Coronavirus

[League Circles]

People are more used to wearing protective masks in Asia than in western countries might be also one of the reasons the outbreak is better contained in there than in here.

Yeah, there are probably lots of reasons. They probably have better immune systems due to better diet, drastically less alcohol use, etc.

[Dresden]

This is interesting:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/coronavirus-latest-baltimore-makers-working-to-print-3d-face-shields-for-local-hospitals/ar-BB11y3p3

[Dresden]

This post exactly why people in the medical field should be part of the policy discussion but not determining policy.

You only see what's in front of you, which are the patients suffering from the virus. But you have no awareness of the social and economic impact of whatever policy you are advocating. You don't even consider those things.

So let me ask you, what is the effect of millions of people losing their jobs in the next two months? What strains does that cause on society? How many people die as a result? What happens to rate of violent crime?

At what point do the negative consequences of nationwide shutdowns outweigh the benefits of flattening the curve?

Or let me put it like you did: will your tune change if a family member is murdered as a result of mass rioting? Or if a family member commits suicide because he lost his job and can't care for his family?

Yes. Lets sacrifice people in the altar of economics. Some people dont get it before it explodes on their faces, or in their faces. Maybe this will make your country start thinking more about their citizens than money spend on space programs and military expenses. Mind you this will make a huuuuge impact on healthcare, also other than infected people. Your country is about to start to hit the deep end with this next week or two, 14 500 new cases in the last update and youre only getting started with this.

Let's be honest, as a Finn, you benefit from our military as much as we do. I have no idea what Putin, China, Iran, etc. would do if they had no fear of repercussions for their actions. Russia basically stole Crimea and they have made claims on parts of Finland in the past. The Baltic states . . . You could basically guarantee that Putin would put all of his neighbors under his thumb.

Eh, that's a stretch. Not to make any excuses for a dictator like Putin, but the parts of the Ukraine he invaded had large portion of Russian ethnics, and Ukraine was formerly a part of the USSR. You can't say the same about Finland. I really doubt Putin would be trying to reclaim all the countries formerly behind the iron curtain.

[Dresden]

People are more used to wearing protective masks in Asia than in western countries might be also one of the reasons the outbreak is better contained in there than in here.

Yeah, there are probably lots of reasons. They probably have better immune systems due to better diet, drastically less alcohol use, etc.

Biggest reason is SARS put them all on alert 4 years ago. They did poorly during that crisis, and have since made preparations, so they were ready and willing to act quickly when this broke out in Wuhan.

[Nikola]

So far all explanation for social distancing I read about is flattening the curve. To flatten the curve you need to do it for a super long time and the economic impact to flatten the curve is catastrophic.

I do think there is value in getting more information, or mass producing ventilators, or making tons of make shift hospital beds, or figuring out ways to ramp up the number of sick we can care for at once. If you find a good treatment method and mass produce that as well then that also has tons of value.

I'm not against social distancing per se, I just don't think you can do it for an extended period of time. I think anything more than 2 months will be catastrophic and even 2 months might be catastrophic. You have to gain something in those 2 months that is meaningful, because you won't flatten the curve in that time.

Because of the media people are reacting with such fear of the virus they are not thinking rationally about this at all. It's very scary to have politicians decide what business to keep open. As someone who works in supply chain I know for certain that they have no clue what type of disruptions they are causing.

so you've been speaking with the politicians that are making these decisions?

what seems certain is that you have no clue that politicians constantly have business leaders in their ears who know a thing or two about supply chain. they are tasked with balancing business concerns and public health concerns

unfortunately, business operations are intertwined with the public health outcome here. saying that politicians should not be making decisions for businesses isn't much different than saying that it should be left to businesses to make the public health decisions. and how could that possibly go wrong?

Please with the condescending tone. Yes that is what they are tasked for but they do not have the ability. Even an expert from a single industry can make mistakes.

No one in the government has contacted my company. We produce machinery to process food(essential goods). Companies that produce millions of pounds of food a year depend on us. Exclusively.

How do they know what suppliers we are depending on in the next few months? Who are those suppliers depending on? And who those suppliers are depending on? This can go on for a while. People have no idea how many companies are essential to keep society functioning. Grocery store and gas stations are not going to cut it for very long at all.

I do not have answers for how far we need to go to stop the virus. But it is clear we are entering the territory where lives will be lost because of the shut down. It's a scary balancing act. But fear has everyone only thinking about one side.

[whonka]

[list=][/list]

This is interesting:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/coronavirus-latest-baltimore-makers-working-to-print-3d-face-shields-for-local-hospitals/ar-BB11y3p3

New York hospitals are doing the same through their engineering schools. Have to be creative in these times. My understanding though is that it’s only the surgical masks and eye guards, not sure about whether it’s possible to do n95.

[whonka]

Please with the condescending tone. Yes that is what they are tasked for but they do not have the ability. Even an expert from a single industry can make mistakes.

No one in the government has contacted my company. We produce machinery to process food(essential goods). Companies that produce millions of pounds of food a year depend on us. Exclusively.

How do they know what suppliers we are depending on in the next few months? Who are those suppliers depending on? And who those suppliers are depending on? This can go on for a while. People have no idea how many companies are essential to keep society functioning a. Grocery store and gas stations are not going to cut it for very long at all.

I do not have answers for how far we need to go to stop the virus. But it is clear we are entering the territory where lives will be lost because of the shut down. It's a scary balancing act. But fear has everyone only thinking about one side.

Can’t say I’m an expert on this one so will defer of course, but wasn’t that the point of trump’s national emergency response declaration when he got all those corporate people like Walmart, Walgreens, and CVS to speak that he was working directly with the heads of those supply chains?

[DuckIII]

Neither of those things are even remotely true of people who are doing even a modest amount of open minded research into what we are facing medically and economically.

Just FYI, I've not seen any article yet where someone weighed the cost of social distancing against life years expected to be saved to try and determine a value of what we're doing. Not saying there isn't one out there, but if you find one I'd love to see it, because I'd be very interested in any experts modeling those things against each other.

I brought this up at the office and was considered a monster. People are really bad at math and irrational.

Thats because it’s monstrous. You can’t evaluate quality of life to minimize negative economic outcomes. Those of you stating that people are going starve to death, riot and start committing suicide in huge numbers are the ones spreading irrational fear, not the other way around. And doing so based on what are highly likely personal concerns with individual finances and not macro considerations for the good of all.

Fortunately this is not a dystopian novel and the government is not going to sacrifice the lives of the elderly and infirm as part of its “macro” strategy to battle the economic evils of the corona virus.

[whonka]

From the chief infectious disease epidemiologist from UChicago. It sums up very well everything that health officials are saying.

Watch on YouTube

[dice]

Because of the media people are reacting with such fear of the virus they are not thinking rationally about this at all. It's very scary to have politicians decide what business to keep open. As someone who works in supply chain I know for certain that they have no clue what type of disruptions they are causing.

so you've been speaking with the politicians that are making these decisions?

what seems certain is that you have no clue that politicians constantly have business leaders in their ears who know a thing or two about supply chain. they are tasked with balancing business concerns and public health concerns

unfortunately, business operations are intertwined with the public health outcome here. saying that politicians should not be making decisions for businesses isn't much different than saying that it should be left to businesses to make the public health decisions. and how could that possibly go wrong?

Please with the condescending tone. Yes that is what they are tasked for but they do not have the ability. Even an expert from a single industry can make mistakes.

yes, everybody can make mistakes. including your own business when making decisions for itself. particularly when you, like all of us, lack data and certainly about potential adverse business impacts of the virus

No one in the government has contacted my company. We produce machinery to process food(essential goods). Companies that produce millions of pounds of food a year depend on us. Exclusively.

there are business leaders that represent companies, including yours. the government is not going to contact every company individually to ask their opinion

But fear has everyone only thinking about one side.

first of all, that's not true given than many states have not shut down businesses. secondly, the government has to step in in some cases because there's not ENOUGH societal fear. finally, we need widespread testing results before we can responsibly move too far away from those worst case scenario fears

[transplant]

I'm 66 and my kids, their spouses and their friends are asking me whether I've ever seen anything like this (it's weird being the wizened sage). My answer is an unequivocal no, but the no is based on the level of disruption of everyday life, not the loss of life resulting from the pandemic...at least to this point. The 1968-69 Hong Kong flu is estimated to have taken 1,000,000 lives...I lived through that and while I certainly remember it, it's not one of the top-5 news stories from that period. Maybe Covid-19 will top this...maybe not. If you think you know the answer to this, you don't. That's at the heart of the problem...even our best and most knowledgeable minds don't know more than they do know.

Personally, I'm hoping that when we come out of this tunnel we're in that we're wondering in retrospect if all these costly preventive measures were worth it 'cause that'll mean that the disease wasn't as deadly as we currently fear.

[TallDude]

This post exactly why people in the medical field should be part of the policy discussion but not determining policy.

You only see what's in front of you, which are the patients suffering from the virus. But you have no awareness of the social and economic impact of whatever policy you are advocating. You don't even consider those things.

So let me ask you, what is the effect of millions of people losing their jobs in the next two months? What strains does that cause on society? How many people die as a result? What happens to rate of violent crime?

At what point do the negative consequences of nationwide shutdowns outweigh the benefits of flattening the curve?

Or let me put it like you did: will your tune change if a family member is murdered as a result of mass rioting? Or if a family member commits suicide because he lost his job and can't care for his family?

Yes. Lets sacrifice people in the altar of economics. Some people dont get it before it explodes on their faces, or in their faces. Maybe this will make your country start thinking more about their citizens than money spend on space programs and military expenses. Mind you this will make a huuuuge impact on healthcare, also other than infected people. Your country is about to start to hit the deep end with this next week or two, 14 500 new cases in the last update and youre only getting started with this.

Let's be honest, as a Finn, you benefit from our military as much as we do. I have no idea what Putin, China, Iran, etc. would do if they had no fear of repercussions for their actions. Russia basically stole Crimea and they have made claims on parts of Finland in the past. The Baltic states . . . You could basically guarantee that Putin would put all of his neighbors under his thumb.

Well i`m not worried about Putin. We have 230 000 men/women In arms if war come. We have A lot of heavy artillery. Finnish ground is damn tricky. Forests, swamps Rivers and lakes make tanks almost useless. And we can raise our military up to 900 000 men an women in arms. We have enough missiles. And we are well trained. Personally when i was in the Army i did use 24 different weapons. But most important thing is that we have some nukes. They are made in 60`s and 70`s and Putin know this. So St. peterburg and Moscov would get atleast destroyed. And if they would use nuke`s they bacially nuke themself. Atlantic ocean winds make most of fallout in Russia`s side. And Putin has been living in Finland a lot. He has here a lot of friends and they meet every year. Just normal Joes. No polticons. So he like Finland. And if u somewhou reach Helsinki it only started guerrilla war. Putin has no money or Power to fight against Europe. Germany can really fast make autofactorys to warfactorys.

[DuckIII]

I'm 66 and my kids, their spouses and their friends are asking me whether I've ever seen anything like this (it's weird being the wizened sage). My answer is an unequivocal no, but the no is based on the level of disruption of everyday life, not the loss of life resulting from the pandemic...at least to this point. The 1968-69 Hong Kong flu is estimated to have taken 1,000,000 lives...I lived through that and while I certainly remember it, it's not one of the top-5 news stories from that period. Maybe Covid-19 will top this...maybe not. If you think you know the answer to this, you don't. That's at the heart of the problem...even our best and most knowledgeable minds don't know more than they do know.

Personally, I'm hoping that when we come out of this tunnel we're in that we're wondering in retrospect if all these costly preventive measures were worth it 'cause that'll mean that the disease wasn't as deadly as we currently fear.

No it won’t necessarily mean that at all. It may mean that the strategies employed specifically to reach that desired outcome, worked. In fact, that’s much more likely because it will be linked with intentional behaviors rather than random fortune.

[dougthonus]

Thats because it’s monstrous. You can’t evaluate quality of life to minimize negative economic outcomes. Those of you stating that people are going starve to death, riot and start committing suicide in huge numbers are the ones spreading irrational fear, not the other way around.

No one is stating that this is happening now, but this argument is the equivalent argument to saying, jeez only a few hundred people died in the US due to coronavirus, why are we doing this.

This quarter is going to make a run for the worst economic downturn in the history of the United States, including anything that happened in the great depression, so things are going to get a lot worse than they are right now, and the longer we stay in this state the worse they will get.

That said, as I've said before, I don't know that you could prevent anything. With no shelter in place command, people were already radically changing behaviors, but what the shelter in place edict has done has steepened the economic pain curve. Hopefully the cheap funding that the government is making available to corporations is enough to keep us from crossing the dotted line on the economic curve where the system collapses.

It really depends how long we socially distance and how fast things move back to normal when we are done.

And doing so based on what are highly likely personal concerns with individual finances and not macro considerations for the good of all.

Just as a disclaimer, I do not know of any middle class person (consider myself middle class) with less financial risk in this situation than I have. My job is counter cyclical and can be done remotely and I moved almost all my investments into cash, much of it prior to the crash. I actually expect to come out extremely well from this with a little bit of timing. I think in six months you will see one of the greatest buying opportunities in your life time if you have cash.

[DuckIII]

Pretty big leap from saying "when prioritizing medical care, that if I can only save one person, I'd save the one with more longer quality life expectancy left" and "we should kill people with short life expectancy to harvest their organs". Don't really seem like comparable situations.

But that’s not what you are saying. You are not advocating medical triage. Yes, in emergent real time situations healthcare workers must make quality of life distinctions in determining who to treat. It’s been happening for a while in Italy in fact and is starting to happen in New York.

What you advocated is sacrificing the lives of at risk Americans, because they already have lower life expectancies, in order to buttress the economy. That isn’t medical triage. And it’s a repugnant notion in this country.

[Nikola]

Just FYI, I've not seen any article yet where someone weighed the cost of social distancing against life years expected to be saved to try and determine a value of what we're doing. Not saying there isn't one out there, but if you find one I'd love to see it, because I'd be very interested in any experts modeling those things against each other.

I brought this up at the office and was considered a monster. People are really bad at math and irrational.

Thats because it’s monstrous. You can’t evaluate quality of life to minimize negative economic outcomes. Those of you stating that people are going starve to death, riot and start committing suicide in huge numbers are the ones spreading irrational fear, not the other way around. And doing so based on what are highly likely personal concerns with individual finances and not macro considerations for the good of all.

Fortunately this is not a dystopian novel and the government is not going to sacrifice the lives of the elderly and infirm as part of its “macro” strategy to battle the economic evils of the corona virus.

Economic problems can cost lives too. For example almost no one currently retires will see their 401K bounce completely back. They will have less money for healthcare. The shutdown has already cost lives in this way. We will see what supply chain issues arise. It won't be none. People are going to start losing jobs like crazy if the lockdown continues very much longer. Followed by losing their homes.

If you honestly think crunching numbers to find the best possible outcome is monstrous I probably can't say much to you.

[Nikola]

Please with the condescending tone. Yes that is what they are tasked for but they do not have the ability. Even an expert from a single industry can make mistakes.

No one in the government has contacted my company. We produce machinery to process food(essential goods). Companies that produce millions of pounds of food a year depend on us. Exclusively.

How do they know what suppliers we are depending on in the next few months? Who are those suppliers depending on? And who those suppliers are depending on? This can go on for a while. People have no idea how many companies are essential to keep society functioning a. Grocery store and gas stations are not going to cut it for very long at all.

I do not have answers for how far we need to go to stop the virus. But it is clear we are entering the territory where lives will be lost because of the shut down. It's a scary balancing act. But fear has everyone only thinking about one side.

Can’t say I’m an expert on this one so will defer of course, but wasn’t that the point of trump’s national emergency response declaration when he got all those corporate people like Walmart, Walgreens, and CVS to speak that he was working directly with the heads of those supply chains?

The government was already very informed about many supply chains for national defense purposes. And I'm sure they are learning a lot right now. But there are a lot of essential industries out there and they simply do not have the time, man power, or acumen to figure out.

[dougthonus]

What you advocated it sacrificing the lives of at risk Americans because they already have lower life expectancies in order to buttress the economy. That isn’t medical triage. And it’s a repugnant notion in this country.

Not what I'm advocating, because I'm not advocating anything other than measuring the full impact of whatever choices you make and that when measuring that impact life years is a better indicator than lives. In a triage situation, a hospital will measure in life years not lives, well we are in a triage situation as a country right now. We've sacrificed the economy to buy time on saving lives without a guarantee that it will be successful. Might be the right long term move, might not be.

[DuckIII]

I brought this up at the office and was considered a monster. People are really bad at math and irrational.

Thats because it’s monstrous. You can’t evaluate quality of life to minimize negative economic outcomes. Those of you stating that people are going starve to death, riot and start committing suicide in huge numbers are the ones spreading irrational fear, not the other way around. And doing so based on what are highly likely personal concerns with individual finances and not macro considerations for the good of all.

Fortunately this is not a dystopian novel and the government is not going to sacrifice the lives of the elderly and infirm as part of its “macro” strategy to battle the economic evils of the corona virus.

Economic problems can cost lives too. For example almost no one currently retires will see their 401K bounce completely back. They will have less money for healthcare. The shutdown has already cost lives in this way. We will see what supply chain issues arise. It won't be none. People are going to start losing jobs like crazy if the lockdown continues very much longer. Followed by losing their homes.

If you honestly think crunching numbers to find the best possible outcome is monstrous I probably can't say much to you.

You just completely changed the argument from what it was to a completely different thing. Obviously the economy is a consideration in all this and must be heavily considered in the decision making process. But not by throwing the elderly and infirm on the pyre so we can all go back to work sooner.

And no, shelter in place has not “already cost lives.” That’s just a lie. On the other hand, about 30 people died from coronavirus in New York. Today.

[transplant]

I'm 66 and my kids, their spouses and their friends are asking me whether I've ever seen anything like this (it's weird being the wizened sage). My answer is an unequivocal no, but the no is based on the level of disruption of everyday life, not the loss of life resulting from the pandemic...at least to this point. The 1968-69 Hong Kong flu is estimated to have taken 1,000,000 lives...I lived through that and while I certainly remember it, it's not one of the top-5 news stories from that period. Maybe Covid-19 will top this...maybe not. If you think you know the answer to this, you don't. That's at the heart of the problem...even our best and most knowledgeable minds don't know more than they do know.

Personally, I'm hoping that when we come out of this tunnel we're in that we're wondering in retrospect if all these costly preventive measures were worth it 'cause that'll mean that the disease wasn't as deadly as we currently fear.

No it won’t necessarily mean that at all. It may mean that the strategies employed specifically to reach that desired outcome, worked. In fact, that’s much more likely because it will be linked with intentional behaviors rather than random fortune.

To be clear, I didn't say that that if the virus isn't as deadly as we currently fear then the measures we're taking should be considered as having been unnecessary. However, if this (relatively) positive result occurs, there's no doubt that many will question the actions taken. You may not, but many will. My point is that I'd rather have this situation than one where the actions are deemed to have been insufficient because of an underestimation of deaths.