COVID-19 - Wuhan Coronavirus (a non-political thread, see pg. 36 #1778)

[Warhammer]

French fry producers are struggling because orders of French fries to fast food restaurants are down. For many other plants they are reorganizing their productions lines to change how it is packaged, as someone mentioned rather than large bags for restaurant, family sized bags instead, etc.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by bob

Should I be preparing the family for summer plans being cancelled? I am having a lot of trouble finding information on what's the best guess timeline here.

I think that this is impossible to know. We are in uncharted territory here.

Everyone wants things back to normal as soon as possible. But we just don't know enough at this point to determine if it is possible.

[tyketime]

I do think we'll start to see some loosening of the restrictions in the next 30-60 days. It may be geographically based as some have suggested.

But from a personal point of view, I still don't know how that would look. I won't be on the first wave of passengers in a plane. No way am I staying in a hotel. I can't imagine going to the movie theater or playhouse anytime soon. I could see going out to a restaurant if the tables are spread further apart.

It will be interesting how each of us determines our "comfort level". I suspect some will resume normal activities as soon as possible. While others may wait until a vaccine is widely available. But the range of that timeframe could be 1-12 months...

[panerd]

Yeah we have a family trip to California with Disney etc planned for early July with all cancelleble airbnb, hotels, airfare, etc. I'm completely fine cancelling or rescheduling but then I look at even the most conservative graphs and it all of them basically say by June the entire country will be at like <10 deaths a day. I realize it's all based on completing the graph the other way I just don't get how it's possible.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by bob

Should I be preparing the family for summer plans being cancelled? I am having a lot of trouble finding information on what's the best guess timeline here.

I'm going to say the stay-at-home orders will be gone by summer but we won't be back to 90-100% normal yet, social distancing will still be around, everyone will be conscious of crowds, business will still have greatly reduce travel etc. Basically airlines, cruise ships, hospitality, theme parks are still going to be screwed.

IMO it comes down to what you'll be doing but I'd keep away from crowds. We're actually looking at renting a cabin in the Blue Ridge mountains and doing some fly fishing vs Disney.

I'm wondering more on how my daughter's college freshman year is going to be like.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by bob

Should I be preparing the family for summer plans being cancelled? I am having a lot of trouble finding information on what's the best guess timeline here.

I would and have. Maybe late summer stuff will happen, We've tentatively* hired a nanny, as we're thinking that summer camps will probably be closed through mid-summer at least. The international youth ministry that I used to work for has already cancelled all camps prior to June 15th. (Typically they start around Memorial Day Weekend.)

Let's face it: the best-case scenario for mid-July is that the spread has slowed down and some medication(s) are shown to lessen the symptoms. There will be no vaccine by then, it will still be incredibly dangerous for the at-risk group (which is, what, like a good 25% of the population???,) and if we're *very* lucky, we'll have enough widespread testing to know who has built up immunity to it. Those who haven't still would feel vulnerable.

The other issue with "back-to-work" without a vaccine or comprehensive testing that no government--be it local, state, or federal--can control is human behavior. My co-worker's mid-40s healthy wife died from this. As more stories like that come out, we're going to see more concern from non-at-risk people about not just "doing my part to help society" but about their own personal health and safety. If restaurants open on May 1st or June 1st or whenever, you can't MAKE people go, and there's going to be a significant percentage of the population that simply...won't. Same with other mass attractions. Can hospitality/entertainment/summer fun venues function if they're only getting, say, 40% of normal revenue?

*--"Tentatively" in the sense that she is planning to work at one of the camps our kids will attend if open. If not open, she'll be looking for income and we'll be looking for help.

[Ben E Lou]

Heh. Long response cross-posted with several of y'all who made my point of "government can't make people go."

[panerd]

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

[bob]

Originally Posted by panerd

Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

That's basically where I am.

Back to summer plans, I expect major fights with summer camps that want to open in June.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by bob

Should I be preparing the family for summer plans being cancelled? I am having a lot of trouble finding information on what's the best guess timeline here.

I think it depends on the plans. If it involves Disney or a tour of different baseball stadiums could be dicey, if it is renting a beach house somewhere you can drive to I think you are probably good.

We have 2 trips coming up with decisions to make.

Trip 1 is 2 weeks in Nantucket. We go every year with my parents. We have already paid 50%, the other half due June 2nd. Trip is first two weeks of August. If we cancel and they rent the house to someone else we get our money back. If we cancel and they don't rent it out we lose half the money. I would imagine if there is still a shelter in place we get our money back.

The second trip is a Disney Cruise in November. Balance also due in June (probably could have planned that better). That one we would of course get a full refund if it doesn't go. My bigger concern is what if the virus makes a comeback and we are on a cruise ship. Less than ideal.

I feel your pain, sucks to have to think about this stuff already.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by panerd

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

I've thought about this point as well. For people who want to open everything up ASAP, it would seem that the ideal is that as many people get the virus as the health system can deal with, but not one more.

[tyketime]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The other issue with "back-to-work" without a vaccine or comprehensive testing that no government--be it local, state, or federal--can control is human behavior. My co-worker's mid-40s healthy wife died from this. As more stories like that come out, we're going to see more concern from non-at-risk people about not just "doing my part to help society" but about their own personal health and safety. If restaurants open on May 1st or June 1st or whenever, you can't MAKE people go, and there's going to be a significant percentage of the population that simply...won't. Same with other mass attractions. Can hospitality/entertainment/summer fun venues function if they're only getting, say, 40% of normal revenue?

I think this is a very interesting point. While I appreciate the newer CDC guidelines for making Essential Workers available to return to work with certain caveats (no fever, no current symptoms, etc.). I am VERY wary of how this translates to the rest of the workforce if they follow the same formula. People need a paycheck, and while I don't blame them, I certainly don't necessarily trust that they will truly self-administer and follow these guidelines. So unless each business is equipped to have someone actively check each employee, it will be difficult to determine that balance of risk/reward.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The other issue with "back-to-work" without a vaccine or comprehensive testing that no government--be it local, state, or federal--can control is human behavior. My co-worker's mid-40s healthy wife died from this. As more stories like that come out, we're going to see more concern from non-at-risk people about not just "doing my part to help society" but about their own personal health and safety. If restaurants open on May 1st or June 1st or whenever, you can't MAKE people go, and there's going to be a significant percentage of the population that simply...won't. Same with other mass attractions. Can hospitality/entertainment/summer fun venues function if they're only getting, say, 40% of normal revenue?

This is where I'm at. I hated going to work when we were with "limited" (but far more than reported) cases. Damned if I'm taking extra chances until we have better controls than "hey, we stopped testing and we think most people don't have it". I'll go to work and hate doing it. I'll continue to get pickup groceries and maybe resume some curbside takeout. I'll go outside but continue to avoid people and maybe go for drives to get out of the house like I am now. And... that's about it. I'm not going to church - I'll keep watching from home. It's unlikely we're going to visit my parents because we don't want to put them at risk. I'm sure as hell not going to a baseball game, amusement park, movie, or vacation and those were all things on the list for this summer as they're all things I love to do. I know other people have higher risk tolerances than I do and some people have already had COVID and survived. But I suspect a lot of people are in the same boat I am. I don't see how the economy magically fixes no matter when the President wants to "reopen" it.

SI

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by panerd

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

Early on I recall a lot of the experts warning against thinking this is a short term solution, and saying the flattening would be a long process. They have since been silenced by Trump and Pence, I read recently Pence is now forbidding any scientists on his team from doing CNN interviews. I think a lot of the reopening stuff is driven by Trump and co. to get the economy going.

I suspect what happens is we start opening around Memorial Day. The summer months knocks this down and we are lulled in to a false sense of security. Trump claims victory and fires Fauci who then goes on to warn people we are being to complacent. Then this thing roars back in the fall.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by bob

Back to summer plans, I expect major fights with summer camps that want to open in June.

I wonder how much refund policies and "have they already paid full price" will play into these decisions. We've paid $0 (day camp), $100 deposit (overnight camp) and full price (overnight camp) for three June camps. I could see some camps playing hardball if restrictions are lifted but large numbers don't want their kids to go.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I've thought about this point as well. For people who want to open everything up ASAP, it would seem that the ideal is that as many people get the virus as the health system can deal with, but not one more.

I thought Sweden was trying that and it's gotten them an 8% death rate for their efforts.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

I think the whole hammer and dance theory (https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coron...e-be9337092b56) is the best I've seen. At least until there are some medicines that can work against this.

Honestly, I'm not sure how we don't just completely screw ourselves over 1918 style. If these effects are mitigated throughout the summer, there's no stopping re-opening schools in the fall and our deadliest months are going to be October and November.

SI

[tyketime]

Speaking of Disney, I saw this article last night:

According to WFTV in Orlando, Florida, analyst Steven Cahall has downgraded the Walt Disney company mostly because of the impact COVID-19 has had on theme parks. He said this is not a demand-driven downturn like the parks saw in 2008 and 2009. However, the impact will still be big. He said he expects no attendance for the rest of the fiscal year, and parks working at a 50% capacity in fiscal 2021.

“Until the time at which there is significantly improved testing and/or a widely available vaccine it’s tough for us to imagine long lines for Rise of the Resistance, no matter how much folks might want to go to [Walt Disney World] deep down,” Cahall wrote. He also said that with no attendance at the parks, that means significantly lower occupancy at hotels and resorts, and almost no revenue coming in for the cruise line industry in the foreseeable future.

I'm not sure if he is truly suggesting zero attendance for the rest of 2020, or just such a low number that it will still have a huge negative impact...

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'm sure as hell not going to a baseball game, amusement park, movie, or vacation and those were all things on the list for this summer as they're all things I love to do.

SI

For once my procrastination pays off and I hadn't bought out Six Flags passes yet.

I'm out on baseball as well.

I do wonder if we are going to see a change in how movie studios release films. The new Trolls movie is being released today on several streaming platforms. $20 to rent. Cuts out the middle man and the studios still get their money. I can easily make popcorn and get candy to watch from home.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by tyketime

Speaking of Disney, I saw this article last night:

I'm not sure if he is truly suggesting zero attendance for the rest of 2020, or just such a low number that it will still have a huge negative impact...

I have to think them shuffling their movies around would also hurt revenue or else this guy isn't that good of a financial analyst

SI

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by bronconick

I thought Sweden was trying that and it's gotten them an 8% death rate for their efforts.

It may be, and to be clear, it's not a position that I'm advocating trying to achieve, as it's far too risky. Just saying that if quick re-openings are your goal, that has to be the number you're shooting for.

[Ben E Lou]

To those who have talked about it coming back in the fall: is there now evidence that warm weather will help squelch it in the summer, or is that a position mainly based on schools and higher ed reopening and thus speeding up the spread?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

To those who have talked about it coming back in the fall: is there now evidence that warm weather will help squelch it in the summer, or is that a position mainly based on schools and higher ed reopening and thus speeding up the spread?

Combination of both.

I can see a scenerio where we get lulled in to a false sense of security and end up back at square one, or worse because of it.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I wonder how much refund policies and "have they already paid full price" will play into these decisions. We've paid $0 (day camp), $100 deposit (overnight camp) and full price (overnight camp) for three June camps. I could see some camps playing hardball if restrictions are lifted but large numbers don't want their kids to go.

We have prepaid all of the day camps and about 2/3rds of the one overnight camp. I suspect they all will play hardball. All of them would have been filled by end of January if we hadn't signed up when we did.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yeah we have a family trip to California with Disney etc planned for early July with all cancelleble airbnb, hotels, airfare, etc. I'm completely fine cancelling or rescheduling but then I look at even the most conservative graphs and it all of them basically say by June the entire country will be at like <10 deaths a day. I realize it's all based on completing the graph the other way I just don't get how it's possible.

I doubt we see less than 10 deaths per day anytime soon and not until a vaccine. We are also expecting to cancel summer plans.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by tyketime

Speaking of Disney, I saw this article last night:

I'm not sure if he is truly suggesting zero attendance for the rest of 2020, or just such a low number that it will still have a huge negative impact...

His reference to "fiscal year" almost certainly means through June 30, 2020. Just in case that term isn't registering... not the calendar year through Dec 31, 2020. He seems to be saying zero attendees in the next several weeks, and who knows after that but plug in a depressed number.

[albionmoonlight]

From what I learned about Disney people when we were planning our trip last year, if the park reopens, a lot of people will see it as an opportunity to so when the crowds are lower. It will not be a ghost town.

But I also take the point that "a lot of people" is still less than the "there are so many people here that we are physically having trouble moving" level crowds that Disney expects.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by bronconick

I thought Sweden was trying that and it's gotten them an 8% death rate for their efforts.

And Sweden is perhaps the most ideal candidate if you wanted to do it, due to both mentality and as a hard fact the low population density. Even Stockholm (densest population) would by a quick search not even crack the Top50 in the US.
Sweden (same as the other nordic countries) also has among the best air quality, which obviously plays a role as far as the likelihood of death and severe cases in a given region (more people with worse lungs or other existing conditions to do with air quality).
So in reality the question is not "why not be Sweden?" because it'd be "be like Sweden, only with worse preconditions)


If you compare Norway (much more stringent measures but otherwise comparable chatacteristics as a country and time of outbreak) and Sweden, Sweden has about 4 times more dead per capita.

And even they are changing course now after intense pressure from both scientists and the already overwhelmed medical community.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I think the whole hammer and dance theory (https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coron...e-be9337092b56) is the best I've seen. At least until there are some medicines that can work against this.

Honestly, I'm not sure how we don't just completely screw ourselves over 1918 style. If these effects are mitigated throughout the summer, there's no stopping re-opening schools in the fall and our deadliest months are going to be October and November.

SI

Not just medicine. New testing methods, increased capacity and training for people involved (even stuff like finding and conracting people) or more protective gear. If you keep importing it and producing it but the number of sick gets lower you can after a few weeks maybe finally outfit everybody that needs it and that will mitigate effects when it picks up again.

Right now even workers in Hospitals have to cut Corners, not to mention Care Facilities ...

[tyketime]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

His reference to "fiscal year" almost certainly means through June 30, 2020. Just in case that term isn't registering... not the calendar year through Dec 31, 2020. He seems to be saying zero attendees in the next several weeks, and who knows after that but plug in a depressed number.

Good catch! I just looked it up. Disney Fiscal Year runs from Oct2019 - Sep2020

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by panerd

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

That is the great unknown, unless everyone is tested. My guess is lockdown can only end when there is the capacity to test everyone of a certain age, or in a certain area or industry, or however each country decides to do it.

[molson]

I've heard it described as turning on different societal and economic faucets and seeing what happens, and then turning on and off faucets as needed.

Governments are going to be cautious but I think we'll also see certain faucets turned on very soon. Our society and economy can't just wait for a vaccine (which there's no guarantee of even happening). But if we can be better prepared for future and hopefully much more moderate upticks in cases - through better treatment, more experience, more equipment, better hospital capacity, better societal habits, then it can be manageable. One of the reasons the Spanish Flu eventually disappeared, quite suddenly, is that doctors just got really good at treating it. We'll move in that direction with this too.

The big mystery to me is big crowds - sporting events, theme parks, concerts. Everybody is going to be reluctant to turn on those faucets. I could see those things shut down until and if there's a vaccine. I think we're entering an era of empty-area sports for those entertainment entities big enough to make money from TV. The rest, are probably just gone longer-term.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

To those who have talked about it coming back in the fall: is there now evidence that warm weather will help squelch it in the summer, or is that a position mainly based on schools and higher ed reopening and thus speeding up the spread?

More the latter than the former: kids are crazy disease vectors (which, of course, every parent already knows).

SI

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by molson

The big mystery to me is big crowds - sporting events, theme parks, concerts. Everybody is going to be reluctant to turn on those faucets. I could see those things shut down until and if there's a vaccine. I think we're entering an era of empty-area sports for those entertainment entities big enough to make money from TV. The rest, are probably just gone longer-term.

I find myself crossing the street when I am walking the dog and people are walking on the sidewalk toward me.

I feel so far away from being comfortable at something like a tailgate or a football game.

And I imagine I am not the only one.

[Arles]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Going out of "shelter in place" in Sept/Oct before a vaccine would be the worst thing you can do. Schools back in session, colder weather, allergies back in effect and other colder weather illnesses (ie, the normal flu) that could weaken our immune system.

If we aren't going to stay in until a vaccine (which I don't think we can), I think we have to look at loosening the restrictions in July. I'm not saying 40K people at a sporting event or big concerts - but maybe open back up restaurants for under 25 people, salons, stores, etc. The summer has the advantage of no school (slows the spread of illness), fewer allergy issues, hotter weather to potentially slow down the virus propagation and it is easier for the "at-risk" population to stay at home. If we could end the summer with good practices in place to reduce the spread (more companies instituting better health guards because they have money and customers), I think we would be in a better spot for the fall. Worst case, we would have a higher group immunity due to some of the lower risk groups getting and recovering from it.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Arles

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Going out of "shelter in place" in Sept/Oct before a vaccine would be the worst thing you can do. Schools back in session, colder weather, allergies back in effect and other colder weather illnesses (ie, the normal flu) that could weaken our immune system.

If we aren't going to stay in until a vaccine (which I don't think we can), I think we have to look at loosening the restrictions in July. I'm not saying 40K people at a sporting event or big concerts - but maybe open back up restaurants for under 25 people, salons, stores, etc. The summer has the advantage of no school (slows the spread of illness), fewer allergy issues, hotter weather to potentially slow down the virus propagation and it is easier for the "at-risk" population to stay at home. If we could end the summer with good practices in place to reduce the spread (more companies instituting better health guards because they have money and customers), I think we would be in a better spot for the fall. Worst case, we would have a higher group immunity due to some of the lower risk groups getting and recovering from it.

This makes sense to me. Devil is in the details, etc. But as a framework, it's pretty good.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm wondering more on how my daughter's college freshman year is going to be like.

I am with you. It has me very worried.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by panerd

What if the stay at home stuff is too effective? I mean let's say 10-20% have gotten the virus but close to 80% have not? When can the stay at home order ever end? Isn't the conclusion that the flattening the curve is really to save the strain on hospitals and eventually everyone will be exposed to this virus? (unless you do stay at home until the vaccine comes out)

This isn't some economy argument and certainly isn't an argument that Trump is doing something right. Just not sure I'm understanding the end game or if there is an end game here.

It seems like a long term plan. You open up and then close when it begins to overwhelm the health systems. Cycle continues. At some point through herd immunity, each time you open up, the impact on hospitals lessens.

I still foresee elderly and immunocompromised people having to stay home or be extremely careful. And I imagine some social distancing will remain in place till there is a vaccine. Like I don't foresee grocery stores taking down their sneeze guards and rules for a long time. I imagine shaking hands will be a thing of the past for awhile. People will avoid large gatherings in confined spaces. I know personally it will probably be a long time before I sit down at a busy restaurant.

Most experts have felt this is a 12-18 month battle. Hopefully the worst is behind us, but there will likely be hotspots pop up and lots of death.

[RainMaker]

One other thing I should add is time is helping scientists and doctors learn how to fight the disease better. Just read how they are finding that putting patients on ventilators too early is actually bad for their recovery. Little things like that which will save X% of lives adds up. Plus hopefully there are some anti-virals which can either shorten hospital stays or save a few lives in the process will help.

[molson]

Germany tested a random sample of 1,000 residents and found that 2% of the population was currently infected, and that 14% were carrying antibodies suggesting that they had already been infected. Then eliminating overlap, it was concluded that 15% of the sample had been infected.

If that number is accurate and could be calculated out to the country than Germany's death rate from the virus would be around 0.22%. (Not accounting for people who died under the radar, which hopefully isn't too significant a number in Germany.)

That seems like pretty good news. 15% already, and it's the 15% who had a lifestyle most likely to come across it early. You'd have to think the % is much higher in places that didn't do as well containing it, like New York.

(Edit: Of course, as Arles alluded to, whatever that % is, it's now going to grow only very slowly from here on out as long as restrictive movement politics are in place)

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I still foresee elderly and immunocompromised people having to stay home or be extremely careful.

The thing I am thinking about is how we deal with these people. My mother in law lives in the area. Do we just never visit her until there is a vaccine?

I'm a healthy guy in his young 40s with a job. I would presumably be one of the people out and about if we do loosen restrictions. But if I am out and about, even in a limited way, I don't see how I could ensure that I am not an asymptomatic carrier who got exposed 6 days ago at the gas station.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The thing I am thinking about is how we deal with these people. My mother in law lives in the area. Do we just never visit her until there is a vaccine?

I'm a healthy guy in his young 40s with a job. I would presumably be one of the people out and about if we do loosen restrictions. But if I am out and about, even in a limited way, I don't see how I could ensure that I am not an asymptomatic carrier who got exposed 6 days ago at the gas station.

I don't know. You'd probably have to stay away or be extremely careful when visiting (mask, distance). Without any sort of real testing in this country, we have to assume everyone is a carrier.

I just did some shopping for my Dad. Wore a mask, dropped off the stuff at his place, said hi from a distance, and left. I feel terrible about the whole thing but he's in his 70's now. Would never forgive myself if I gave it to him and it killed him.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't know. You'd probably have to stay away or be extremely careful when visiting (mask, distance). Without any sort of real testing in this country, we have to assume everyone is a carrier.

I just did some shopping for my Dad. Wore a mask, dropped off the stuff at his place, said hi from a distance, and left. I feel terrible about the whole thing but he's in his 70's now. Would never forgive myself if I gave it to him and it killed him.

We did the same for my MIL last weekend, she came out to the car and begged us to come inside because she was so lonely and didn't understand why we wouldn't do so. It was pretty awful, but the same scenario - even though the chances of us having it and being asymptomatic are miniscule (don't go anywhere except walk the dogs late at night) neither of us would ever forgive ourselves if the worst happens. Late 70's, diabetic, just had major back surgery and has a thyroid issue she's dealing with right now, it wouldn't go well for her if she got it.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by molson

Germany tested a random sample of 1,000 residents and found that 2% of the population was currently infected, and that 14% were carrying antibodies suggesting that they had already been infected. Then eliminating overlap, it was concluded that 15% of the sample had been infected.

If that number is accurate and could be calculated out to the country than Germany's death rate from the virus would be around 0.22%. (Not accounting for people who died under the radar, which hopefully isn't too significant a number in Germany.)

That seems like pretty good news. 15% already, and it's the 15% who had a lifestyle most likely to come across it early. You'd have to think the % is much higher in places that didn't do as well containing it, like New York.

(Edit: Of course, as Arles alluded to, whatever that % is, it's now going to grow only very slowly from here on out as long as restrictive movement politics are in place)

Actually it can't i think. I know the area and that is like saying a study on likelihood of traffic accidents on an empty but heavily policed road in Iowa can be scaled up to say sth definitive about the whole country.

This was the only hotspot for a while and got heavy ressources, meaning everybody got the best treatment and very early. They also had no major outbreaks in retirement homes so far. This Death Rate is an absolute Best Case Number.

And as an aside, the study released only a preliminary result from only a bit over 500 people so the rate they published is 0,38, not 0.22.

And when i say published: They did a press conference, gave no description of the demographics or methodology* and no peer review process at all.
They even pulled their 2 Page summary from the Website after a few hours and some glaring mistakes/holes werenpointed out.
And they hired a PR firm normally doing faux-political yellow journalism.

* For example no allowance for false positives. A week ago the antibody test they used still could not tell if it was Covid19 or another way more more harmless Coronavirus that causes a mild flu (15% of germans get one of those between November and March)
They also dont say how the "households" look. If there are many Parents + 2 kids households (it is that kind of place) that will skew the results of the %infected since it is likely 3 or all 4 get it.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The thing I am thinking about is how we deal with these people. My mother in law lives in the area. Do we just never visit her until there is a vaccine?

I'm a healthy guy in his young 40s with a job. I would presumably be one of the people out and about if we do loosen restrictions. But if I am out and about, even in a limited way, I don't see how I could ensure that I am not an asymptomatic carrier who got exposed 6 days ago at the gas station.

And even if you don't visit her, Somebody three transmissions removed from you might infect his Mother. Or you infect a mate who infects his daughter who infects a friend who infects her mom who is a nurse in a home and has only a shitty selfmade mask because there still aren't enough good ones.

I mean, the idea of protecting the vulnerable is good but we can't properly (with the current tools and ressources) when a small portion of the generall population has it, how would it work better with the same Tools if more have it ?

There is no alternative to keeping infection levels and risks low everywhere. There are Tools to do that while opening up but those are not available yet or not enough like proper masks.

[rjolley]

I may have missed it earlier but have they officially determined that herd immunity is possible with this virus? I've read that it is, but I've also read that a good percentage of people who were infected didn't have any antibodies after they recovered, or had a very low count.

If herd immunity is possible, then that's great and will help us get closer to the old norms sooner.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by rjolley

I may have missed it earlier but have they officially determined that herd immunity is possible with this virus? I've read that it is, but I've also read that a good percentage of people who were infected didn't have any antibodies after they recovered, or had a very low count.

If herd immunity is possible, then that's great and will help us get closer to the old norms sooner.

That story was out there, but then I heard someone say that diabetics tend to produce less antibodies and they may have been over-represented in the sample. So who knows?

Basically, science is all about patience, double blinds, large sample sizes, repetition of results, peer review, etc.

And, for obvious reasons, we are going to be reporting on studies that haven't done anything close to that. So we are going to be hearing lots of stuff--good and bad--that will end up not being true simply because the process that produced it wasn't good science. No one's fault. Just the problem with trying to do something desperately important quickly that really can't be done as quickly as we need.

[whomario]

Representive Austrian antibody study found it in 0.33% of people never registered as covid cases btw which indicates indicates 2/3 undetected (9k cases, assumed 28k actually infected) or a 1% mortality rate.

Originally Posted by rjolley

I may have missed it earlier but have they officially determined that herd immunity is possible with this virus? I've read that it is, but I've also read that a good percentage of people who were infected didn't have any antibodies after they recovered, or had a very low count.

If herd immunity is possible, then that's great and will help us get closer to the old norms sooner.

One limited scope study so far found low antibody counts. May be significant, may be not.

The problem remains that there seems no way to aim for herd immunity before a vaccine unless a lot of things fall into place as far as treatment is concerned or you are fine with 400k dead (and all that entails, including permanetly overrun hospitals and doctors offices and doctors and nurses burning out) instead of 100k between now and then ...
Herd Immunity within the year is not a good outcome.

And that number is for an unrealistic and somhow, despite overloaded hospitals, consistent 0.2 mortality (Influenza) and assumes more young people getting it.

[Arles]

They just had an infectious disease doctor on here in Phoenix and he answered some questions. One person asked about the herd immunity and he said that while we don't know for sure, we do know that most cases have some level of antibodies after being infected. He said that if you did manage to get it again (which he said seemed unlikely given what we know) that you would probably have mild symptoms given you will have some of the antibodies already prevalent.

Not sure if that helps some people here, but it makes sense. Once you have it, even if you win the lottery and get it again, chances are it will be a much milder case than normal.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by whomario

Representive Austrian antibody study found it in 0.33% of people never registered as covid cases btw which indicates indicates 2/3 undetected (9k cases, assumed 28k actually infected)




One limited scope study found low antibody counts. May be significant, may be not.

The problem remains that there seems no way to aim for herd immunity before a vaccine unless a lot of things fall into place as far as treatment is concerned or you are fine with 400k dead (and all that entails, including permanetly overrun hospitals and doctors offices and doctors and nurses burning out) instead of 100k between now and then ...
Herd Immunity within the year is not a good outcome.

And that number is for an unrealistic and somhow, despite overloaded hospitals, consistent 0.2 mortality (Influenza) and assumes more young people getting it.

Yeah, I don't see the herd immunity as the best way out of this, but it's being touted so much recently that I thought there was more information that I hadn't seen. Without a vaccine and without a test that returns accurate results quickly, there's no effective way to protect people who are more vulnerable. Without some form of effective treatment, there's no way to protect people who do catch it. Seems like people are taking the effectiveness of social distancing to mean we can be out and about sooner. I'm not sure if that's the case.

Part of me hopes this doesn't die down through hotter weather. If it does, it's very likely we're back in the same position through the winter. If it doesn't, we potentially make adjustments that will allow us to have some of our freedoms back and limit the next surge until a vaccine is widely available.

How long would you wait after a vaccine is available to take it? 3 months? 6? no wait?