Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Empty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird

So, with the very likely possibility that baseball and basketball — at minimum — will be played to empty stadiums, it begs the question: Will it be as fun?

And before you answer, think about it for a second. No crowd noise. No intensity that builds for the home team or against the away team. Yes, the scoreboard will tell the tale, but the pressure is cranked up when you have a building full of crazy fans screaming their lungs out.

I get that it’s a business and that the money’s at the ML level, but considering crowds, distance from population centers, and the pleasures of relaxed fandom, I’ve been thinking that we might just run some mLs instead.

Mayor Blomberg Posted: April 28, 2020 at 10:17 AM | 9762 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: business, fans, stadiums

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 74 of 98 pages ‹ First  < 72 73 74 75 76 >  Last ›
   7301. bunyon Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:25 PM (#5963166)
I was posting on my phone between meetings. To be clear, Puck's 7284 linked article is the same as mine in 7276 (I don't feel I'm owed a coke as my post wasn't very good and anyone should be forgiven for not clicking on something that simply says "link")

The article highlights something that, in retrospect, I feel I should have known. R0 isn't some physical constant like g or c (as, pre-pandemic, I sort of imagined), but it is dependent on the society. The same virus may have a different R0 in two places because of a variety of factors. That extends, then, to herd immunity. Of course, the kicker is that if you achieve herd immunity with one set of societal behaviors, you don't retain it when/if the societal behavior changes. If, for example, we got to herd immunity at 40%* using strict social distancing, limited lockdown and universal mask wearing, we can't just relax because we have "herd immunity" because, by relaxing, we the amount of infection needed for herd immunity would go up.

The point is, even for those here pointing how much we don't know and how complicated it is, it's probably still more complicated and there is a lot we don't even know we don't know.

Fun to think about. Shitty to live.
   7302. bunyon Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:30 PM (#5963168)
well what's your understanding then? For instance how dangerous is it to work an 8 hour shift in wharehouse with say a dozen people?


I am not a doctor -- wait, I am, but a PhD in English isn't what you want here -- but masked up, maintaining distancing, good air circulation, breaks when needed probably not too bad. Depends on the size of the warehouse, of course.


And, obviously, it depends on the actual people. I'd rather work in a closed room with 20 unmasked uninfected people than in a warehouse with three masked infected people. If the three guys in the shop are masking and distancing from customers and observing protocols away from the shop, that sounds fine for them to be lax with each other. I mean, are people wearing masks in their homes with their families (I'm not but as I wrote this it occurred to me others might be). My wife and I are basically under the assumption that if one of us gets it the other will. So, are those three mechanics single? Or living with a wife and a bunch of teenagers? Are they living quiet chaste lives or going out every night?
   7303. PreservedFish Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:35 PM (#5963171)
I cannot find it now, but I skimmed a very long blog post that discussed something like Karl's theory in detail. In discussing the "25% is enough for herd immunity thing," it had quotes from and links (that I did not click) to what were purportedly eminent epidemiologists. So, this theory may have had better sources than "a guy on reddit."

If it were just "a guy on reddit," would it invalidate the theory? Well, no - an idea needs to be judged on its own merits - but realistically, probably yes. One dude just isn't likely to uncover a logical error that an entire academic discipline has overlooked for decades. It has happened before and it will happen again, but I'm betting dollars to donuts that it didn't happen here.
   7304. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:43 PM (#5963175)
Probably married, bunyon, at least Fred (the owner) I'm certain is. I've been over twice during the covid, once for inspection, once for a battery. No concern; they're good people.
   7305. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:44 PM (#5963176)
Fish -- rake a look at what puck and bunyon linked.

ad if poster did uncover something like that it's not going on reddit.
   7306. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 04:46 PM (#5963177)
And no disrespect for reddit; it's helped me to diagnose four cancers that doctors insist I don't have.
   7307. Srul Itza Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:00 PM (#5963180)
Summing up:

A. It is obvious that some people have more social interactions with others. For SDCNs living in their parent's basements here, that is well known. But there is nothing to indicate that it is really having a significant effect on spread here.

B. The overlap is with studies indicating that the percentage at which herd immunity may be reached can change, based on behavior. So in different times and places, different cultures and different diseases, it may be less than the usually quoted 70-75% . Thus, societal behavior that involves lots of masking and social distancing and some or many things shut down may make it appear that the herd immunity number is low and has almost been reached. But if that results in less masking, less distancing and things being opened up quickly, the disease will almost certainly start to spread again, because true societal herd immunity was not actually reached.

My personal interest is more in the current, apparent lower rate of death from the disease. I have read a number of articles on it, and what I get as factors are (a) wait a while, deaths lag and the numbers may shoot up; (b) we are catching more of the infected than we did earlier on, resulting in a higher apparent denominator; (c) we know more about how to treat it and are doing a better job; (d) the infected population is skewing more to the young than the old and others who may be at higher risk, as the latter are continuing to be more careful; and (e) we are catching more cases earlier, resulting in better medical outcomes (which may explain why hospitalizations are rising without the deaths keeping pace).

Any thoughts on the list?

Also, we have all been reading about how the disease can have significant health effects, even if people survive -- but I have seen no statistics on what percentage of people are so affected. Has anyone?
   7308. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:14 PM (#5963182)
(f) Response is helped by the fact that hospitals are not overwhelmed. TX, FL. AZ are all candidates to test this hypothesis.

I have not seen any comprehensive numbers on other lasting effects.
   7309. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:24 PM (#5963183)
Houston ISD has announced it is delaying the start of the school year and will begin entirely online.

The first day of school was previously scheduled for August 24.
Virtual instruction for the district begins on September 8 and will continue for six weeks through October 16. Students will not be welcomed back to campus until late October.

Here’s what to know so far:
The first day of school has been postponed to September 8, 2020.
Houston ISD plans to offer face-to-face instruction for all students beginning October 19.

---
bbc will be happy; the boys not so much. ;)
   7310. Greg Pope Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:37 PM (#5963186)
I'm from a Chicago suburb so I had no vote in the mayoral election. But even so I had no idea how much I would love Lori Lightfoot.

The mayor has repeatedly warned that, if Chicago’s virus numbers take a turn for the worse, she won’t hesitate to reinstate stricter public health requirements.

“Some of you have joked that I’m like the mom who will turn the car around when you’re acting up. No friends, it’s actually worse, I won’t just turn the car around, I’m going to shut it off, I’m going to kick you out, and I’m going to make you walk home. That’s who I am. That’s who I must be for you and everyone else in the city to make sure that we continue to be safe,” she said. “I don’t want to be that person if I don’t have to, but I will if you make me, and right now we are on the precipice. We are dangerously close to going back to a dangerous state of conditions.”


Emphasis added. She's awesome.
   7311. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:40 PM (#5963190)
trigger warning: death cult.
The NBC News/WSJ poll also shows a whopping 72 percent of American voters believe that the country is headed on the wrong track — a 16-point jump on this question since March.

Just 19 percent think the nation is headed in the right direction
who are these people?


"i can never go out to eat again; i have to wear a chernobyl suit to get the mail; i haven't touched another human being in 172 days. THIS IS THE GOOD LIFE!"
   7312. Tony S Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:48 PM (#5963192)
who are these people?


40% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old.

30% of Americans believe in astrology.

19% is actually a devastating number.
   7313. bunyon Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:49 PM (#5963193)
My personal interest is more in the current, apparent lower rate of death from the disease. I have read a number of articles on it, and what I get as factors are (a) wait a while, deaths lag and the numbers may shoot up; (b) we are catching more of the infected than we did earlier on, resulting in a higher apparent denominator; (c) we know more about how to treat it and are doing a better job; (d) the infected population is skewing more to the young than the old and others who may be at higher risk, as the latter are continuing to be more careful; and (e) we are catching more cases earlier, resulting in better medical outcomes (which may explain why hospitalizations are rising without the deaths keeping pace).

Any thoughts on the list?


It's all true. All of it. Even the thing you didn't list (f in the next post)

Probably married, bunyon, at least Fred (the owner) I'm certain is. I've been over twice during the covid, once for inspection, once for a battery. No concern; they're good people.

Yeah, they sound like they're doing okay to me. Perfect adherence to the rules is not possible. But if you live like that, pretty soon you're in a crowded bar. I think we should all strive to follow the rules as closely to possible. We're going to fail but coming close to doing it right will dramatically reduce the odds we get sick.

   7314. PreservedFish Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:50 PM (#5963194)
Perhaps that's the 19% of America that believes we have entered Biblical endtimes.
   7315. SoSH U at work Posted: July 15, 2020 at 05:52 PM (#5963195)
Any thoughts on the list?.


I'd also combine a and b into a separate letter. Earlier detection leads to even longer lags. But I think all of them apply, plus Mayor's.

   7316. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 15, 2020 at 06:42 PM (#5963199)
I have read a number of articles on it, and what I get as factors are (a) wait a while, deaths lag and the numbers may shoot up; (b) we are catching more of the infected than we did earlier on, resulting in a higher apparent denominator; (c) we know more about how to treat it and are doing a better job; (d) the infected population is skewing more to the young than the old and others who may be at higher risk, as the latter are continuing to be more careful; and (e) we are catching more cases earlier, resulting in better medical outcomes (which may explain why hospitalizations are rising without the deaths keeping pace).


I tend to think that (a) and (b) are the dominant features. We're pretty clearly seeing (a) - the death rate has clearly started to rise. Moreover, if you look at Worldometers, we've now shifted to where the states with the most cases by day (e.g., yesterday's top 5- Texas, California, Florida, Arizona, Georgia) are also the states with the most deaths by day (yesterday's top 5 - California, Florida, Texas, Arizona, Alabama - Georgia was 7th in deaths; Alabama was 9th in cases). I don't think deaths have quite caught up to cases but the trends have lined up, which suggests to me that the issue was primarily the time lag all along.

That said, I have no doubt that (b) is true so the observed IFR is almost certainly going to be lower in, say, August, than it was in, say, April. But the observed IFR was something like 9-10% in April, which was never the true IFR. If I had to guess, I'd guess we're going to see something like a 2.5% observed death rate with about a three week lag going forward.

I'd certainly like to think that (c), (d), and (e) are also true so that the REAL death rate is somewhat lower. But I'm somewhat skeptical. I think (a) and (b) are doing the really heavy lifting here. I'd say, time will tell. But to be honest, I don't know that we'll ever really know for sure.
   7317. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 06:57 PM (#5963202)
what would I have to do to show you that not all people in a society are exposing themselves to the same number of people? Would I pull out an almanac that shows that X% of people ride the subway and X% take a taxi to work? Isnt this obvious?

In general terms, it's obvious, sure. But Karl's conclusions from that idea were incorrect and dangerous, and that's what I was objecting to. (EDITed not to rehash what I thought those conclusions were.)

As for the idea itself, sure it's interesting. But the output is very dependent on assumptions that we don't know, and I don't have much faith in our ability to measure.

I mean, I just put together a very simple one, assuming that the population is divided up into high-interaction (Type A) and low-interaction (type B) people.

25% of people are Type As and the average Type A person initially spreads the virus to 5 other people. 75% of people are Type Bs and the average Type B initially spread the virus to 0.6 other people. (This is consistent with "25% of the people have ~75% of the interactions.")

In that scenario, the percentage of people who get it depends very much on how much interaction there is between Type As and Type Bs. Are Type As basically only spreading it to other Type As, or are they spreading it to a bunch of Type Bs? (I.e. are Type As mainly bar patrons who fraternize with each other, or are they barbers who serve the wider population?) Changing that assumption can result in anywhere from 35-65% of the population getting infected.

And relatively small changes in the number of people that a Type B infects also causes large changes in the percentage ultimately infected. If 25% of the population has 80% of the interactions or 60% of the interactions has a big impact on how many people ultimately get infected.

So, I mean, sure it's an interesting notion if you enjoy playing around with models. But the "logic" of it only goes so far, since the assumptions you use basically dictate any conclusions you might draw, and AFAIK we really don't have any way of empirically observing those inputs.
   7318. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:04 PM (#5963205)

The article highlights something that, in retrospect, I feel I should have known. R0 isn't some physical constant like g or c (as, pre-pandemic, I sort of imagined), but it is dependent on the society. The same virus may have a different R0 in two places because of a variety of factors.


Right. This idea sort of occurred to me back in March but I figured maybe I didnt understand the whole thing, so for a few months I assumed RO was some static number that we were trying to determine.

As the linked article points out, the concept of RO began in terms of inoculating people for known pathogens. I guess it made sense to assume a static number for those purposes.
   7319. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:10 PM (#5963206)
I thought I did, but I'll try again. I totally agree w/ you that what happened in Europe does not in any way support the idea.

OK, fine, so then don't accuse us of not engaging with the idea.

Another thing you said there was that we would expect the outbreak to rage until Rome to caught up to Milan and Marseille caught up to Paris. But my understanding is that these places have gone on lockdown and taken other safeguards, so there is really no way to test whatever Karl's theory is right? Cause that theory can only be tested in the raw, and not many places, other than maybe Miami or Tex are gonna let this virus go through without attempting to lockdown.

OR am I missing something? LIke did they not do lockdown in Rome or Marseille?


They did, but so did FL and TX. Karl's theory was that once you relax lockdowns (regardless of how much you relax them and how people individually behave after the lockdowns are relaxed), the virus springs back up until you reinstitute strict lockdowns or you get to herd immunity. That was what I was objecting to. It's a dangerous theory because it basically says the things that NY and Rome are doing and FL isn't (like wearing masks) don't make a difference. I think it's extremely likely that those things do make a difference, and not abiding by those recommendations is taking a significant risk for no reason.
   7320. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:11 PM (#5963207)

40% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old.

30% of Americans believe in astrology.


All of them are on my Facebook feed.
   7321. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:13 PM (#5963208)
are Type As mainly bar patrons who fraternize with each other, or are they barbers who serve the wider population?


Why not both? Most bar patrons have jobs, no?
   7322. tshipman Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:18 PM (#5963209)
I just don't get how we can get to the point where almost 600,000 people have died and have people saying that the real problem is that we haven't engaged enough with ridiculous and dangerous theories.
   7323. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:23 PM (#5963210)

Right. This idea sort of occurred to me back in March but I figured maybe I didnt understand the whole thing, so for a few months I assumed RO was some static number that we were trying to determine.


I thought I never really understood the concept of R0 because it seemed obvious to me that (a) it would vary heavily across different places, (b) it wasn't that useful without some concept of time attached to it. Like, the average person infects 1.1 or 1.2 people, but over what timeframe?

Like, the difference between R0 of 1.1 and 1.2 means your number of cases will double roughly twice as fast.

But so will the difference between an R0 of 1.1 with an average transmission time of 3 days vs. an average transmission time of 6 days.
   7324. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:25 PM (#5963211)

Why not both? Most bar patrons have jobs, no?

Sure, I was just giving the two extremes.
   7325. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:25 PM (#5963212)
Karl's theory was that once you relax lockdowns (regardless of how much you relax them and how people individually behave after the lockdowns are relaxed), the virus springs back up until you reinstitute strict lockdowns or you get to herd immunity. That was what I was objecting to.


umm, is there a typo here? I thought most of us agree on the first sentence.
   7326. Hank Gillette Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:28 PM (#5963213)
My personal interest is more in the current, apparent lower rate of death from the disease. I have read a number of articles on it, and what I get as factors are (a) wait a while, deaths lag and the numbers may shoot up; (b) we are catching more of the infected than we did earlier on, resulting in a higher apparent denominator; (c) we know more about how to treat it and are doing a better job; (d) the infected population is skewing more to the young than the old and others who may be at higher risk, as the latter are continuing to be more careful; and (e) we are catching more cases earlier, resulting in better medical outcomes (which may explain why hospitalizations are rising without the deaths keeping pace).

Any thoughts on the list?


I have reservations about (c). I have not seen any news of breakthroughs in treatments.

Remdesivir is the most promising drug treatment so far, but the results from the tests so far have not been exactly spectacular. It did shorten recovery time. The death rate was lower, but not to a statisically significant degree.

I think the rest of the list explains the lower death rate, with (a) being the wild card. The U.S. death rate started rising again in the second week of July. It’s anyone’s guess as to whether the massive number of new cases in states like Texas and Florida are going to explode the death rate, or whether testing has increased enough that we are counting many more of the mild cases than we were previously.

It really sucks to be in a pandemic when so much is still unknown.
   7327. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:36 PM (#5963214)
umm, is there a typo here? I thought most of us agree on the first sentence.

No, we don't without the caveat of Dave's next sentence, which is that behavior matters. There's a difference between ok, we're relaxing things so go whatever you want and we're relaxing the lockdowns but wear a ####### mask, avoid crowded indoor spaces, don't go to COVID parties. But, of course, Karl was part of the any restriction is fascist lockdownerism contingent.

Dave wrote:

It's a dangerous theory because it basically says the things that NY and Rome are doing and FL isn't (like wearing masks) don't make a difference. I think it's extremely likely that those things do make a difference, and not abiding by those recommendations is taking a significant risk for no reason.
   7328. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:45 PM (#5963215)
I have not seen any news of breakthroughs in treatments.

Not speaking for Srul, but it seems like we know more about when to ventilate when to use other oxygen delivery, and how to position patients.
   7329. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 07:50 PM (#5963217)

Adding to 7323, there's a lot of things we don't know about this disease, or at least a lot of things we shouldn't just assume, because they make a big difference in our conclusions.

Take the NY antibody study that I posted earlier. They are very thoughtful about how the specificity and sensitivity of the tests they used impact the actual infection rate vs. the observed positive test rate, which is great. But they calculate an IFR of 0.6% based on a median time from infection to death of 19 days.* But what you assume for that time lag between infection and death has a big impact on your calculated IFR -- one week less or one week more can get you to 0.4% or 0.8%. (And if 19 days is the median, then half the deaths come after that, right? So shouldn't it be more like 1.2%?)

* I am not ragging on the study authors; they are clear that estimating the IFR was "not an aim of this analysis" and "This estimate is in line with estimates of 0.5%–1.0% observed in other countries; however, additional analyses are needed to more precisely estimate the infection fatality ratio in NYS."
   7330. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:11 PM (#5963222)
My personal interest is more in the current, apparent lower rate of death from the disease. I have read a number of articles on it, and what I get as factors are (a) wait a while, deaths lag and the numbers may shoot up; (b) we are catching more of the infected than we did earlier on, resulting in a higher apparent denominator; (c) we know more about how to treat it and are doing a better job; (d) the infected population is skewing more to the young than the old and others who may be at higher risk, as the latter are continuing to be more careful; and (e) we are catching more cases earlier, resulting in better medical outcomes (which may explain why hospitalizations are rising without the deaths keeping pace).

(a), (b) and (d) seem pretty clearly true.

With respect to (a), we've seen deaths rising in a number of states over the past week that saw their positive testing rate begin to rise 3-4 weeks ago, even as they continue to decline in many other places.

With respect to (b), the number of tests continues to rise every week -- while the positive test rate has been creeping upwards since the beginning of June, it's still much lower than it was at the peak (on a nationwide basis, not true in every state). So it stands to reason we are catching a higher proportion of cases now than we were in April-May. (I'm not sure whether we're catching more than we were in June -- cases may be growing faster than tests now, but we won't necessarily see that in the CFR for a few weeks.)

And with respect to (d), the median age of diagnosed cases in Florida was 49 prior to May 31. Since May 31, its been 36. There are still a lot of older people being diagnosed, but the growth rate has been more pronounced in younger age groups. Unfortunately, it's been trending upwards again recently -- the median age of positive cases today was 41, for example.

Not sure about (c) or (e), but they make sense too.
   7331. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:35 PM (#5963224)
I cannot find it now, but I skimmed a very long blog post that discussed something like Karl's theory in detail. In discussing the "25% is enough for herd immunity thing," it had quotes from and links (that I did not click) to what were purportedly eminent epidemiologists. So, this theory may have had better sources than "a guy on reddit."

Might it be this?

I read it a few days ago. I thought it made some good points, overlooked some other things. The posters here have spent a lot more time thinking about and analyzing this pandemic than I, so I am interested to know the obvious flaws in this article that escaped me.
   7332. PreservedFish Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:38 PM (#5963225)
Yes, that's it. Thank you Chicken.

I'd be curious to see responses anyone has to it. I haven't mounted the effort to read the whole thing critically yet.
   7333. Laser Man Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:41 PM (#5963227)
The data lag (a) is the big concern right now. Are the 958 deaths recorded today best correlated with the 26K cases 4 weeks ago, the 38K cases 3 weeks ago, or the 52K cases 2 weeks ago?

Looking at the curves shown on Covidtracking.com, the cases start rising sharply around June 10. The hospitalization starts going up about 10 days later, around June 20. And the deaths curve starts going up on July 7, about 4 weeks after the cases started going up. That suggests that the next few weeks could be much worse, as the daily case number is now in the 60K-70K range. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
   7334. Jay Z Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:42 PM (#5963228)
They did, but so did FL and TX. Karl's theory was that once you relax lockdowns (regardless of how much you relax them and how people individually behave after the lockdowns are relaxed), the virus springs back up until you reinstitute strict lockdowns or you get to herd immunity. That was what I was objecting to. It's a dangerous theory because it basically says the things that NY and Rome are doing and FL isn't (like wearing masks) don't make a difference. I think it's extremely likely that those things do make a difference, and not abiding by those recommendations is taking a significant risk for no reason.


Right now, he's right. Rome isn't invulnerable, if they go "back to normal" I'm sure the virus will show up. The alternative is continuing shelter in place indefinitely, which has an impact on people's enjoyment of life, psych well being, economic well being.

Or you are New Zealand and do a hard lockdown, then completely quarantine everyone coming in. Much less expensive for an island nation to do that. Here, it would be a significant expense to have checkpoints at every state and city line. And New Zealand has still lost all of their tourism.

Shelter in place is a waiting game, and waiting game does have things in its favor. Maybe we get a vaccine. Maybe we get better treatments. Maybe the virus mutates into something less toxic. Maybe all three of those happen. Or some combination. Or none of them happen. Or people really can get infected again and again, worse each time, no one is invulnerable to that. In that case hard eradication, hard quarantine and lockdown is going to be the only sane choice. Wipe it out and monitor it hard.

But the timing matters. If some of those solutions take too long, maybe people do get fed up with missing too many things from their lives. Or we get partial solutions and decide "good enough."

About the only data I feel comfortable with yet are the demographics of the deceased. Everything else is guesswork.
   7335. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:47 PM (#5963229)
Hedge-fund dad, vaccine-autism crusader cherry-picks studies and hypotheses.
Prove me wrong.
   7336. Hank Gillette Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:47 PM (#5963230)
Not speaking for Srul, but it seems like we know more about when to ventilate when to use other oxygen delivery, and how to position patients.


True, and I am sure that there have been other advances, but they seem pretty minor to me. Nothing that would be a “game-changer”, as far as I can see.
   7337. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:50 PM (#5963231)
I'd be curious to see responses anyone has to it. I haven't mounted the effort to read the whole thing critically yet.


The first thing that jumped out at me is that his first graph that basically sums up his argument - deaths are falling, COVID is over - ends two weeks too soon. U. S. deaths aren’t falling any more. They’re going up pretty damn sharply. So, to the extent the rest is an explanation of why deaths are falling it’s arguing against reality.
   7338. Laser Man Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:55 PM (#5963232)
I'd be curious to see responses anyone has to it. I haven't mounted the effort to read the whole thing critically yet.
Right, the main issue is that he is plotting deaths through June 19, when the number of deaths was dropping steadily. Unfortunately, the hospitalizations started rising rapidly on June 20, and the deaths have been going back up since July 7.
   7339. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:57 PM (#5963234)
In fairness, he send to think that is because we have not met the magic TEN PERCENT immunity rate. Yes 10.
   7340. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 08:59 PM (#5963235)
Oh yeah, and he also believes that nothing about Swedish life changed.
   7341. Hank Gillette Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:00 PM (#5963236)
Right now, he's right. Rome isn't invulnerable, if they go "back to normal" I'm sure the virus will show up. The alternative is continuing shelter in place indefinitely, which has an impact on people's enjoyment of life, psych well being, economic well being.


Our fathers and grandfathers left there homes and families for years to fight Nazis, while the rest of the people here endured rationing, shortages of sugar, meat, rubber, and gasoline. Yet, they persevered, I guess because they could still go to bars and the movies.

We, somehow, can’t handle being asked to stay home as much as possible and wear masks when out in public.
   7342. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:01 PM (#5963237)
From TFA

This article came out one day after I wrote mine, and validated everything I just said, except the author is wrong about COVID-19’s HIT, it’s 10-20%, not 60%, which is even better news


Great scientist absolutely brilliant, except where she disagrees with me by a factor of 3-6. But I did private equity so trust me, not her.

I'm convinced.
   7343. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:09 PM (#5963241)
Terrible day for the U. S. per Worldometers: 71,670 new cases and 997 new deaths. Ugh!
   7344. Tony S Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:10 PM (#5963243)
Our fathers and grandfathers left there homes and families for years to fight Nazis, while the rest of the people here endured rationing, shortages of sugar, meat, rubber, and gasoline. Yet, they persevered, I guess because they could still go to bars and the movies.

We, somehow, can’t handle being asked to stay home as much as possible and wear masks when out in public.


The boomer generation (well, a critical mass of it) has never had to experience real hardship, so the institutional memory of individual sacrifice for the greater national good has pretty much dissipated. That's a big reason our response to this pandemic has been so poor, by far the worst among developed nations (a description which is increasingly dubious when applied to the US).
   7345. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:22 PM (#5963245)
Yeah, Kiko, us over 140,000 deaths, and holy crap, the Texas numbers on reload are totally sickening, 12,235 cases, 154 deaths.

Both are records. Yesterday was the third highest number of cases in TX, July 9 is #2. Yesterday is was the second most daily deaths in Texas, July 8 #3.

That's not a good week.
   7346. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:25 PM (#5963246)
... so the institutional memory of individual sacrifice for the greater national good has pretty much dissipated. That's a big reason our response to this pandemic has been so poor,


I dont know Tony. I think the leadership has been really poor starting w/ Trump and certain governors. There is no doubt he could have taken this thing more seriously which would have had a huge effect on a lot of institutions. As it stands now, it literally looks like a civil war out there, with the southern states being total idiots about the whole thing.
   7347. sunday silence (again) Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:30 PM (#5963247)

Shelter in place is a waiting game, and waiting game does have things in its favor. Maybe we get a vaccine. Maybe we get better treatments. Maybe the virus mutates into something less toxic.


I think one thing that's possible is that even if one doesnt get lifetime immunity, there could be "booster" shots that would give you say 5 or 6 months of immunity and then you have to line up for another booster. Obviously there's issues there with production etc. but if that's what it takes to get back to normal maybe thats what has to happen.

I forget what they call it, is it "indirect" immunity where they simply inject with antibodies in order to produce a limited time immunity?
   7348. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:30 PM (#5963248)
the southern states being total idiots about the whole thing.


Keep that up, suh, and we'll secede!
   7349. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:32 PM (#5963249)
I think leadership matters. But it also matters the enemy we are facing. The Nazi horde and the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor is a tiny bit different than some "bad flu" disease which is invisible and which scientists keep hedging and changing their minds about.

I don't think there has been some weird generational rot over the years. People are people The situation matters, leadership matters, but the idea that boomers or any other demographic are uniquely terrible is dumb.
   7350. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 15, 2020 at 09:42 PM (#5963252)
Keep that up, suh, and we'll secede!
by the time you get going, you won't have the lung capacity to succeed.
I don't think there has been some weird generational rot over the years. People are people The situation matters, leadership matters, but the idea that boomers or any other demographic are uniquely terrible is dumb.

counterpoint:

ok boomer
   7351. Eric L Posted: July 15, 2020 at 11:40 PM (#5963262)
As always, Mouse speaks to my inner optimist. But while people don’t change much, societies can. History is full of cultures that lost their ability to respond to challenges.
   7352. Howie Menckel Posted: July 15, 2020 at 11:42 PM (#5963263)
supposedly part of the "noise" about massive increases in positive tests in "late" states yet not a matching death rate could be that there finally are so many tests going on that there are people - waiting to get out of hospitals or back to work - who could test positive 5, 10, 15 times but go in as 5, 10, or 15 different people in the data.

any evidence of this?

it seems plausible - but plausible doesn't necessarily mean accurate.
   7353. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 16, 2020 at 12:15 AM (#5963265)
it seems plausible - but plausible doesn't necessarily mean accurate.

the fact that you find that plausible is an embarrassment.
   7354. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 16, 2020 at 12:37 AM (#5963267)
supposedly part of the "noise" about massive increases in positive tests in "late" states yet not a matching death rate


This isn't really a thing anymore (*) beyond a simple 3-4 week lag between infection and death. Deaths over the past 7 days were 5,314, which is 29.6% higher than deaths over the previous 7 days (4,100). Go back 23 days. New cases in the 7 days ending June 22nd were 204,524, a 29.8% increase over the previous 7 days (157,592).

(*) - Honestly, it was never a thing that couldn't be explained by a simple 3-4 week lag between infection and death. New daily cases didn't start increasing until around June 11th or so.
   7355. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 16, 2020 at 12:51 AM (#5963268)
The situation matters, leadership matters,


The situation calls for consideration and small sacrifice by people ho have grown used to get thing their own way and being protected from this sort of thing in a way that want true 90-100 years ago.
As far as leadership, the party in power has spent the last couple decades discrediting leadership, thought, knowledge, expertise and thrived on conspiracy and quackery.
That's a toxic Kool-Aid.
   7356. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 16, 2020 at 12:59 AM (#5963269)
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/herd-immunity-coronavirus/614035/


This is not the case when a virus is spreading in the real world. Instead, the complexities of real life create what modelers refer to as heterogeneity. People are exposed to different amounts of the virus, in different contexts, via different routes. A virus that is new to the species creates more variety in immune responses. Some of us are more susceptible to being infected, and some are more likely to transmit the virus once infected. Even small differences in individual susceptibility and transmission can, as with any chaos phenomenon, lead to very different outcomes as the effects compound over time, on the scale of a pandemic. As Gomes explains, “There doesn’t need to be a lot of variation in a population for epidemics to slow down quite drastically.”

That’s exactly what Gomes’s work attempts to do. She describes a model in which everyone is equally susceptible to coronavirus infection (a homogeneous model), and a model in which some people are more susceptible than others (a heterogeneous model). Even if the two populations start out with the same average susceptibility to infection, you don’t get the same epidemics. “The outbreaks look similar at the beginning. But in the heterogeneous population, individuals are not infected at random,” she told me. “The highly susceptible people are more likely to get infected first. As a result, the average susceptibility gets lower and lower over time.”

...

“If there is a large variability of susceptibility among humans, then herd immunity could be as low as 20 percent,” Britton told me. But there’s reason to suspect that people do not have such dramatically disparate susceptibility to the coronavirus. High degrees of variability are more common in things such as sexually transmitted infections, where a person with 100 partners a year is far more susceptible than someone celibate. Respiratory viruses tend to be more equal-opportunity invaders. “I don’t think it will happen at 20 percent,” Britton said. “Between 35 and 45 percent—I think that would be a level where spreading drops drastically.”

...

Lipsitch also believes that heterogeneity is important to factor into any model. It was one reason he updated his prediction, not long after we spoke in February, of what the herd-immunity threshold would be. Instead of 40 to 70 percent, he lowered it to 20 to 60 percent. When we spoke last week, he said he still stands by that, but he is skeptical that the number lands close to the 20 percent end of the range. “I think it’s unlikely,” he said, but added, “This virus is proving there can be orders-of-magnitude differences in attack rates, depending on political and societal decisions, which I don’t know how to forecast.”


   7357. Howie Menckel Posted: July 16, 2020 at 01:09 AM (#5963270)
Kiko,

my main struggle is reconciling NYC area death levels to southern states.

I realize the latter sadly are gaining ground, but do we really think they horrifically catch up?

also asked a question a few days ago about Georgia, which I think reopened in late April and it seemed like May Day was inevitable?

what happened, or didn't happen, in that state?
   7358. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 16, 2020 at 01:17 AM (#5963271)
stiggles: "the fact that you find that plausible is an embarrassment."

Never thought of you as one for understatement.
Live and learn.
   7359. Eudoxus Posted: July 16, 2020 at 01:31 AM (#5963272)
154 deaths in Texas today is the highest daily death total for any state since New Jersey on May 27th, I believe. Hidalgo county reports 66 deaths alone -- hopefully that's partly a backlog effect.

I agree it still looks implausible that Texas, Florida, Arizona, et al will reach NY/NJ levels. But I think 300-500/day is not that unlikely. That's basically New York levels with the very worst three weeks lopped off. Being spared those three weeks is a huge deal, and it's an interesting question why things don't get that bad (if they don't). But Ii think the southern states are on track at least for Italy/Spain/UK levels. And I suspect there will be specific areas in those states that hit NY levels -- part of the NY effect is that the place that got hit particularly badly was such a huge city that it pulled up the overall numbers sharply.

(Navajo Nation, for example, has deaths equal to .22% of the population, which I think is pretty comparable to NYC.)
   7360. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 16, 2020 at 01:43 AM (#5963273)
I don't think it is, Eudoxus. And I fear that Cameron County is just warming up. Reports from there are terrible.
Harris County broke yesterday's record for deaths and the previous day's for cases. It's getting real.

Here's the Hidalgo County stats page.
   7361. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 16, 2020 at 01:53 AM (#5963274)
Right now, he's right. Rome isn't invulnerable, if they go "back to normal" I'm sure the virus will show up.

Oh come on. He wasn't right about Rome. He said that Italy had reached herd immunity at 25%! Neither part is true -- they haven't reached herd immunity and they were never close to 25% infection rate.

The alternative is continuing shelter in place indefinitely, which has an impact on people's enjoyment of life, psych well being, economic well being.

Sure, if Rome goes "back to normal" they will likely see a return of COVID. But you may have missed the fact that Rome isn't sheltering in place anymore. Activity in Italy was only down 18% from the baseline in the first week of July, while Lazio (which includes Rome) was down 25%, according to Google Mobility data. That's more "back to normal" than Florida (down 35%) over the same time period.

I actually think that once you get cases low enough, a combination of sensible restrictions, widely available testing and vigilant contact tracing can allow you to return to some semblance of normal without a serious outbreak. When Italy reopened, it was after 2+ months of very strict lockdowns. And they were coming off a week where only 2.4% of tests came back positive. And they still required masks. Their current positive test rates appear to be below 1% (although I'm not sure I fully understand how they report their data).

Florida, meanwhile, has a positive testing rate over the past week of 19%. So they're pretty clearly doing something different, since Italy hasn't reached herd immunity and Rome certainly hasn't. Or maybe Florida was just unlucky. But I firmly believe it was bad policy not to require masks, and to push forward with reopening while insisting everything was ok, even as the positive test rate increased a month ago. And it seems insane to reopen Disney World as that rate approaches 20% now.

Remember, Karl is the one who said that masks and lockdowns don't actually do anything; NY just reached herd immunity:

NY's numbers went and stayed down <b>not because New Yorkers are good at lockdowns and masking, it went down because all the high-interaction people already had it....That curve of washing out after roughly 25% antibody prevalence has played out everywhere - Italy, Spain, France, London, NY, NJ. Brazil is now nearing that. CA/TX/FL are up currently not because it's a "second wave", it's because they never had a first. They will rage for another few weeks and then gradually subside just like NY and everywhere else did.

(emphasis added)


The implication of the above statement is that Rome is going to have an outbreak regardless of whether they wear masks or are on lockdown*. This is so wrong and so far beyond what you seem to think he said, that I don't understand why you are defending him.

*Unless it's a really strict lockdown, I guess? I honestly don't know, Karl's theory doesn't seem that well thought-out to me.
   7362. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 16, 2020 at 02:03 AM (#5963275)
Sure, if Rome goes "back to normal" they will likely see a return of COVID. But you may have missed the fact that Rome isn't sheltering in place anymore. Activity in Italy was only down 18% from the baseline in the first week of July, while Lazio (which includes Rome) was down 25%, according to Google Mobility data. That's more "back to normal" than Florida (down 35%) over the same time period.


There's a lot of folk who can't get past binaries: either we're slow dancing in the streets or we're in gulags.
That same logic insists on saying that nothing changed in Sweden.
   7363. Mayor Blomberg Posted: July 16, 2020 at 02:45 AM (#5963277)
Oslo has been mostly open for a couple of weeks and -- more riskily -- is getting ready to admit Brits.
   7364. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: July 16, 2020 at 02:55 AM (#5963278)

154 deaths in Texas today is the highest daily death total for any state since New Jersey on May 27th, I believe. Hidalgo county reports 66 deaths alone -- hopefully that's partly a backlog effect.

Texas only reported 110 deaths on 7/15, according to the state at least. That's still their highest total so far, 12 higher than a week ago. Not sure where Worldometers gets its numbers from.

The weekly trend in TX is 187-232-332-619.

154 would have been the highest since NJ on 5/27, if you exclude states that started counting probable deaths in their totals and had big one-day jumps because of it. But CA reported 140 today, and had four days above 110 last week.

I don't think any state will get to NY levels. We peaked at 39 daily deaths per million. The worst state in the country is currently Arizona at 9, while Florida is at 4 and Texas is at 3. FL/TX/AZ look like they have another few weeks of things getting worse for them, at least. But New York basically had at least a month of nobody taking any precautions and nobody doing any real testing, in the most densely populated city in the country, with lots of European travelers coming in.
   7365. Hank Gillette Posted: July 16, 2020 at 03:35 AM (#5963279)
And no disrespect for reddit; it's helped me to diagnose four cancers that doctors insist I don't have.


Okay, apologies, but I can’t tell for sure if you are serious or being sarcastic.
   7366. BrianBrianson Posted: July 16, 2020 at 03:49 AM (#5963280)
I don't think there has been some weird generational rot over the years. People are people The situation matters, leadership matters, but the idea that boomers or any other demographic are uniquely terrible is dumb.


Apart from which, there are obvious counterexamples that it isn't necessary; pretty much all of the G7 countries haven't had any more real, extended, collective hardship than the US in living memory (well, except perhaps the East Germans), but we're generally doing pretty well on doing a real lockdown, taking the time to wear masks and dispense soap, and are getting back together pretty well. So whatever America's deal is, it's hard to blame it on an era of extended prosperity.
   7367. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: July 16, 2020 at 04:45 AM (#5963285)
I think the J.B. Handley/Reddit theory is a poor explanation for the world. For the Handley/Reddit theory to work, it has to explain why countries like Germany haven't reached anywhere near the mortality rate of other countriest. It can't be lockdown, because that's largely over in Germany - schools, shops, bars, restaurants, even cinemas are open. If it's mask adherence, then the takeaway must be that we could save tens of thousands of future deaths in the US in Florida, Texas, Arizona, etc. through the rather painless process of mandating mask observance. If it's that Germany already super-secretly reached herd immunity, then it has to explain why case detection is so low.

But the linked blog actively rejects mask-wearing. It's also written by an anti-vaxxer. I think we can accept that a Herd Immunity Threshold isn't a simple raw % of population without stretching the logic beyond observable facts.
   7368. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 16, 2020 at 05:00 AM (#5963286)
the linked blog actively rejects mask-wearing. It's also written by an anti-vaxxer

most people don't know this, but 1 Tbs of undiluted sulfuric acid is a safe and effective substitute for vaccinations for those of caucasian ancestry.
   7369. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 16, 2020 at 05:10 AM (#5963287)
Never thought of you as one for understatement.
Live and learn.

his instincts are bad and he should feel bad.
   7370. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:19 AM (#5963292)
So whatever America's deal is, it's hard to blame it on an era of extended prosperity.


Poor leadership. A crisis that by its nature is difficult for the US culture to handle - an invisible enemy we can't really fight. Our government structure with the State/Federal level split. The ridiculousness of making a disease a partisan issue in an extremely partisan time for the nation.

There is no need to blame arbitrary generational cohorts when the real answers are pretty obvious.
   7371. PreservedFish Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:20 AM (#5963293)
But the linked blog actively rejects mask-wearing. It's also written by an anti-vaxxer.


Yuck.
   7372. ramifications of an exciting 57i66135 Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:24 AM (#5963294)
trigger warning: republican death cult
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed an executive order on Wednesday banning all cities and counties in the state from requiring people to wear masks during the coronavirus pandemic. The move comes as Georgia has experienced a steep rise in covid-19 infections over the past two weeks, with 3,871 new cases and 37 new deaths on Wednesday alone.
...
In early April, Georgia had identified just 4,748 identified cases and 154 deaths from covid-19. Today, the state has recorded 127,834 cases and 3,091 deaths total, well below the actual number of cases and deaths according to health experts

   7373. Greg K Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:26 AM (#5963295)
It's an interesting question, whether greater centralization is an advantage or disadvantage in the crisis.

On the surface it seems like being able to react at the state or county level is an advantage. I recall reading that the UK had problems related to its greater centralization of governance. On the other hand, the wide scope of the NHS allowed for swift mobilization.

France has a pretty centralized government don't they? How did it play out there?
   7374. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:33 AM (#5963296)
Assigning attributes to entire generational cohorts is nearly as valid as astrology.
   7375. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:35 AM (#5963297)
@7373 - I think it really depends on the nature of the crisis. In many it is an advantage to have a bunch of differenty places trying different things and the weird funding mechanisms across Federal/State doesn't matter as much. This crisis is poorly suited to it though IMO.
   7376. Greg K Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:41 AM (#5963298)
Yeah, that was a pretty nebulous post on my part. I meant this crisis specifically.

I suppose there's also the practical matter of how those various levels of government interact with one another. Ideally, they're working together and helping each level do what they need to do. But I keep reading stories about governors restricting what decisions county administrations can make, or the federal government undermining state government responses. Decentralized federalism can work, if the participants are willing. Germany has a federal system where responsibilities are divided among national, provincial, and local levels...they seem to have done alright.
   7377. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:52 AM (#5963299)
That is where the absurd partisanship present in the US right now combined with the disease becoming a partisan matter really hurts. Good leadership could have minimized the issue. Ooops.
   7378. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: July 16, 2020 at 08:53 AM (#5963301)
In addition to simple partisanship, the US has a really strong divide along urban and rural lines, and since the disease impacts those places differently and at different times it only makes things worse.
   7379. PreservedFish Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:02 AM (#5963304)
Good leadership could have minimized the issue. Ooops.


I wonder if, in this environment, any Democrat could have minimized the issue. It might be an "only Nixon could go to China" situation.
   7380. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:05 AM (#5963305)
Decentralized federalism can work, if the participants are willing. Germany has a federal system where responsibilities are divided among national, provincial, and local levels...they seem to have done alright.


Without going fully OT:P, I think federalism works better in a system that's not locked into 2-party structures. In countries like Germany, there's less immediate recoiling from 'opposition' parties working with each other between state levels, in part because coalition governments and mixed Cabinet setups are somewhat inevitable. You can't run a country with 7 different significant political parties if every other party is the devil to your membership.
   7381. BrianBrianson Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:09 AM (#5963306)
France has a pretty centralized government don't they? How did it play out there?


By the death count we did better than Spain or Italy, but worse than Germany. My impression is there was a lot of luck in where you were when you realised the problem was serious.

But ... France is a little tough to qualify in Anglophone thinking. The country is pretty centralised, but there's a lot of local flexability within that, French bureaucracy is ... pervasive, but also a lot more forgiving and flexible than I'm used to as an Anglophone.

But I think the governments were all on the same-ish page, which helps a lot. There was some anti-lockdown sentiment in the early going, but it wasn't very co-ordinated or coherent, and I think there was a much stronger impression the government was committed to solving/supporting everyone through the problem as needed, that probably made it a lot easier.

Canada is probably less centralised than the States, but again, the governments were largely on the same page, so there wasn't much coordinated or coherent backlash. If Doug Ford had been a COVID conspiracy guy, it could've been a lot rougher. But it looks he's gonna get rewarded for it, we could see the kind of Tory Ontario we haven't seen since ol' Bill Davis left Queen's Park (okay, probably not - but, he's a really interesting case study for a populist conservative leaning into dealing with COVID as serious business).
   7382. bunyon Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:17 AM (#5963307)
The partisanship is a generational failure. Or, rather, several generations. The boomers, gen x and even the millenials have had ample opportunity to create a functional nation. We certainly had the foundation for one. We've failed (so far, I mean other generations of Americans have likewise failed). We can always pick ourselves up and put it together (as other generations did) but until we do, we're going to continue to see failure like we are living through. I generally agree you can't compare generations because the challenges they face and their circumstances differ. Maybe the "greatest generation" would have failed in the face of COVID-19 and we would have handled the Depression and WWII just as well. But the facts on the ground are, they handled their business and, so far, we have not.

Pandemics basically require collective action. Get enough people who refuse to observe the needed protocols and it doesn't really matter how rich or smart the country as a whole is. Of course, wars require the same things. Americans appear to be good at violent intervention but ask us to be patient or calm and we go to pieces. The Federal government can't force mask wearing at a small town walmart. Only the local police can do that. And our local police have, um, issues.


As for the pandemic itself, I don't see any reason to think FL and TX are going to avoid being NY or Italy. I mean, other than luck. Luck cuts both ways, of course. Opening schools and keeping the rest of society open with already a huge spike ongoing is asking for even worse outcomes than we've seen so far.
   7383. PreservedFish Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:18 AM (#5963308)
Distressing internecine family partisanship story: talked to a friend the other day that's in San Francisco and lives alone (that's a heavy lockdown to bear). She has at least one health factor that puts her into the higher risk category.

She's from the midwest and all of the rest of her family are deep, deep believers in far-right conspiracies and fears and such, to the point where it resembles a real psychosis. A typical story is the time her mom realized that she had left her backdoor unlocked and insisted that they drive back and lock it, ruining the day's plans, because she was convinced that MS-13 posed a threat. To her suburban home. Because the back door was unlocked. She complains that Fox News is too liberal. They are also convinced that Covid is a hoax.

Recently my friend's uncle got ill, and was obviously on his deathbed. This turned into a huge family issue because my friend refused to fly across the country to be near him. She was accused by mother/aunts/brother of being a stooge, so deeply corrupted by liberal conspiracies that she couldn't tell right from wrong anymore. I get stressed out and enraged just thinking about it.
   7384. PreservedFish Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:34 AM (#5963311)
Speaking of Fox News, I click on it every once in a while just out of curiosity. Judging from the daily headlines, by far the biggest story in the country right now is crime and anarchy in the "Portland autonomous zone," and if there's a second biggest story, it's still the BLM protests. I wonder how many people in Florida, Texas etc aren't just dismissive of Covid fears but are actually just flat out unaware of them.
   7385. SoSH U at work Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:34 AM (#5963312)
I wonder if, in this environment, any Democrat could have minimized the issue.


I don't think so. But Trump could have had much better luck. I think those who oppose him have largely done what the CDC and others in public health have been advocating, disregarding whatever disjointed path Trump was following. But if he had been consistent in promoting the things we know help suppress spread (mask wearing, continued social distancing, phased in return to normalcy), perhaps pitching those ideas as a patriotic duty, then a lot of them would have been far more likely to get in line.
   7386. Hot Wheeling American Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:45 AM (#5963314)
I don't think so. But Trump could have had much better luck.

Right. He's the one with the personality cult made up by the anti-science party.
   7387. Tony S Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:48 AM (#5963316)
I don't think so. But Trump could have had much better luck. I think those who oppose him have largely done what the CDC and others in public health have been advocating, disregarding whatever disjointed path Trump was following. But if he had been consistent in promoting the things we know help suppress spread (mask wearing, continued social distancing, phased in return to normalcy), perhaps pitching those ideas as a patriotic duty, then a lot of them would have been far more likely to get in line.


True, but that's not about "luck". He's consistently made the wrong policy and messaging choices.
   7388. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:49 AM (#5963317)
I was told today that the office in Zug (nominally 'our office, but I've not been there in 3.5 months with this client) had its first case on Monday. People were reportedly behaving 'as normal' - no masks, shaking hands, no social distancing - and now everyone there has to get tested on Friday, going into the office only in 5-minute intervals.

It's when you let your guard down . . .
   7389. SoSH U at work Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:56 AM (#5963318)
True, but that's not about "luck". He's consistently made the wrong policy and messaging choices.


I'm not arguing that. What I'm saying is that had he been consistent with the right policy and messaging choices, his odds merely would have been better at getting through to the "freedom" crowd than anyone else. But even had Trump done and said all the right things, it wouldn't be a guarantee with the "mask mandates are unconstitutional" cohort.
   7390. Ron J Posted: July 16, 2020 at 09:57 AM (#5963319)
#7386 As I've mentioned before, if you want to see a populist ( a conservative one too ) who's done generally well you need only look at Doug Ford of Ontario. He started off badly at the beginning but has pretty much followed the advice of his health experts.

And because he's the undisputed leader of the populists, the no mask crowds have never gained any real traction in Ontario.
   7391. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:12 AM (#5963322)
I thought there would be a response to my Atlantic link in 7356, as it sounds similar to the hotly discussed Karl 25% rule.

Even if its not 25%, the thrust of the article is that herd immunity may be achieved at a lower than previously accepted number.

I'll repost with emphasis added: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/herd-immunity-coronavirus/614035/


If there is a large variability of susceptibility among humans, then herd immunity could be as low as 20 percent,” Britton told me. But there’s reason to suspect that people do not have such dramatically disparate susceptibility to the coronavirus. High degrees of variability are more common in things such as sexually transmitted infections, where a person with 100 partners a year is far more susceptible than someone celibate. Respiratory viruses tend to be more equal-opportunity invaders. “I don’t think it will happen at 20 percent,” Britton said. “Between 35 and 45 percent—I think that would be a level where spreading drops drastically.


   7392. PreservedFish Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:22 AM (#5963325)
It's great news if true, BLB.
   7393. bunyon Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:22 AM (#5963326)
Good lord, BLB. I missed your post before posting mine. And then it was posted again after me. Sorry for missing you but agree it's a really interesting article.

I think it won't be that low (20-25%) because I think those models underestimate how careful people are being. I doubt that the reason I haven't gotten it yet is because I'm resistant but because I'm a hermit. But I do think the data suggest that herd immunity is likely well before 70%. But 20% seems way too low. And, in any case, we're not close to that nationally. Getting to 40% of the population infected in less than a year would see mass death and collapsed hospitals.
   7394. Swoboda is freedom Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:29 AM (#5963330)
My wife is an ER doc here in Westchester NY. The number of cases is down significantly. We had over a few of her co-workers (on our deck), including one who is now working in Houston. There were talking about the improved care for covid patients and how much they had learned. Not putting people on a ventilator too early, using steroids in 2nd week, etc. This could also explain a drop in death rate. The hospitals have some better knowledge of how to treat.
   7395. AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:35 AM (#5963331)
But 20% seems way too low.
NYC (yes, it;s NYC but still) hit 20% with the richest 5% fleeing the city, and the next richest 20% working from home and having all their groceries delivered (and most of the rest of the city closed down for months, and subway ridership at 10-20%). There's no way this is an accurate representation of normal interaction.

Certain zipcodes in NYC reportedly had 50% infected. Same for Bergamo.
   7396. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:42 AM (#5963332)
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed an executive order on Wednesday banning all cities and counties in the state from requiring people to wear masks during the coronavirus pandemic. The move comes as Georgia has experienced a steep rise in covid-19 infections over the past two weeks, with 3,871 new cases and 37 new deaths on Wednesday alone.
...
In early April, Georgia had identified just 4,748 identified cases and 154 deaths from covid-19. Today, the state has recorded 127,834 cases and 3,091 deaths total, well below the actual number of cases and deaths according to health experts


Christ, so now we're going to wind up having to apologize to two Republican governors.
   7397. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:42 AM (#5963333)
There were talking about the improved care for covid patients and how much they had learned. Not putting people on a ventilator too early, using steroids in 2nd week, etc. This could also explain a drop in death rate. The hospitals have some better knowledge of how to treat.

This is probably the biggest explanation in the drop of the fatality rate.

NYK was unlucky to be first.

   7398. deleuze68 Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:44 AM (#5963334)
Florida just reported 156 deaths
   7399. AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale Posted: July 16, 2020 at 10:46 AM (#5963335)
After 4 weeks of CDC total death reports being fairly low, this week is as high as it has been in a month. CDC total death reports reflect 60-75% the prior two weeks (none the current week) and the rest from earlier. Data is lumpy though--daily new reports are very lumpy, and even week;ly new reports are pretty lumpy.

My current estimate for excess deaths for the week ending 6/27 is 4000+ (CDC currently has it at about -1800 (negative 1800), but will increase it week-to-week as they have done throughout the pandemic). It's possible the week ending July 4 will end up lower. If we haven't hit 200,000 excess deaths now in the US, we are very close.
   7400. AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale Posted: July 16, 2020 at 11:12 AM (#5963339)
Just to give a sense of the lumpiness, and delay, of the CDC reports.

Actual total deaths week-to-week show a pretty smooth curve, but that is not the case for the date they are first logged by CDC. The Worldometers reported data is much smoother. People relying on the latest CDC weekly report to jubilantly call the "end" of the virus (of which there are many) have to properly account for both the CDC's insufficient lag adjustments and the weekly data lumpiness.


week ending     deaths during week     new deaths reported during week

4/4             71746                    
4/11            78461                  64646
4/18            76133                  71141 
4/25            73060                  72223            
5/02            68319                  64640
5/09            65572                  67743
5/16            62896                  70767
5/23            59608                  64562
5/30            56843                  62142
6/06            55281                  69249
6/13            53233                  62896
6/20            51142                  57476
6/27            46892                  57996   
7/04            36602                  56582 (adjusting for July 4)
7/11            19408                  57090
7/18                                   59395 (with tomorrow sill to be reported, so another 5000-10000 most likely).

Page 74 of 98 pages ‹ First  < 72 73 74 75 76 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Ghost of Sox Fans Past
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogFormer Dodgers fan favorite Jay Johnstone dies at 74 after COVID-19 battle
(4 - 10:33am, Sep 29)
Last: Zonk paid more than $750 in taxes last paycheck

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-29-2020
(1 - 10:22am, Sep 29)
Last: Jefferson Manship (Dan Lee)

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(9762 - 10:19am, Sep 29)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogWaPo: If baseball keeps these grotesque expanded playoffs, it will have lost its soul
(34 - 10:08am, Sep 29)
Last: dejarouehg

NewsblogRon Roenicke let go as Boston Red Sox manager; team will begin search immediately
(23 - 9:53am, Sep 29)
Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...)

NewsblogOT - NBA Bubble Thread
(3203 - 9:48am, Sep 29)
Last: jacksone (AKA It's OK...)

NewsblogMLB playoffs: Bracket, dates, neutral-site bubbles, everything else to know about 2020 baseball postseason
(49 - 9:45am, Sep 29)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogFormer San Francisco Giants OF Hunter Pence announces retirement, ending 14-year MLB career
(22 - 9:18am, Sep 29)
Last: Russ

Sox TherapyMeet the 2021 Boston Red Sox - Position Players
(8 - 8:07am, Sep 29)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert

NewsblogMLB rookie status for 2020 amended
(6 - 7:29am, Sep 29)
Last: Rally

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-28-2020
(11 - 2:01am, Sep 29)
Last: Doug Jones threw harder than me

NewsblogLos Angeles Angels fire GM Billy Eppler after five seasons
(23 - 6:24pm, Sep 28)
Last: The Gary DiSarcina Fan Club (JAHV)

NewsblogOT - Soccer Thread - Brave New World
(239 - 4:56pm, Sep 28)
Last: The Marksist

Gonfalon Cubs60 Second Season Preview
(84 - 1:01pm, Sep 28)
Last: McCoy

Sox TherapyParty Like It's 1975
(17 - 11:27am, Sep 28)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert

Page rendered in 1.0815 seconds
48 querie(s) executed