could explain how the mortality in the UK could be lower without the UK doing anything "better" than Spain.

But the Spanish tested a sample of the population for antibodies, so should have picked this up, and their number is lower than the UK estimate. If we assume the mortality rate is similar in both countries, the only way both numbers could be right is if the majority of people don't develop antibodies in response to corona virus.

[Moose-tache]

The USA has accounted for 40-45% of all (confirmed) active cases for the last several weeks. But this market share is shrinking, probably because while the US slogs through an excruciatingly slow recovery, the other shoe is finally dropping in Russia, Mexico, and especially Brazil. Brazil is now where the US was at the end of March, with rapidly growing death rates and inadequate testing. They recently lost another health minister, this one a Bolsonaro pick who gave no reasons for resigning. Do any of our Lusophone members have more insight on the situation there?

[chris_notts]

Well, I'm not from Brazil, but I thought the guy who conspired with him to get rid of Lula in a pseudo-coup resigned recently and then leaked a 2 hour video of a Bolsonaro cabinet meeting in which he swore a lot, aired various crazy right-wing conspiracy theories Trump style, discussed how to subvert a police investigation into his family, and insulted supposed international allies. Plus the rubbish he spouted about corona is directly contradicted by people's experience on the ground when their local hospital collapses.

People want out before the ship sinks and another interesting legal manoever is used to change the president again. No one wants to be collateral damage when the next coup by kangeroo court happens.

[chris_notts]

Most people get cold feet when their leader is shown to be corrupt, incompetent and unhinged simultaneously....

[Kuchigakatai]

[Pabappa]

Russia defies expectations by showing decreasing numbers of new cases just as they announce theyre opening the country back up .... but can we trust the numbers? Russia is likely using a different method of reporting COVID-related deaths compared with most of Europe & the US, since otherwise we would have to conclude they are 10X more successful at ensuring COVID patients survive. That or they just massively tested their population and found many cases that other countries would have overlooked. Maybe theyre testing less people now.

[Moose-tache]

Russia has tested ~5% of their population, compared to ~3.8% in the US. That could account for some increase in total cases, but trickery with the testing won't cause the number of deaths to decrease, unless they can do some creative accounting with those numbers as well.

In other authoritarian-bullshit-news, Florida fired the woman who was making a real-time map of cases in that state. She alleges that she was fired for refusing to lower case numbers. The website is still up, but is not being properly maintained. Also, parts of Disney World are reopening for business. Probably unrelated fact.

[MacAnDàil]

As has been mentioned, there are delays in the appearance of symptoms (of 3-14 days roughly) so there should be a similar delay in Russia's stats rising. Then again, I am a bit suspicious of Russia having literally no new cases for the whole of February.

[Pabappa]

I noticed that as well but I think its at least plausible .... the USA had only 24 cases at the end of February, for example, and if I remember right, over half of them were at a single nursing home in Washington state .... our first "cluster". And the others were for people who had recently been to China. So if the USA was able to evade the plague for that long, Russia certainly could have done the same.

What Im more suspicious of is the death total. I suspect Russia is not lying so much as doing what some countries are admitting to .... excluding deaths from the tally if the patient has any other health condition that may have contributed to the death. There's nothing wrong with this .... like I said, it's not lying .... but it becomes a lie when people measure their numbers side to side with those of other countries doing it "our" way and then claim Russia is 10X better at saving lives.

I should add that I havent bothered to look this up to verify it, and perhaps someone could do that in just a few seconds ... but if not, I dont read Russian so it would get quickly more difficult.

Now, if Russia is *not* excluding deaths that way and still claims a fatality rate 1/10 that of the West then I am suspicious of even the figures themselves.

hmmm .... i found this: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/19/euro ... index.html

[chris_notts]

An interesting debate has been whether the corona crisis will lead to deflation or inflation. I think in the long term it depends a lot on government policy: if nominal incomes are largely supported while supply contracts then inflation is possible, whereas if incomes and supply both crash a deflationary downward spiral seems possible. At least in the short term the UK is heading into deflationary territory as companies desperately try to sell stock with limited outlets. Inflation is heading down and the government is borrowing at negative rates:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/ni ... oronavirus

https://www.theguardian.com/business/li ... 782fa7df4d

[Linguoboy]

An interesting debate has been whether the corona crisis will lead to deflation or inflation. I think in the long term it depends a lot on government policy: if nominal incomes are largely supported while supply contracts then inflation is possible, whereas if incomes and supply both crash a deflationary downward spiral seems possible.

It's also going to depend on consumer behaviour, and it's really too early to see yet what the permanent effects of the crisis might be. The longer this goes on, the more people are finding substitutes for shopping. For stuff they need, people are swapping or just giving things away. DIY is on the rise; all those sewing machines which came out from their covers to make masks might not go back under once clothing stores reopen. And people are confronting their psychological reasons for spending money and looking for alternatives. Plus the pandemic is bringing home the human costs of maintaining a just-in-time supply chain; folks are literally asking themselves, "Is having this worth risking someone's life for?" and quite often the answer is "No".

We've seen some of this before during previous recessions but not, I don't think, on the same scale. (15% unemployment is already eye-watering, and I don't think we've topped out yet.) There are going to be the same "You must spend to save civilisation!" exhortations that we saw after 9/11 but I just don't know if they're going to be as effective--especially if, as you say, consumers' incomes aren't supported.

[alynnidalar]

Another factor is the inaccessibility of brick and mortar stores, which means a) an even more pronounced shift to online shopping, which was already killing brick-and-mortar stores to begin with, and b) less impulse buying where you go into a store intending to buy one thing, only to end up with a pile at the cash register. Under a "normal" recession, people still go to stores physically and get tempted with impulse purchases, even if they're spending less than usual, but in a pandemic, these aren't even options.

Sure, there's impulse buying online, but... it's just not the same for me...

[chris_notts]

You're both right, that's another factor of course. But it's complicated because the behaviour changes will cause job losses so you're back to which is shrinking faster, demand or the remaining suppliers.

On a personal note, I haven't really missed shops or restaurants or even other people that much, apart from close family, although I've always been on the introverted end of the spectrum. My main impulse buys are usually IT, books and plants, but I already have a decent sized library and I have some packets of seeds so it's really a case of not missing it if I don't see it in the first place. It's strange... my wife's income has been hit quite a lot already, but despite that we're saving quite a bit just because we don't have anything to spend the remaining money on.

EDIT: I guess I should say that we haven't really gone out for anything non-essential in 8 or 9 weeks now. But I don't really find it affecting me much, and my son is very happy to not be forced to go to school every day. The only one really suffering psychologically at all is my wife.

[Nortaneous]

the USA had only 24 cases at the end of February, for example

Officially, yes, but the official numbers are wrong. There was already community transmission in February, which is extremely difficult to square with such a low case count. And the only reason we know there was community transmission in February is that someone in Seattle did some unauthorized testing, which the government shut down. Any bets on whether they factored those cases into the official numbers?

The official numbers are only going to get more wrong, but they've been wrong from the start.

[Moose-tache]

IMHO the DIY scarves and hats that are going around pose no threat to manufactured clothes. My husband is now trying to find someone who will sell him a loom online. Anyone want to place any bets on whether his creations will be Zara's next fashion sensation? In the Before Time, as linguoboy points out, people didn't buy clothing because they had no choice. Most shopping malls sell validation and status, and those things cannot be stitched together on Grandma's pedal powered sewing machine. I don't ever see people prioritizing conspicuous consumption any less in the future, especially as our economy becomes increasingly bifurcated into "folks who made it" and "failures." As for whether demand loss (due to income loss) or supply loss (due to shuttered business) will decrease faster, I think it will be much easier for governments to buoy supply. But historically we haven't seen a deflationary spiral in many, many years, so it's hard to make predictions about it. Until the 70s, everyone assumed that inflation couldn't happen during a recession, because of the same relationship between supply and demand mentioned here.

Also, on the off chance that terrible homespun does become the badge of identity for those who can't or won't go shopping after the pandemic, I vote we call those people "frumpen proletariat." This is very important.

[Kuchigakatai]

Seen on the Internet somewhere:

"I wonder how long it'll take until I start social distancing in my dreams"

[chris_notts]

But, on the off chance that terrible homespun does become the badge of identity for those who can't or won't go shopping after the pandemic, I vote we call those people "frumpen proletariat." This is very important.

There is a big difference though between just buying enough clothes and buying massive wardrobes as some people do. If you have a change of clothes for every day of the week for both formal and informal occasions then you have enough.

I think there's a third category as well: people who just want to be comfortable. My wife is constantly criticising me for only owning two pairs of shoes at a time, for happily keeping and wearing old clothes with small holes in, and generally refusing to buy new clothes until the existing ones are completely unusable. I could afford new clothes, but why torture myself when I don't have to? Luckily people seem to expect programmers and IT people to be a bit casual / scruffy and as long as I don't get fired and I'm comfortable I don't really give a crap what other people think.

[alynnidalar]

IMHO the DIY scarves and hats that are going around pose no threat to manufactured clothes.

That's why I think it's going to be less about DIY replacing factory-made, and more about people simply buying less and "making do" with what they have already. Once you get in the habit of not going to stores/window shopping, it's easier to maintain.