It's crazy, I usually have a headache after observing students in there. They cant do lunches in the classroom because its teachers mandated lunch time during that but they will have to stagger it more (right now there is just a younger and older lunch time). And maybe have more outdoor tables to spread out.

The most concerning thing is we all have to adjust how we do school in ways which require more resources but we are all looking at budget cuts and reduced resources

Michigan extends stay-at-home through May 28th, but manufacturing is allowed to open on May 11th. The conspiracists are swarming. They are more and more including people I know to be level-headed and apolitical in most circumstances.

I'm having a hard time keeping my brain from exploding.

Mythbusters did something like that as well regarding a 'dinner party'. It turned out the germs got on everyone except 1 - even those who were told to act like 'germaphobes' (and that one it didn't was an actual germaphobe who didn't touch anything with her bare hands).

I'm seeing a lot of people I know that I would say should know better falling in to conspiracy BS. I'm guessing it stems from their desire to have their "old life" back. I do find it very disturbing how anti vaxxers have co-opted the movement and are convincing otherwise rational people.

Roy from Siegfried and Roy died today from the virus

They have opened up testing for asymptomatic people locally so my wife, son mother and I have appointments to get tested on Tuesday.

Some political overtones, but posted here because it's a level-headed view of the economic issues right now, and the illusory notion that all we need for the economy is to lift some laws:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ession/611398/

Some good news on the medical front:

1) Pretty much proven that blod clotting (even when the patients had no issues with that prior) is a major contributor for death. Hope is that giving blood thinners early on prevents that.

2) A hospital in Hongkong testet a new Mix of medications and got great results in mild cases.

3) A german institute developed a blood test/analysis that looks to do a great job predicting those just hospitalised that take a bad turn a few days later. Being able to identify those would be huge, making it possible and ethically sound to treat them more 'agressively' early on rather than wait and see if they need it.

Hasn't pretty much every drug tested in mild cases looked good? I mean, after all, the majority of people still get well on their own from it.

SI

Went to do my Kroger 8am run today. I scored a Charmin Extra-strong 12-roll !! TBH, I really didn't need any more TP but this is the first Charmin I've seen in at least 6 weeks so had to buy it. Lots of Bounce paper towels too.

There were maybe 20-25 customers in the store. All but 2 had masks on but it did get a little too crowed at a corner for the vegetables (just waited till they all cleared out). All Kroger workers had them on too and, for the first time for me, there was a woman cleaning shopping carts at the entrance and pointed to the ones that had been cleaned.

Plenty of vegetables, fruits. Lots of meats but there were limits to 2 each for beef & chicken. It may be my imagination but think the meat prices have gone up. Lots of milk, eggs. Limited flour though and all the bread flour was gone.

I should go back to Kroger late afternoon and see if there is a significant difference). We haven't ordered on-line for a pickup this past week. Things are getting better at the grocery stores and easy enough to go at a non-rush time.

Assume it'll be free?

This is a great article and spot on. The economy is f’ed because of the pandemic not the shutdowns and thus rolling those back will not keep us out of a recession.

Sorry if this has been posted already, but I was curious if anybody was tracking the health of those who attended the rallies protesting against the stay at home orders in various states. This is one of the first I've seen and qualifies that the Health Dept did not ask what large gathering they attended:

72 got COVID-19 after being at large event

Early Release - Coronavirus Disease Outbreak in Call Center, South Korea - Volume 26, Number 8—August 2020 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC



Spread of SarsCov2 in a large Office Space in South Korea in mid march.


Despite reacting immediately after the first positive test (March 8th, presumably the first or among the first to get sick) almost 100 people were infected in the building and some outside.

Again, this organised response would likely not be possible here. So the number of infections in the 'outside world' would be greater (bringing the virus directly or indirectly to vulnerable people).
It is interesting how it seems more likely to catch it in this setting than at home.

And now consider having to work in a retirement home in these times and living with that scenario over your head unless you take extreme measures that also threaten the mental wellbeing of all involved...

Now add twice as many that did "attend a large gathering" but were to chicken to confess to it ...

Meanwhile, a user in another forum that i have known for years is living in Brazil and i get sick reading his updates. Seems like thousands of aditional "pneumonia" and "stroke" victims are emerging where it seems more than likely that a majority is actually untested Covid19 ... Also, like early on in New York, a massive spike of deaths at home. Funeral homes and service reporting 3 times as many deaths than normal etc ...
At the end of all this, whoever points to the official cases and says "see, not thaaat bad, why the fuss ?" i will want to strangle ...

Another fascinating graphic:




From an Austrian study. Thickness of dots = number of cases that cases generated (some aditional ones might simply never been found), bottom scale is days and days in the graphic are alternating grey/black. Colour of dots mark which "generation" im that chain it is.

Shows what happened starting with 1 traveller returning from Italy who got tested 4 days after returning and he and his contacts got quarantined 1 day later (so 5 after returning) 3 initial contacts he infected, 2 did not infect anybody else (maybe only because quarantined in time), the 3rd passed it on before he was quarantined and started a cascade of cases.
The latter parts of the chain were during the lockdown, so also visually shows how that helped in stopping these 3+ infections at a time and then mostly being 1 at a time.

This is why testing and tracing as well as quarantining is so crucial. But it also shows how small the margin of error is.

Edit: are the pictures too big ?

Testing is covered by all insurance companies by law. Now you may be charged for going to a out of network provider or something like that.

Representative studies are done all the time based off small sample sizes. And yes, the number of people who caught Covid-19 (or tested positive for it) in a jail is not representative of the general public, but their outcomes would seem to be very informative and something worth tracking & reporting on.

And I agree I'd love more tests across bigger areas and with a longer period of time they're monitored, but the few smaller scale studies we've seen are saying the numbers are different than the estimates being used to drive public policy, and I don't understand why you're adamantly saying they are wrong instead of saying "hmm, let's get a bigger study".
Why not both? There is a good argument that shelter in place orders & shutting most things down were the right call due to the potential for exponential growth in the number of hospital patients & fatalities, but if we are willing to open back up now when there hasn't been any drastic change in potential infection or cure rate it begs the question of what exactly changed other than people understanding how much shelter at home hurts economically and socially. And if we're willing to accept the increased fatalities opening the economy this much will bring it shows that the economy could have kept functioning at 60-70% instead of 20-30% (or whatever) for the last 2 months, which would not have kept us out of a recession but is a material difference.
I've seen that too (and it's also very dependent on which of the dozens of tests, of which I have no idea which are better), but stats like over 90% of 3000+ prisoners had it are way too high to be waved away as a testing flaw or margin of error issue.


Long story short, we all agree we need better and more widespread testing and the federal government won't be taking the point role they should, but it's very weird there aren't more initiatives on a state/county/city level, and I'm not sure why we're digging in heels in the discussion about when/if to open up instead of looking to get better info before advocating for a position.

Poll: 71 percent of Americans worried that coronavirus restrictions are being lifted too quickly https://t.co/vXgnvg8Bn9 pic.twitter.com/chthwUd1IH

— The Hill (@thehill) May 8, 2020

Why isn't the story whether the restrictions are being lifted too quickly? If so, then who cares what the majority of people think. If no, then who cares what a majority of the people think.

When did "actually figure out the right answer" go out of vogue?

Because the answer can't be mathmatically proven? Also, if people think the coronavirus restrictions are being lifted too quickly, they will hesitate to go out, meaning the benefits from reopening will not be as great.

To piggyback on what Foz said, a huge chunk of the country doesn’t trust the administration/conservative politicians, a huge chunk doesn’t trust the mainstream media, a huge chunk doesn’t trust conservative media, and a huge chunk doesn’t trust the Dems. Other than in a fantasy world where Rs, Ds, Fox, and MSNBC are delivering basically the same message to the populace, the success of reopening is pretty much completely dependent on how people feel about it.

Well I can tell you that my 72 yr old, lung damaged and compromised father, who lived through being a POW in Vietnam, told me yesterday that this is all been blown so far out of proportion by the media, and that it's all completely outrageous, because 7,500 people die in this country every single day.

He was holding back, and I was escalating in response (typical family discussion/argument over the phone), and he said, you'll have to forgive me, this gets me pretty worked up. So he certainly has nothing to worry about.

If that's the case, why should we care about this? Or really anything?

Read through some of this article this morning and thought it was interesting. The Risks - Know Them - Avoid Them

I figured that me wanting bigger studies was implied by pointing out those would help a lot more. But that's not the same as simply doing more random testing.

Plus, "flawed" is sth entirely different than "wrong". Science isn't perfect and also done by people. Sometimes those people make mistakes (which might not even be anyones 'fault' as it is simply to be expected whe the subject is new), sometimes they (need to) take shortcuts, sometimes they get led by their bias.
The Problem comes from wanting a study to say more than it actually can/does. A study always tells us sth, but a study with certain limitations tells us less than a study without those. Which is not a problem in itself, unless you expect it to show a sufficient result and then stop there because you figure that is all you need. Or that you take it to say sth it doesn't

https://www.businessinsider.com/cali...ory-row-2020-5

Looks like Elon Musk and California are divorcing.

Because right now that majority has no real eye opening way to express that. I mean, they can't well do a counter protest to drown out the angry mob.
Which at least in Germany seems to be a boon to those, because all the folk normally ranting merely online come out to play because a) police has to treat them with Kid gloves (for fear of playing into their "this is government opression" narrative) and b) the other side won't physically engage (not as in "violence" but simply counter protests with much larger numbers).
It is literally the one time they can expect to spread their message unopposed because it literally can't be opposed by the majority that disagrees with them.

I don't think that's the media's job, which is to report things, not tell people what to think. I've seen lots of articles quoting Fauci, Birx, other experts, talking about what Trump has said, polls like this, etc.

There are other institutions whose job it is to figure out the right answer. Journalism isn't supposed to be about that. .

Journalism should be about finding the truth. If it's just an exercise in printing what people email you, what's the need for it?

Policy positions are inherently debatable matters. The scholarship on when, how, under what conditions we should open is not unanimous. The point is that journalism can and should serve as a reputable, minimally-biased source of information on what all the relevant parties have said and the validity of their claims, so that the people can decide for themselves what approach is best.

One thing i would add is that infections happening at home within the family are actually surprisingly low. Those certainly are a big part, but the current data actually points to it being way less than you'd think (a couple studies in China, Netherlands and Germany found quite low transmissions at home, certainly lower than at 'social gatherings'. As low as 1 of 3 in a 4 person household catching it from the first one). But very informative and well written, definitely needs more of those sort of summaries IMO.
One thing though: I don't think you can exclude gatherings in crowds outside (sports events, concerts etc). Those were all stopped everywhere, so naturally played no role in the documentation.


The core problem as far as the 'curve' is that the US simply has not managed to have the infection level subside sufficiently to be able to manage it without collective measures. Then it is truly a question of "what are we willing to accept".

If you react later (relative to the real infection level) you would have to havena longer, stricter lockdown to get to the same low level that others reach that reacted sooner. While the case numbers are just an indicator, you can still surmise using case numbers, test volume and % of positives) that the US by and large * is still at a higher level than you can really controll/manage.

Because the lower the level, the better the chance to keep it low by other means than a lockdown. Again, estimates are that in Germany we can right now just about track and quarantine most contacts of most new cases. And we get about 1k a day.

* Although part of the problem is that due to the 'geography' of the US you have even more vastly different trajectories within the country as other countries have. Which is why countrywide numbers don't look as bad as Italy or the UK.

Neither side of this is behaving like the massive entities they are, but it's hard not to notice that, for all of their outrage and concern about personal freedom, all of Elon's rants (that I've seen) seem to ignore the actual folks working at his California factories entirely.

The Elon Musk vs California thing is interesting. Is there some big order that Tesla has to fill and that's why he's rushing to get people back in the factory? Or is it driven by wanting to get some part of his life back to normal because everything is in a state of flux right now? Or is there something else?

People aren't buying cars right now, so wouldn't it be better to not have cars sitting on the lot unsold?

Weight of claims also matters. When most of the experts are saying one thing, with data to support it, and a smaller group of non-experts are saying something else, with no data, that should be part of the information given.

For example, journalists shouldn't run the claims from Plandemic as if they are at all similar in weight to guidelines from the CDC.

And sometimes even when people try, they screw it up. You can’t fix stupid. Just got this in a text from my wife, who is picking up takeout at the nearby Mexican joint. (Yes, it is just called “Mexico.”)

Wasn't there wait lists for Teslas? It's been my understanding that they have a lot of unfilled orders.

Also I think Tesla has a bunch a debt that isn't magically going to go away while the factory is closed.

Part of the problem here is the experts are basing a lot of their claims on models. The problem with the models, this is a new virus with a lot of speculation and not a lot of hard data. Thus most of the info going into the models is questionable, making the models questionable.

How many models from 1 month ago are close to being correct? How many models from 2 months ago are close to being correct?

That would make sense for why he's pushing to open the factory.

My friend grew up in a small town in Kentucky in the 80s that had a restaurant that everyone just called "Foreign Food."

Tesla isn't going anywhere. They rely heavily on the subsidies and rebates California provides.

He will be back to pretending to make ventilators next week.

Don't get me started on people only covering their mouth when there are strong indication that you might well be more likely to catch it and catch it en masse through your nose (which is not being reported nearly widely enough)

Also, this guys Twitter has some fascinating graphs:

John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) | Twitter



Even more extreme for the urban areas hit hardest and first (rural and other parts of a country likely would have never gotten that bad but they also benefitted immensely from being hit less and thus the lockdown being imposed before things reached critical mass)



(remember the total numbers are not all taken at the same date and the curve stops at different points, but for most it shows the peak. Numbers of normal mortality are monthly average)

Actually managed with this to have someone admit that maybe (hey, babysteps) the Virus is actually responsible for most aditional deaths and that the 'panic' in countries like Germany might not actually lead to a large portion of people being afraid to call 911 but that this too is more likely to happen in countries that are actually hit hard ... (so that the problem is not by itself the created 'panic' of the 'killer virus' but the virus itself).

Of course there will be longterm ramifications for people being now hesitant to call a doctor but it's not like this happens in a vacuum either. (and heck, look at South Africa for what a decrease in murders and accidents will do at least short term)

You don't think Texas can provide similar incentives? The cost of doing business in California is so massive that there's a reason very few people manufacture there. That's the reason Telsa needs all those subsidies. I think the PR aspect of manufacturing in California is a main reason Telsa stays there, but that only goes so far. Other states (esp Texas and Nevada) could easily provide a much better environment for manufacturing than Cali.

xkcd: Coronavirus Polling

I find these numbers surprising.

And there is a limit to how much we should care about what people think versus what experts say is the right thing to do.

dola:

And I've love to talk to the 16% of people who do not have a favorable impression of Tom Hanks.

This comes back to my issue with all these articles from experts. They are making an assumption that because the less than 2% sample numbers in each state don't show a decline - that means the virus isn't decreasing. You have to look at the testing rates. If 100 people a day were testing April and now we are testing 500 a day in a state, the numbers aren't going to decrease (even if the number of people with virus has actually decreased if you counted everyone). Back on April 24, 8.7% of those tested in Arizona had the virus (6,045/69,486). As of today, that percentage had decreased to 7.6% (11,380/150,241). That means that of the last 80,755 tests, just 6.6% came up positive (2% less than March to late April). However - that number doesn't get reported, we just see "record number of cases" because the state has done over double the new tests in the past 2-3 weeks.

With this in mind, I don't think it is silly to try some restricted openings in some states that haven't been hit as hard. If your hospital bed use has been a lower, flat number for weeks (ie, 8- 12%) - you have the safety net to begin rolling back some of the restrictions. The reality is the media is going to scare about 40-50% to stay inside anyway - so if you have a good set of guidelines for the other half to follow, things may be able to re-open slowly. But, at some point, we have to begin this process - if only to find out what things work/don't work and what steps seem to be safer. People are not just going to stay inside all summer. As the shelter in place months increase, people are going to get fed up and go back out (esp younger people). Finding out steps that can help reduce the danger of that while everyone is somewhat patient is better than just "releasing the hounds" in September.

In John Oliver's send up of Bob Murray from last year they wrote lyrics that were intentionally so absurd that no one could say they were true. One of them was that Bob Murray didn't like Tom Hanks.

The whole thing starts around the 21 minute mark of the video if you haven't seen it before.

SLAPP Suits: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) - YouTube

To quibble, nobody has said you can't go outside. I am quite free to use my deck, use my back yard (or more correctly, mow). I can go on car rides. Heck, we can go hiking here. "We can't go outside!" is a bit misleading.

---

Also, of course models are going to be off. We're doing things which are affecting the input into those models. Besides, what are we supposed to do, wait to get a baseline until we do anything?

I would recommend looking at the entire picture of a state - not just if the case totals are increasing. Compare hospital bed use, ICU beds, ventilators, positive test rate, etc over the past month and see where you are at. If you are still high on many of these metrics, maybe you wait. But, if you aren't, it seems reasonable to start rolling back restrictions while trying to keep as much social distancing and mask use as possible.

This has been extremely difficult to model - partly because we haven't seen the level of social distancing across the US done in the past 6 weeks in decades. So, every model that comes out now has questionable data backing it. It doesn't mean that you ignore them all, but I also wouldn't take them as fact (like many are).