Zompist Bboard Again

For evictions, some Scots campaign for ban on eviction. Rent holidays have already been put in place in France for CROUS residents. IIRC businesses too. They could do it for ordinary people too.

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:48 am
Now then, based on data from other coronaviruses: there's no reason to expect it will. Natural immunity could last only a few months. It was supposed to go away with rising temperature, but if I understand correctly, coronaviruses aren't that sensitive to hear.
Sure, maybe there'll be a vaccine, but it'll take years to develop.

Ok, that does sound like a problem.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:36 amIn Hubei, 0.1% of the population was infected. In Daegu it was 0.3%, and in Lombardy it's 0.3% and growing. But there is no community on Earth larger than a crowded Chuck-e-Cheese that has an infection rate above 1%.

Where are these numbers from? If they're from anything that isn't a large randomised sample of the entire population, symptoms or not, they're worthless.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:36 am In Hubei, 0.1% of the population was infected. In Daegu it was 0.3%, and in Lombardy it's 0.3% and growing. [...]

Daegu should terrify rather than reassure you. From my earlier post:

zompist wrote:Here's how it happens. A 35-year old woman was infected but not tested, at a time when there were only 30 cases in the country. She went to two church services, with a total attendance of 9300. 1200 people got the virus; a few weeks later, her city (Daegu) was the epicenter of the virus in South Korea, with 3600 cases as compared with 98 in Seoul.

And South Korea has very aggressive social tracing; that's why we have these figures, and why the city as a whole has a "low" rate of infection. But, one person was responsible for the discrepancy between Seoul and Daegu, and a couple of low-key interactions— going to church services— allowed her to infect 1200 people.

If you're just plugging numbers into the calculator, that's a "12.9% infection rate"— better than the cruise ship, yay!

If anyone has ever been on a cruise, you know that we already have a maximum infection rate. Of the passengers on board the Diamond Princess, 19% were infected with Covid-19.

On the other hand, 25% of the Americans on board tested positive. Might be a fluke, but maybe Americans are more gregarious and thus more apt to be exposed.

Or take the Life Care Center in Kirkland WA: 108 patients, 180 employees; 81 patients and 34 employees tested positive. That's a 40% infection rate.

even in the US where government response has been patchy and delayed, there is extensive social distancing.

Yes, not least because the most populous states have Democratic governors who are taking the pandemic seriously, unlike the President. What if he gets his way and "re-opens the economy"? What if just Republicans decide to throw away the social distancing?

I mean, I take your point that a 100% infection rate is unlikely. A 19% rate would still be catastrophic.

I'm not thrilled or attracted by worst case scenarios; we talk about them so we can avoid them, not plunge into them. But we have to resist all the inevitable memes of "it can't be that bad" or "I'm healthy so it won't affect me" or "I've never experienced a pandemic so it can't possibly be as bad as they say." It can be really bad, that's why we're taking extreme measures.

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:01 am - There's a bit of sense in Trump's madness. The quinine cure is actually hydroxychloroquine and an antibiotic, which is not as mad as it sounds (HCQ does something I don't understand to cell membrane, and the virus apparentdebatly uses gut bacteria as shelter, hence the antibiotic). The debate over here is completely insane. But there will be large scale test, which is the only way to settle it.

The problem is, there is no treatment yet, but Trump is lying that there is. "We're going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. ...And that's where the FDA has been so great. They've gone through the approval process - it's been approved."

It hasn't been approved. But because he's making these lies on TV, many people believe him. A couple in Arizona drank chloroquine; the man died and the woman is in critical condition. "Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure," she told reporters.

A lot of his lies are just dumb. His lies about the pandemic literally kill people.

In fairness (and boy do I hate saying that with regards to Trump), drinking a random chemical that's in your house because you think it's the same as the one Trump mentioned once is a level of stupidity even beyond Trump. If you have that little common sense, I'm not sure you'd last long no matter who's president.

alynnidalar wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:21 pm In fairness (and boy do I hate saying that with regards to Trump), drinking a random chemical that's in your house because you think it's the same as the one Trump mentioned once is a level of stupidity even beyond Trump. If you have that little common sense, I'm not sure you'd last long no matter who's president.

They were in their 60s, so if they've been in this country the whole time, they survived both Bushes, Reagan, and Nixon.

But it probably won't be much longer before we hear about the first cases of Americans with lupus dying because they can't find hydroxychloroquine to treat their disease. Then can we blame him for killing people with his lies?

When he was elected, I remember thinking he'd crash the economy and get thousands killed. At the time, I thought that would take starting a trade war to do the former and a conventional war for the latter. But he's so much more resourceful than I expected he's managing to do both just by ignoring a pandemic. (There you go, Pabappa: don't say I never give him credit for his accomplishments.)

We actually have data on what happens when you stop social distancing early... from the 1918 flu pandemic, which killed 50 to 100 million people worldwide. Here's a nice chart showing deaths in St Louis:



Note the black bars at the bottom, indicating social distancing measures. These were put into effect early. As soon as the death rate started trending down, the authorities removed the measures. Bing, death rates shot up.

Nor is this an anomalous case-- it happened in city after city. Meanwhile, cities that didn't halt their social distancing didn't experience that second jump in deaths.

Part of all this is the "in living memory" problem. If some of us had lived through the 1918 pandemic, we'd know what it was like and take it seriously. But we haven't, so all too many people have no frame of reference for it, or use the wrong one-- e.g. "don't let the epidemic win!", like the epidemic is a terrorist that thrives on people being afraid. It's not even alive, it doesn't care about your fear, all it wants is large numbers of victims gathering together.

First of all, to the Americans: I can't stress this enough, but your president is an ass. Don't listen to him, stay home and take care of yourselves.
Also, whatever Republicans suggest, doing the opposite is probably the best course of action.

Now, that being said, I have issues with that Vox piece. The curves suggest a four month lockdown. The consequences of that could be... impressive. There's even worse. The Imperial College of London models a second peak , just as bad as the one we're here now, in October if complete containment ends in August... Their solution: keep everyone at home until a vaccine is found. So we'd be getting out in eighteen months. (That's if a vaccine is found. I'm old enough to remember wen searchers were confident about an AIDS vaccine...)

Given that, worrying about economic or social consequences isn't callous or unreasonable. We could be headed for the worst depression since 1929 as it is. With two billion locked at home for four months, the worst depression since... ever. Two years? Forget about it.

Now, we have some reason to be optimistic. For instance, this isn't the Spanish flu. COVID-19 has claimed 20,000 people. That's terrible, but not even in the same ballpark as the Spanish flu. The regular flu kills just as many people per year in the US alone. AIDS kills close to one million.

Don't get me wrong! By all means, let's take whatever measures are necessary, including full lockdown to avoid overwhelming our hospitals. But let's keep in mind that it can only be temporary, and let's hope other options are being considered, because the Vox / Imperial College scenarios just aren't feasible IMO.


(On a more personal note: we're working from home and homeschooling my eldest daughter and taking care of the baby. Believe me, after a week, death by viral pneumonia is starting to look like a reasonable alternative.)

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:33 am Now, we have some reason to be optimistic. For instance, this isn't the Spanish flu. COVID-19 has claimed 20,000 people. That's terrible, but not even in the same ballpark as the Spanish flu. The regular flu kills just as many people per year in the US alone.

Err, you are aware that, early in the history of the Spanish Flu, there was a time when, up to that date, it had only killed 20,000 people, too? You are aware that early in each flu season, there's a time when the current flu strain has barely killed anyone? You are aware that every disease that kills a lot of people starts by killing a few people? You are aware that it wouldn't make sense for, say, the transportation minister of a country, to stand up on, say, January the 8th and say "last year, [high number] died in traffic accidents in our country, but this year, so far only [low number] have died in traffic accidents in our country, so I see that as a great development"?

Flu seasons lasts about 4 months. The coronavirus epidemic has been going on since December in China and is dying down there. Or so it seems.
So, if, and that's a big 'if', we can trust the data, my affirmation holds.

The real problem is, the numbers from China make little sense. It's hard to understand how Spain and Italy could exceed their death toll in so little time...

(There are a lot of unknowns there. I don't mean to say 'Come on! It's just the flu', but, rather 'plan for the worst but hope for the best').

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:41 amThe real problem is, the numbers from China make little sense. It's hard to understand how Spain and Italy could exceed their death toll in so little time...

Isn't this readily explained by China instituting far harsher measures much earlier? Or perhaps you're implying that Chinese officials are lying about the real totals, which plenty others have suggested.

I've read that one of the reasons for higher death tolls in Italy vis-à-vis other countries is, sadly, that the elderly are more integrated into their society than elsewhere. It's not unusual, for instance, for younger people to live in the same household as their grandparents. In general, this can be a very positive--but when there's a high chance of younger people being asymptomatic carriers, it suddenly becomes a recipe for disaster.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:45 am

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:41 amThe real problem is, the numbers from China make little sense. It's hard to understand how Spain and Italy could exceed their death toll in so little time...

Isn't this readily explained by China instituting far harsher measures much earlier? Or perhaps you're implying that Chinese officials are lying about the real totals, which plenty others have suggested.

Yes, I meant that they could be lying. (They did cover up some evidence early on) Though, of course, I hope they aren't.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:45 am I've read that one of the reasons for higher death tolls in Italy vis-à-vis other countries is, sadly, that the elderly are more integrated into their society than elsewhere. It's not unusual, for instance, for younger people to live in the same household as their grandparents. In general, this can be a very positive--but when there's a high chance of younger people being asymptomatic carriers, it suddenly becomes a recipe for disaster.

That could definitely be a factor as well. It could also explain the situation in Spain.

Prince Charles has tested positive for coronavirus.

I was just reading about experts questioning China's figures the other day: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... oronavirus

zompist wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:57 pm

Ars Lande wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:01 am - There's a bit of sense in Trump's madness. The quinine cure is actually hydroxychloroquine and an antibiotic, which is not as mad as it sounds (HCQ does something I don't understand to cell membrane, and the virus apparentdebatly uses gut bacteria as shelter, hence the antibiotic). The debate over here is completely insane. But there will be large scale test, which is the only way to settle it.

The problem is, there is no treatment yet, but Trump is lying that there is. "We're going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. ...And that's where the FDA has been so great. They've gone through the approval process - it's been approved."

It hasn't been approved. But because he's making these lies on TV, many people believe him. A couple in Arizona drank chloroquine; the man died and the woman is in critical condition. "Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure," she told reporters.

A lot of his lies are just dumb. His lies about the pandemic literally kill people.

This crisis has definitely brought out the best and worst in everybody. For example, doctors are now illegally stockpiling Trump-recommended medication by writing fake prescriptions for themselves and their families, denying it to those who actually need it for other medical conditions:

https://www.propublica.org/article/doct ... r-families

Meanwhile, the US has just granted a potentially very expensive monopoly for "rare" disease cures to a company that makes a potential Covid medication, in further proof that the US healthcare system serves profit over people:

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/23/gil ... ug-status/

I can imagine that, come the revolution, these profiteers and the people who enable them will be the first against the wall. Or at least I can dream it.

On the other side of the pond, NHS doctors are understandably threatening to quit because they're not being provided with the basic safety gear they need. The government had ample warning but did nothing until the last minute:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ianTodayUK

The only good thing about this is that it will hopefully show BoJo to be the useless idiot he is.

The Financial Times has been making some really good charts on the virus. Here's the latest.

The US is on top for spreading the virus. USA NUMBER ONE!

I'm surprised the UK is doing as well as it is.

zompist wrote: ↑Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:44 pm The Financial Times has been making some really good charts on the virus. Here's the latest.

The US is on top for spreading the virus. USA NUMBER ONE!

I'm surprised the UK is doing as well as it is.

I saw a video of the New York governor yesterday. I know nothing about him or how good he actually is at governing, but purely from what he said and presented about the corona outbreak I was relatively impressed. He explained quite well what the plan was, and what they were doing to meet the challenge. He certainly seemed a lot more presidential than Trump does. Of course, he's limited in what he can do if the federal government doesn't pull its weight.

Dear God, the numbers for New York are frightening.

Here's a video of Cuomo from today. Not the one I originally saw, but the content seems similar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2khIjJuLHI