Covid-19 Round 2 is Here(jacquesmattheij.com)
jacquesmattheij.com
Covid-19 Round 2 is Here
https://jacquesmattheij.com/2020-09-20-covid-19-round-2/
92 comments
And? Is there a lesson applicable for other countries?
Would we have had less deaths without lockdowns?
Would we have had less deaths without lockdowns?
You mean this Sweden?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/man-behin...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-03/man-behin...
When that interview was done, Sweden was in a pretty bad spot. Today their strategy is looking much more successful. Do you have anything more recent from him?
Today everyone's strategy is looking more successful as we leave the summer. We will see how it all stacks up in the next six months after flu season.
Sweden also has one of the highest per capita COVID-19 mortality rates in the world, yet still suffered economically from the virus same as anyone else. This should always be in the conversation every time we're talking about the Sweden response.
>Sweden seems to be one of the few countries with no detectable signs of a second wave.
It’s really just too early to say. There’s a strong tradition of spending summers in a country cottage in Sweden. These are naturally very socially distanced (often alone in the forest), and they go together with spending all day, every day out in the sunshine - and thereby getting a massive vitamin D boost.
Furthermore, the weather is still mild, and a lot of people who’d normally be back in town, are choosing to work from their country cottage instead. This is especially true of the older, vulnerable generation.
Finally there’s also been a few days when deaths have crept up. But counting has continually been hampered by chronic delays - so I’d say wait a few weeks before assuming Sweden is in the clear.
It’s really just too early to say. There’s a strong tradition of spending summers in a country cottage in Sweden. These are naturally very socially distanced (often alone in the forest), and they go together with spending all day, every day out in the sunshine - and thereby getting a massive vitamin D boost.
Furthermore, the weather is still mild, and a lot of people who’d normally be back in town, are choosing to work from their country cottage instead. This is especially true of the older, vulnerable generation.
Finally there’s also been a few days when deaths have crept up. But counting has continually been hampered by chronic delays - so I’d say wait a few weeks before assuming Sweden is in the clear.
Compare them to another country like the UK, where the peak was in late April, they got down to a low point in early July and then it didn’t start to look like an unmistakable second wave for 2 months, around early September. Sweden’s peak and then trough are shifted by about 2 or 2 1/2 months from them (their peak was in mid July and they only hit their low point at the end of August/beginning of September).
So it’s way too early to make any conclusion about what will happen next there. If they do end up following the same trend as the UK, it won’t be clear in graphs until November.
So it’s way too early to make any conclusion about what will happen next there. If they do end up following the same trend as the UK, it won’t be clear in graphs until November.
Maybe because the first wave didn't end? The USA is still in it's first wave too.
The first wave definitely did end (and yes, it was pretty bad). But look at the linked data. Cases and deaths are significantly down from the peak.
Have a look at the following: https://i.redd.it/8gugazufo1o51.jpg
it looks like Sweden is fairing the same as far as new infections as most of the other European countries. So the fact is that its population didn't develop herd immunity (or at least it didn't in any measure better than other countries who did lock down) and its economy was still hit quite hard comparatively (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354)
it looks like Sweden is fairing the same as far as new infections as most of the other European countries. So the fact is that its population didn't develop herd immunity (or at least it didn't in any measure better than other countries who did lock down) and its economy was still hit quite hard comparatively (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354)
20 days after first symptoms, still tired and coughing, and I had very mild symptoms.
I've been very strict about social distancing EXCEPT the day(the first in 6 months) I went out for beers with two friends at and outdoor space.
What I want to say is: that one time you let your guard down is when you will get infected and the horrors begin, especially if you don't live alone and care for the people you live with!
I've been very strict about social distancing EXCEPT the day(the first in 6 months) I went out for beers with two friends at and outdoor space.
What I want to say is: that one time you let your guard down is when you will get infected and the horrors begin, especially if you don't live alone and care for the people you live with!
This is something I can't find... how safe is being outdoor in close proximity? So I'll take your story.
How close were you to your friends/others and did you go inside the bar at all? Did either of your friends test positive?
How close were you to your friends/others and did you go inside the bar at all? Did either of your friends test positive?
We were more than 2 meters apart, but we did shake hands and I smoked cigarettes from one of them.
My friends did not get tested, but they also showed no symptoms.
I sprayed the table with alcohol, the seats, my beer bottles.
I did share an uber ride with one of my friends, I did open the windows, I think the driver might have coughed once or twice, I did make the huge mistake about asking him about his car model and he wouldn't shut up afterwards.
My friends did not get tested, but they also showed no symptoms.
I sprayed the table with alcohol, the seats, my beer bottles.
I did share an uber ride with one of my friends, I did open the windows, I think the driver might have coughed once or twice, I did make the huge mistake about asking him about his car model and he wouldn't shut up afterwards.
Thanks. Hope you fully recover soon!
The fact that you have very mild symptoms, which most majority of the cases will be, should be viewed as a good thing, instead of fear and despite you've been very strict about social distancing and still got infected shows that lockdown is not effective.
Here something for comparison :
"Shopping in Sweden during Coronavirus" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQat0vX-wjM&feature=emb_titl...
Hardly any mask and businesses seems normal
Here something for comparison :
"Shopping in Sweden during Coronavirus" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQat0vX-wjM&feature=emb_titl...
Hardly any mask and businesses seems normal
That is the thing -- mild symptoms is suuuuch a misleasing term -- sure, they were mild, but 20 days later and still tired, still caughing, stressing if that pain I feel is just a muscle tiree from caughing or I'm actually getting lung fibrosis? That never happened before; my wife was alone at home with out 2.5 year old daughter unable to get up from the floor.
My daughter started having a fever 2 days after I returned from hospital, 12 days after I started having symptoms, wave 3 of stress and worry.
I barely slept during this time.
I saw and heard a lot of examples of how quickly things can turn south in the hospital.
How do you dispose of the trash when you're quarantined in a flat?
There's so much more than the symptoms that will screw with you for this disease.
I barely slept during this time.
I saw and heard a lot of examples of how quickly things can turn south in the hospital.
How do you dispose of the trash when you're quarantined in a flat?
There's so much more than the symptoms that will screw with you for this disease.
It took me six months to get anywhere near my normal energy levels. I too would say I had a 'mild' case, still I was out for about 3 weeks completely.
The first time I realised how wiped out I really was, was when I helped an older patient -- his bed was next to a curtainless window and I climbed up to improvise a curtain from a bedsheet -- I was panting for air.
Up to that point it didn't register how tired I was, because I was just not doing anything physical.
Up to that point it didn't register how tired I was, because I was just not doing anything physical.
I had a double pneumonia when I was 23 or so, that may have set me up for this one, I'll never know. But fortunately I knew to sleep on my belly to ensure my lungs don't drown, even so I had some pretty big dips in O2 saturation levels. After three weeks I was out and about but even the slightest exercise and I would be sweating like a pig and unable to take in enough air. Now it's as good as before, I've been super careful all summer and I hope to sit this one out without a re-infection.
Hang in there, it will hopefully get better soon.
Hang in there, it will hopefully get better soon.
Dips in O2 can be very dangerous.
I saw a 48 year old guy unable to put his oxygen nostrils back when his saturation read something like 85.
I think he went ~72% before someone put his nostrils back and the nurse put him back on facemask + an additional O2 tank, besides the regulat O2 coming in the copper pipes.
He kept saying he was fine, just sleepy.
Glad you're ok now.
I saw a 48 year old guy unable to put his oxygen nostrils back when his saturation read something like 85.
I think he went ~72% before someone put his nostrils back and the nurse put him back on facemask + an additional O2 tank, besides the regulat O2 coming in the copper pipes.
He kept saying he was fine, just sleepy.
Glad you're ok now.
Pretty impressive how fast this hit. Compared to a 'normal' pneumonia which is comparable to a slow descent this was like falling off a cliff. Fine one moment and unable to do much of anything several hours later. Initial recovery seemed to go very well too but then this very strong fatigue just would not let go. I'm curious how other people have experienced their recovery, what phases they went through and how long each of those took.
> That is the thing -- mild symptoms is suuuuch a misleasing term -- sure, they were mild, but 20 days later and still tired, still caughing, stressing if that pain I feel is just a muscle tiree from caughing or I'm actually getting lung fibrosis?
You can get the exact same thing from the flu. I had a flu a few years ago that kept me coughing for 8 weeks.
You can get the exact same thing from the flu. I had a flu a few years ago that kept me coughing for 8 weeks.
Yes, that is true, I know I keep coughing for a long time even after regular colds, but somehow this doesn't put my mind at ease at all.
Its highly possible that the anxiety and stress would cause you more trouble then the virus itself.
Then again, I had flu/cold before that is mild but feel horrible as I experienced it.
Then again, I had flu/cold before that is mild but feel horrible as I experienced it.
Yeah, I'd say 90% of the issue(for me, not my wife, she actually was too sick to leave bed and had a todler to look after) was the stress and anxiety.
But am I alone in this?
I don't think so, I think most people would go through the same stress and anxiety in my situation, that is the part that is so easy to overlook.
But am I alone in this?
I don't think so, I think most people would go through the same stress and anxiety in my situation, that is the part that is so easy to overlook.
You are not alone, I too had some anxiety in beginning of march but over time, as more data and fact come out, now I have almost zero stress and anxiety due to covid. Now my stress and anxiety is largely from the people/government response of the covid.
Source? This is a virus killing a ton of people and leaving many more flat on their backs for weeks... To suggest that it's "highly possible" someone's symptoms are from anxiety is kind of insulting IMO.
>killing a ton of people
its not.
current best estimate of ifr according to cdc :
0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054
Percent of infections that are asymptomatic: 40%
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
Which is a good news that so many the cases are asymptomatic and the ifr is so low.
Which is also inline with my own observation, I know almost nobody get really sick from covid.
I still go out whenever I can, still travel whenever I can, still doing normal socialization/gathering as I possibly still can.
its not.
current best estimate of ifr according to cdc :
0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054
Percent of infections that are asymptomatic: 40%
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
Which is a good news that so many the cases are asymptomatic and the ifr is so low.
Which is also inline with my own observation, I know almost nobody get really sick from covid.
I still go out whenever I can, still travel whenever I can, still doing normal socialization/gathering as I possibly still can.
That is a lot of people. 200,000 deaths already attributed to COVID-19 in the USA. That's 0.0006 of the entire population dead already. Is it good that it's not that contagious? Yes. Is it killing a lot of people? Also yes.
All-causes mortality is up quite a bit too.
All-causes mortality is up quite a bit too.
This is the part where it become very subjective. I disagree that its a lot, to me is not a lot.
Though i could understand that for some people even 1 death is a lot.
Though i could understand that for some people even 1 death is a lot.
Maybe it's easier to understand as a rate. Around the beginning of May, the all-causes mortality rate in the USA was about 50% higher than normal. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02497-w
It sure sounds like a lot but historically its not, not yet anyway.
This is a graph of historical deaths in Sweden which has a similar death rate as the US. https://twitter.com/PanData19/status/1297919439212552193/pho...
While this year isn't over yet there has been years in my life time with worse death rates that went by completely unnoticed. Looking back in a couple of years I don't think people are gonna say that a lot of people died this year.
This is a graph of historical deaths in Sweden which has a similar death rate as the US. https://twitter.com/PanData19/status/1297919439212552193/pho...
While this year isn't over yet there has been years in my life time with worse death rates that went by completely unnoticed. Looking back in a couple of years I don't think people are gonna say that a lot of people died this year.
How much is a lot for you? A million? Two? At what level will you admit that you're just plain wrong about all this? Or is it all fine as long as you get through in one piece?
Wrong about what? It is a fact that vast majority of cases are asymptomatic or only have mild symptoms.
What about million people suffering due to lockdown? To you they should just endure it right?
How about you, how much low is low to you ? 0 death ? 1 death ?
How much is lockdown suffering is acceptable to you ?
What about million people suffering due to lockdown? To you they should just endure it right?
How about you, how much low is low to you ? 0 death ? 1 death ?
How much is lockdown suffering is acceptable to you ?
So, no answer then. Ok.
It's hard to define "a lot" for 2 reasons:
1. The human population is very large so even the smallest fraction is a sensational number.
2. Any death is a tragedy for someone, not the least the person who died.
This creates a situation where you have lots of people talking past each other.
1. The human population is very large so even the smallest fraction is a sensational number.
2. Any death is a tragedy for someone, not the least the person who died.
This creates a situation where you have lots of people talking past each other.
Indeed if op knew the symptoms would be mild for them in advance, this statement would sound pretty crazy as it could be equally applied to the flu. If I knew the symptoms would be mild for me I’d run out and get it instead of hiding inside for 6 months and have it over with.
Question is who is around you that might have a harder go of it.
Question is who is around you that might have a harder go of it.
But that was my exact thought -- would I do it again?
Day 7 of mild symptoms and my relatives starting to get sick one by one -- NO!
Day 20 -- still no!
For 2-4 weeks after my daughter's symptoms I'll stress about kawasaki signs in her.
Perhaps I'll change my time later, but I don't see the risks worth the rewards.
Day 7 of mild symptoms and my relatives starting to get sick one by one -- NO!
Day 20 -- still no!
For 2-4 weeks after my daughter's symptoms I'll stress about kawasaki signs in her.
Perhaps I'll change my time later, but I don't see the risks worth the rewards.
There were 571 cases of COVID associated MIS-C in children as of July 2020. There’s so many zeroes in front of that percentage likelihood I don’t even know where to start. Worry about it if it happens haha. [1]
Yes it could happen, but the likelihood of your child hurting themselves with something sharp and pointy in your house is several orders of magnitude higher. This is why I hate the way the media is reporting on these literal one-off symptoms as though everyone who catches Covid will certainly absolutely get them.
Kawasaki is broadly associated with all sorts of viral infections. It’s super duper rare.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6932e2-H.pdf
Yes it could happen, but the likelihood of your child hurting themselves with something sharp and pointy in your house is several orders of magnitude higher. This is why I hate the way the media is reporting on these literal one-off symptoms as though everyone who catches Covid will certainly absolutely get them.
Kawasaki is broadly associated with all sorts of viral infections. It’s super duper rare.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6932e2-H.pdf
And we still don't seem to understand the long term damage that even mild COVID causes. I remember reading about people getting blood clots for instance
I did get d-dimers of 1.3 on my first test and 1.26 4 days later, so they got my anticoagulant shots in the hospital and aspirin at home, I initially did worry about that as well.
The funny thing is the other patients had higher strength shots or for much longer -- and they had massive blood shot bruises on their arms/bellies and the nurses had to use some special cream, otherwise those bruises could clot and lead to stroke or heart attacks.
So it was like, even the anti-cloting medicine was somehow trying to kill you in some perverse way.
The funny thing is the other patients had higher strength shots or for much longer -- and they had massive blood shot bruises on their arms/bellies and the nurses had to use some special cream, otherwise those bruises could clot and lead to stroke or heart attacks.
So it was like, even the anti-cloting medicine was somehow trying to kill you in some perverse way.
I wan to see some data about seasonal flu. Is that gone totally this year? Cause I know the yearly death toll of flu in my country (Hungary) and it's significantly higher than Covid so far.
We usually have 3-6k death of flu each year https://akjournals.com/view/journals/650/161/23/article-p962...
And so far 683 deaths from Covid http://abouthungary.hu/news-in-brief/coronavirus-09-19/
We usually have 3-6k death of flu each year https://akjournals.com/view/journals/650/161/23/article-p962...
And so far 683 deaths from Covid http://abouthungary.hu/news-in-brief/coronavirus-09-19/
Flu is endemic. COVID is still spreading. This is a meaningless comparison. The only thing we can look at is case mortality and contagiousness, where COVID is 10x higher and 3x higher respectively than the flu
Why is this post downvoted? This is literally the reason why COVID is treated the way it is.
In the UK the flu has been killing more people than COVID over the last 25 weeks. That might change of course, but we’ve just been told this today during an interview with the health secretary Matt Hancock.
I feel like people around the world deal with this very differently, depending on how severely their country has been affected.
My (European) country did quite well so far, so from our point of view he would certainly seem overly cautious. People have much less fear than during the first wave. They try to live with the risk of getting infected by accepting that it is real, but not letting it dictate everything they do, which would make life more "surviving" than "living".
And I think that's a good approach! Within the confines of necessary precautions like wearing masks, keeping your distance, and banning big events, I think it is still possible to live a life which is worth living in a responsible way. After all, I also don't mind getting into a car while being fully aware of the risks (which could be worse than COVID's depending on where you live). So yes, I do think his recommendations are too drastic and also bad for your mental health. Next to that, most of them are impossible to realize for people who aren't lucky enough to be able to work from home etc.
Maybe I would have a different opinion if I was a US resident.
My (European) country did quite well so far, so from our point of view he would certainly seem overly cautious. People have much less fear than during the first wave. They try to live with the risk of getting infected by accepting that it is real, but not letting it dictate everything they do, which would make life more "surviving" than "living".
And I think that's a good approach! Within the confines of necessary precautions like wearing masks, keeping your distance, and banning big events, I think it is still possible to live a life which is worth living in a responsible way. After all, I also don't mind getting into a car while being fully aware of the risks (which could be worse than COVID's depending on where you live). So yes, I do think his recommendations are too drastic and also bad for your mental health. Next to that, most of them are impossible to realize for people who aren't lucky enough to be able to work from home etc.
Maybe I would have a different opinion if I was a US resident.
> Maybe I would have a different opinion if I was a US resident.
No, unfortunately in the USA, sensible public health recommendations are considered drastic. Heaven forbid Kyle can't buy his khakis and Wendy can't visit her hair salon. Restaurant dining is an inalienable right. Wearing a mask is briefly uncomfortable, therefore totally unacceptable. Banning large gatherings is communism. You gotta flex your freedom at all times to show how much of a good American you are. 2020 has drained me of my empathy. It sometimes feels like half the country has chosen suicide pact to avoid temporary inconvenience.
No, unfortunately in the USA, sensible public health recommendations are considered drastic. Heaven forbid Kyle can't buy his khakis and Wendy can't visit her hair salon. Restaurant dining is an inalienable right. Wearing a mask is briefly uncomfortable, therefore totally unacceptable. Banning large gatherings is communism. You gotta flex your freedom at all times to show how much of a good American you are. 2020 has drained me of my empathy. It sometimes feels like half the country has chosen suicide pact to avoid temporary inconvenience.
I'd like to see some actual data. This link has not a single number to back up it's claims. It feels like a politician saying "the data and science is on our side" yet never providing any data, studies or science, something every politician does. Round 2 is a good discussion but not using this article.
You will surely get the data by this time next year.
If you survive.
If you survive.
Yep, sigh.
NYC: https://www.reddit.com/r/nycCoronavirus/comments/ivtqgq/upda...
Raw data: https://www.google.com/search?q=nyc+COVID+cases
NYC: https://www.reddit.com/r/nycCoronavirus/comments/ivtqgq/upda...
Raw data: https://www.google.com/search?q=nyc+COVID+cases
I read this post as well and while I respect this person his claim is hugely anecdotal. What if some decision far above his pay grade resulted in COVID patients being rerouted from other NYC hospitals to his? That could easily explain his experience without the idea that COVID is rising again in NYC. I’ll wait for the data to come in personally. The data you linked does not show a material change.
"Fortunately" we won't have to wait very long to know the answer. The weather has just started turning chilly here in NYC as of this past week so people are now starting to stay indoors more. And schools might still reopen, but it's impossible to know for sure because our mayor's leadership is so incompetent.
Yes there’s been a lot of treating doctors front line anecdotes as though they’re the product of epidemiological research studies.
You’re asking a person tasked with tending a single tree in their back yard about what the state of the forest looks like.
Especially since the linked raw data there is completely flat.
You’re asking a person tasked with tending a single tree in their back yard about what the state of the forest looks like.
Especially since the linked raw data there is completely flat.
That being family or friends with someone does not influence how infectious they or one might be for each other, often seems to be forgotten or ignored as well.
Why was this story flagged?
This happens all too frequently on HN. A story blows up, then gets flagged - with no explanation whatsoever.
At the very least, it seems it would be in the interest of the moderators to include an explanatory comment as a guidepost for future submissions.
This happens all too frequently on HN. A story blows up, then gets flagged - with no explanation whatsoever.
At the very least, it seems it would be in the interest of the moderators to include an explanatory comment as a guidepost for future submissions.
It's in the site guidelines for flaggers not to mention their flagging in the comments. Maybe there should be a separate area where they could put a reason though.
Good point. What's the bar to a post getting marked "flagged" and removed from the front page? A single user flags? Two? Five? Up to the mods?
Who would flag a post like this? I would guess either people who are annoyed by the omnipresence of SARS-Cov2/COVID-19 coverage or people in denial.
I'm with you here. I found this article useful and informative. Why is this being flagged?
It’s very strange in the UK- we all know it’s coming, and have known for quite some time now, but the government still doesn’t enforce masks, doesn’t have enough tests and spent the entire of August convincing everyone to go out and eat in restaurants/bars (they gave half price meals), thousands of people were eating out several times a week during the period we should have been suppressing the virus.
I don’t get it.
I don’t get it.
That's what flattening the curve means.
When this first kicked off. So many people were getting hospitalised that hospitals were overwhelmed and had to turn people away.
Lockdown happened but still there were workers that had to continue working and other people that didn't care about the measures going out.
A smaller proportion of the population were in the pool of potential covid catchers.
This meant that hospitals could handle new admissions.
Since proper hospital care reduced the chance of death.
The UK government has not indicated that they intend to do a full lockdown intending eliminate covid.
When this first kicked off. So many people were getting hospitalised that hospitals were overwhelmed and had to turn people away.
Lockdown happened but still there were workers that had to continue working and other people that didn't care about the measures going out.
A smaller proportion of the population were in the pool of potential covid catchers.
This meant that hospitals could handle new admissions.
Since proper hospital care reduced the chance of death.
The UK government has not indicated that they intend to do a full lockdown intending eliminate covid.
I don't think you're alone in being perplexed. I've seen neighbors take risks that strike me as insane. It's been a real eye-opener for me regarding differences in how people assess risk, make risk/reward tradeoffs, deal with stress, etc.
[deleted]
As a side note: it’s really annoying that the scroll bar is hidden on that page (Safari/iPhone).
I suspect that is a safari issue, I'm not aware of my website doing anything on purpose to give that effect. If you can tell me what to change I'll be happy to do so.
To be honest: I have no clue what the reason for this is. I just don’t see scroll bar which is annoying because it’s difficult to estimate how long the article is. Happens on a few sites but not many.
BTW: why was the article flagged?
BTW: why was the article flagged?
Ok, strange, if you ever figure out what it is please let me know, I don't have Safari to test on near me at the moment.
Why the article was flagged? Probably because HN has its own share of COVID deniers and they can't help themselves. Uncomfortable truths and all that. I'm so going to track one down and interview them in six months. I'd love to see their retrospective, see if they have learned or not.
Why the article was flagged? Probably because HN has its own share of COVID deniers and they can't help themselves. Uncomfortable truths and all that. I'm so going to track one down and interview them in six months. I'd love to see their retrospective, see if they have learned or not.
To be clear, I didn't flag this, but to me it's also firmly in the "general news" box. It starts with "If you've been following the news", repeats a bunch of widely reported/discussed things and ends with the general recommendations I get all the time. It's not bad, but also not particularly interesting and I'm not sure why it's here.
Yeah ok, but is that a valid reason to flag the article? Just don’t upvote it
Perhaps on the plus side, at least in America, measures like distancing and masks are well-established, which very much wasn’t the case in May or so. And believe it or not, for the most part the measures are followed even by skeptics.
I don’t think it’s really fair to portray the resistance or skepticism as only originating from idiocy or “fringe”. Authorities have said everything and its opposite in the last 6 or so months. They started by telling us this wasn’t really contagious so don’t worry, they told us not to procure masks before they told us to wear masks always, etc. Some people definitely use that to reach all sorts of ridiculous conclusions, no doubt. But I think you can’t discount how disorienting that all is, not to mention the whiplash of being told you must do x after you were told not to. There is also, again at least in America, a certain amount of resentment over health officials and others endorsing certain group events and condemning others, on a political basis, when the virus actually doesn’t care what your politics are. So yep, it is a political football.
I don’t think it’s really fair to portray the resistance or skepticism as only originating from idiocy or “fringe”. Authorities have said everything and its opposite in the last 6 or so months. They started by telling us this wasn’t really contagious so don’t worry, they told us not to procure masks before they told us to wear masks always, etc. Some people definitely use that to reach all sorts of ridiculous conclusions, no doubt. But I think you can’t discount how disorienting that all is, not to mention the whiplash of being told you must do x after you were told not to. There is also, again at least in America, a certain amount of resentment over health officials and others endorsing certain group events and condemning others, on a political basis, when the virus actually doesn’t care what your politics are. So yep, it is a political football.
> Authorities have said everything and its opposite in the last 6 or so months.
Right wingers in a couple countries said that. If you listened to actual experts, by February you knew it was highly contagious, asymptomatic spread was a big control problem, etc. The mask issue is the strongest charge because the goal of not buying up the same supplies needed by healthcare workers was confused into general advice not to wear them but by April that had been recognized as a mistake.
The problem was that politics entered the picture when Trump blew off the experts briefing him starting in December and went with the Fox pundits desire first to hope that the economic impact wouldn’t be significant and later trying to pretend they hadn’t been so disastrously wrong. That meant that medical experts were overridden at previously non-political agencies, and that reporters were now pulled into treating advice as political opinions to be hedged.
Right wingers in a couple countries said that. If you listened to actual experts, by February you knew it was highly contagious, asymptomatic spread was a big control problem, etc. The mask issue is the strongest charge because the goal of not buying up the same supplies needed by healthcare workers was confused into general advice not to wear them but by April that had been recognized as a mistake.
The problem was that politics entered the picture when Trump blew off the experts briefing him starting in December and went with the Fox pundits desire first to hope that the economic impact wouldn’t be significant and later trying to pretend they hadn’t been so disastrously wrong. That meant that medical experts were overridden at previously non-political agencies, and that reporters were now pulled into treating advice as political opinions to be hedged.
> Right wingers in a couple countries said that.
Is Cuomo the governor for New York a right winger? He downplayed the pandemic as late as march 18. Pretty sure he wasn't the only democrat doing it either. If he didn't downplay it New York wouldn't have had one of the worst corona responses in the world.
Quotes:
> "That is not going to happen, shelter in place, for New York City," Cuomo said on The Daily podcast by The New York Times. "For any city or county to take an emergency action, the state has to approve it. And I wouldn't approve shelter in place."
> "Quarantine in place, you can't leave your home," Cuomo said. "The fear, the panic is a bigger problem than the virus."
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/cuomo-says-he-wont-approve-c...
Is Cuomo the governor for New York a right winger? He downplayed the pandemic as late as march 18. Pretty sure he wasn't the only democrat doing it either. If he didn't downplay it New York wouldn't have had one of the worst corona responses in the world.
Quotes:
> "That is not going to happen, shelter in place, for New York City," Cuomo said on The Daily podcast by The New York Times. "For any city or county to take an emergency action, the state has to approve it. And I wouldn't approve shelter in place."
> "Quarantine in place, you can't leave your home," Cuomo said. "The fear, the panic is a bigger problem than the virus."
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/cuomo-says-he-wont-approve-c...
That’s not saying that it wasn’t contagious or serious - he wasn’t saying it’d be over by Easter, Memorial Day, etc. or that it only affected people who were about to die. Also, March 18th was over 6 months ago whereas right-denial of the significance is still ongoing now. In contrast, NY has generally been recognized as having improved their handling dramatically
The big problem is that in the United States so much depends on the federal response. Having the CDC treating it like a political response removed the trigger and support for a lot of local actions because they had to do on their own what would normally have been a CDC publication by February. Similarly, waiting extra months to get serious about travel bans meant that local officials had to deal with a constant stream of infection from outside of their jurisdiction.
The big problem is that in the United States so much depends on the federal response. Having the CDC treating it like a political response removed the trigger and support for a lot of local actions because they had to do on their own what would normally have been a CDC publication by February. Similarly, waiting extra months to get serious about travel bans meant that local officials had to deal with a constant stream of infection from outside of their jurisdiction.
> That’s not saying that it wasn’t contagious or serious
He literally said that panic was worse than the disease.
> The big problem is that in the United States so much depends on the federal response.
He could have locked down New York, but he told people to continue their lives as usual. This resulted in over 30k deaths, most of which could have been saved if he weren't so adamant in keeping business as usual for another week. And likely if he locked down he would have saved neighboring states as well, so maybe a hundred thousand lives in total could have been saved if he wanted to.
> Similarly, waiting extra months to get serious about travel bans
This was said days after Trump had enacted the travel ban against Europe and after we had confirmed cases in here in Europe known to be spread fron New York. Everyone knew New York was a corona hotbed at this time, yet he still kept things open for 10 more days. With a doubling of every 4 days it means he could have saved 80% of everyone who died in the east if he wanted to, but he choose to keep things open since "panic is worse than the disease".
He literally said that panic was worse than the disease.
> The big problem is that in the United States so much depends on the federal response.
He could have locked down New York, but he told people to continue their lives as usual. This resulted in over 30k deaths, most of which could have been saved if he weren't so adamant in keeping business as usual for another week. And likely if he locked down he would have saved neighboring states as well, so maybe a hundred thousand lives in total could have been saved if he wanted to.
> Similarly, waiting extra months to get serious about travel bans
This was said days after Trump had enacted the travel ban against Europe and after we had confirmed cases in here in Europe known to be spread fron New York. Everyone knew New York was a corona hotbed at this time, yet he still kept things open for 10 more days. With a doubling of every 4 days it means he could have saved 80% of everyone who died in the east if he wanted to, but he choose to keep things open since "panic is worse than the disease".
>COVID-19 has a fair chance of affecting you for much longer than that you are actually ill if you have a severe cases of it. And the really long term effects (as in decade+) won’t be known for many years so we are all guessing about what they could be, but if there are any they likely will not be good.
This is just fear mongering. Millions of people have had covid now and so far there's zero evidence that it's significantly more likely to have long-term adverse side effects for the average person than any other respiratory virus.
>Reacting decisively, forcefully and without delay could make the difference between a disaster of epic proportions or something that we will barely remember in twenty years.
This is complete hyperbole. Sweden reacted minimally, and it was hardly a disaster of epic proportions: around four thousand people died in a country of ten million, and those were mostly nursing home residents, due to government failure to properly protect the nursing homes. In fact allowing the disease to spread seems to have brought some form of immunity, as predicted, since it's not experiencing a "second wave" like the other countries in Europe.
> Let me make something very plain here: it is not a choice between the health on the one side and the economy on the other. COVID-19 will continue to hurt us economically until there is a vaccin or we get our act together and decide to deal with it frontally.
This is also not true. After the lockdowns ended the economy has been continuously recovering, even in places where case numbers continued rising after lockdown (for instance the US, unemployment is falling now but covid cases never stopped rising). I don't understand how anybody can think the economic impact of literally forcing a bunch of businesses to close indefinitely is no worse than the impact of businesses just having fewer customers due to some people being scared to go because of the virus.
This is just fear mongering. Millions of people have had covid now and so far there's zero evidence that it's significantly more likely to have long-term adverse side effects for the average person than any other respiratory virus.
>Reacting decisively, forcefully and without delay could make the difference between a disaster of epic proportions or something that we will barely remember in twenty years.
This is complete hyperbole. Sweden reacted minimally, and it was hardly a disaster of epic proportions: around four thousand people died in a country of ten million, and those were mostly nursing home residents, due to government failure to properly protect the nursing homes. In fact allowing the disease to spread seems to have brought some form of immunity, as predicted, since it's not experiencing a "second wave" like the other countries in Europe.
> Let me make something very plain here: it is not a choice between the health on the one side and the economy on the other. COVID-19 will continue to hurt us economically until there is a vaccin or we get our act together and decide to deal with it frontally.
This is also not true. After the lockdowns ended the economy has been continuously recovering, even in places where case numbers continued rising after lockdown (for instance the US, unemployment is falling now but covid cases never stopped rising). I don't understand how anybody can think the economic impact of literally forcing a bunch of businesses to close indefinitely is no worse than the impact of businesses just having fewer customers due to some people being scared to go because of the virus.
> Millions of people have had covid now and so far there's zero evidence that it's significantly more likely to have long-term adverse side effects for the average person than any other respiratory virus.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects....
> Sweden reacted minimally, and it was hardly a disaster of epic proportions: around four thousand people died in a country of ten million, and those were mostly nursing home residents, due to government failure to properly protect the nursing homes. In fact allowing the disease to spread seems to have brought some form of immunity, as predicted, since it's not experiencing a "second wave" like the other countries in Europe.
So far. Sweden was a few months behind the curve with every other Western European country due to accidents of Geography. They may have gotten off lucky, but they are the exception. The Swedish demographics and Geography do not translate well to other countries in Western Europe, even so, the thing here is to compare Sweden with the countries around it and based on that they could have done a lot better than they did.
> After the lockdowns ended the economy has been continuously recovering, even in places where case numbers continued rising after lockdown
I'm not sure if we are looking at the same data but the economy is still very much depressed compared to where it was in March. This situation is not likely to improve any time soon, wishing it so won't make it so. As an employer I too would very much like things to go back to normal ASAP, however, I'm not going to pretend that things are better than they are.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects....
> Sweden reacted minimally, and it was hardly a disaster of epic proportions: around four thousand people died in a country of ten million, and those were mostly nursing home residents, due to government failure to properly protect the nursing homes. In fact allowing the disease to spread seems to have brought some form of immunity, as predicted, since it's not experiencing a "second wave" like the other countries in Europe.
So far. Sweden was a few months behind the curve with every other Western European country due to accidents of Geography. They may have gotten off lucky, but they are the exception. The Swedish demographics and Geography do not translate well to other countries in Western Europe, even so, the thing here is to compare Sweden with the countries around it and based on that they could have done a lot better than they did.
> After the lockdowns ended the economy has been continuously recovering, even in places where case numbers continued rising after lockdown
I'm not sure if we are looking at the same data but the economy is still very much depressed compared to where it was in March. This situation is not likely to improve any time soon, wishing it so won't make it so. As an employer I too would very much like things to go back to normal ASAP, however, I'm not going to pretend that things are better than they are.
I haven’t substantively changed my routine since lockdown started.
> COVID-19 will continue to hurt us economically until there is a vaccin
That’s hardly going to be true. Only because we’re told that we might get a vaccine people like the author make it sound like that this is the obvious thing to happen, but that is really no different than someone hoping to win the lottery. Realistically we need to consider that currently there is no vaccine and theoretically there might never be one. If the above statement is true then theoretically we will never recover from COVID until eternity which is obviously quite ridiculous to say.
I think we should be planning for a way to live alongside COVID with the prospect of never having a vaccine and come up with a way of life that the population can get onboard with. Obviously we all hope that there will be a vaccine and we’ll get an easy way out, but it’s irresponsible to take hard damaging hits now with the outlook that this is a temporary hit only until the magic solution will follow shortly. We don’t know this. We should take actions which allow us to live in a worst case scenario, not the best case. Taking huge short term pains under the assumption of a magic way out doesn’t feel particularly smart. I think we need to consider more measured and balanced forms of dealing with this pandemic because we might be in this for a very long time.
That’s hardly going to be true. Only because we’re told that we might get a vaccine people like the author make it sound like that this is the obvious thing to happen, but that is really no different than someone hoping to win the lottery. Realistically we need to consider that currently there is no vaccine and theoretically there might never be one. If the above statement is true then theoretically we will never recover from COVID until eternity which is obviously quite ridiculous to say.
I think we should be planning for a way to live alongside COVID with the prospect of never having a vaccine and come up with a way of life that the population can get onboard with. Obviously we all hope that there will be a vaccine and we’ll get an easy way out, but it’s irresponsible to take hard damaging hits now with the outlook that this is a temporary hit only until the magic solution will follow shortly. We don’t know this. We should take actions which allow us to live in a worst case scenario, not the best case. Taking huge short term pains under the assumption of a magic way out doesn’t feel particularly smart. I think we need to consider more measured and balanced forms of dealing with this pandemic because we might be in this for a very long time.
We can reasonably expect the vaccine though. It's not a disease with unknown behaviours - we pretty much know what to do about it in general, and need to apply it. The vaccine work was predicted months ago to take until early 2021 and there are multiple teams / approaches which still confirm that timeframe. Even if a few of them fail the late stage tests, we have alternatives.
It's more of an ambitious project with multiple contenders then a lottery at this point. There's a chance they could all fail, but it's not huge.
It's more of an ambitious project with multiple contenders then a lottery at this point. There's a chance they could all fail, but it's not huge.
What about Sweden then?
What do you mean? Do they have a vaccine? I don’t think so, and Sweden did not lockdown because they know they have to find a way to possibly live with it for longer so if anything Sweden is a great example to support my statement.
A few lines down from there:
"Even today it is not guaranteed that a useful vaccine will be developed at all"
"Even today it is not guaranteed that a useful vaccine will be developed at all"
Yes, we very well may be forced to live alongside the new corona. Just as we do the older coronas. Immunity will be gained in time with the cost of organ health and death along the way. No human decisions, action, or in-action are required for mankind to gain resistance eventually.
But... a vaccine in the US exists and is effective at making an immune response in all testing so far. Maybe the vaccine won't stop all woes. Maybe the virus will mutate too fast. But the vaccine exists today. It's not a pie in the sky dream.
But... a vaccine in the US exists and is effective at making an immune response in all testing so far. Maybe the vaccine won't stop all woes. Maybe the virus will mutate too fast. But the vaccine exists today. It's not a pie in the sky dream.
Economy slow down is absolutely not a problem, it's a solution, for the environment, which is the most important thing on this planet.
Also humans are not an especially endangered species, so there is not much to fear on that side
Also humans are not an especially endangered species, so there is not much to fear on that side
People dying to save the environment? You first buddy.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/
EDIT: Before I start a flamewar, I guess I have to comment on whether I think Sweden's strategy was effective, so...
1. They might get a second wave in the future. But so far they seem to have avoided it.
2. It's too early to tell whether the cumulative loss in life and the cumulative economic damages will be better than those of other countries. So far, they do seem to have had more loss in life with less economic damage than their neighbors, but if they don't get a second wave, they might end up in a much better spot economically.
So yeah, in conclusion, we should keep watching them to see how things play out but not draw conclusions like "they had more loss in life" or "they had less damage to the economy", because it's still too early.