COVID-19 Megathread 3: Third time's a charm

[GeorgiaModerate]

So, when do you guys think stuff might actually be able to open back up?

As soon as Trump and the right-wing media stop making excuses about why we don't have tests.

You mean never?  That's awfully pessimistic.

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

So, when do you guys think stuff might actually be able to open back up?

It will more than likely start in places where the virus isn’t as severe and then elsewhere as the virus dies down slowly. Probably throughout May? Give or take.

[President Johnson]

I think the worst aspect of this is nobody can say how long it takes and how it ends. My biggest fear is that we will reach a point where it's either total economic crash through ongoing lockdowns in an effort to keep the numbers down, or basically "sacrifice" those who don't recover by themselves. Would be a terrible, terrible choice to make. We need vaccine as fast as possible.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

We just passed China

[GP270watch]

 NJ just had a surge of positive cases +2500 and found COVID-19 had infiltrated a lot of elderly care facilities, one in particular had to be shutdown after 3 deaths and 25 positive cases.

[HisGrace]

I think the worst aspect of this is nobody can say how long it takes and how it ends. My biggest fear is that we will reach a point where it's either total economic crash through ongoing lockdowns in an effort to keep the numbers down, or basically "sacrifice" those who don't recover by themselves. Would be a terrible, terrible choice to make. We need vaccine as fast as possible.

Keeping the country/world shut down into the middle of next year when a vaccine will be ready is just not a viable option. The people in leadership need to view that as unacceptable and figure something else out.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

[It’s so Joever]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

Even trying to compare the situation in South Korea to the US is a load of horse***t and you know it.

[Good Habit]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

There are exactly ZERO counties where a nation wide lockdown doesnt make sense - it would have been necessary 3 weeks ago at the latest. Now - everithing short of a total lockdown of all the country for 2 months will be absolutely insufficient. It only helps if no one spreading the virus is going in or out of a given area, and thus, not only state borders, but usually ALL county borders need to be shut, until it's clear that there are no active cases anymore. The US is already in a much worse situtation than China ever was.  
I can't actually imagine how the US might survive - forget about elections in a far distant future like november - there is either a coup in favour of a national unity governement - enforcing total lockdown for 2 months - or a civil war. (can't see a national unity government lead by Trump, Pence or Pelosi). May be Trump tries to rescue him self by starting an external war ("liberating Venezuela" - this wont work because civil war in the US is still more likely, and will cost the US all allies) or "destroing China - taking "revenge" for the "Chinese Virus" - if its the later, there is little hope for humanity left....

[Mr. Reactionary]

I can't actually imagine how the US might survive - forget about elections in a far distant future like november - there is either a coup in favour of a national unity governement - enforcing total lockdown for 2 months - or a civil war. (can't see a national unity government lead by Trump, Pence or Pelosi). May be Trump tries to rescue him self by starting an external war ("liberating Venezuela" - this wont work because civil war in the US is still more likely, and will cost the US all allies) or "destroing China - taking "revenge" for the "Chinese Virus" - if its the later, there is little hope for humanity left....

K thx bye.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

There are exactly ZERO counties where a nation wide lockdown doesnt make sense - it would have been necessary 3 weeks ago at the latest. Now - everithing short of a total lockdown of all the country for 2 months will be absolutely insufficient. It only helps if no one spreading the virus is going in or out of a given area, and thus, not only state borders, but usually ALL county borders need to be shut, until it's clear that there are no active cases anymore. The US is already in a much worse situtation than China ever was.  
I can't actually imagine how the US might survive - forget about elections in a far distant future like november - there is either a coup in favour of a national unity governement - enforcing total lockdown for 2 months - or a civil war. (can't see a national unity government lead by Trump, Pence or Pelosi). May be Trump tries to rescue him self by starting an external war ("liberating Venezuela" - this wont work because civil war in the US is still more likely, and will cost the US all allies) or "destroing China - taking "revenge" for the "Chinese Virus" - if its the later, there is little hope for humanity left....

How does someone in Switzerland know what’s going on in rural American better than someone actually living in one of these communities right now?

[HisGrace]

I can't actually imagine how the US might survive - forget about elections in a far distant future like november - there is either a coup in favour of a national unity governement - enforcing total lockdown for 2 months - or a civil war. (can't see a national unity government lead by Trump, Pence or Pelosi). May be Trump tries to rescue him self by starting an external war ("liberating Venezuela" - this wont work because civil war in the US is still more likely, and will cost the US all allies) or "destroing China - taking "revenge" for the "Chinese Virus" - if its the later, there is little hope for humanity left....

Coronavirus fanfics aren't really appropriate right now, man. "Too soon" as they say.

[GeorgiaModerate]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

...IF you have near-universal availability of tests.  We're far from it in the US.

A general comment (not directed specifically at you, NickG):

Why do most people here see this as an either/or strategy?  Don't you see that there's a middle course that's optimal for both the economy and public health?  Lock things down now before they get worse, then lift restrictions in places where a large outbreak is not current when more testing is available to implement widespread testing and tracing.  That way you minimize the current effects and get back to normal as quickly as possible (where "normal" means both more economic activity and no widespread outbreak).

Determining how/when to lift restrictions is a function of testing availability and current local health conditions.  This should be susceptible to optimization by public health experts.

[Good Habit]

Well, it you live in a remote mountain valley, or in northern Alaska, where no one EVER passes by, then you might have a point - but as long as rural America is connected with the rest of the country by road or even Air, it can't remain unaffected. And for contact tracking - a very good idea if you have sufficient people doing the tracking - that is may be 10 officers for every person testing positive... But, of course, this doesn't help all those who are already sick and in an overwhelmed health system, like Wuhan, Lombardy, Madrid, - or very soon New York (and likely even Switzerland)

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Just impose a nationwide lockdown for 2-3 weeks, let the curve start to flatten and re-evaluate later, these whackamole states closing isn't going to do sh!t

[Mr. Reactionary]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

...IF you have near-universal availability of tests.  We're far from it in the US.

A general comment (not directed specifically at you, NickG):

Why do most people here see this as an either/or strategy?  Don't you see that there's a middle course is optimal for both the economy and public health?  Lock things down now before they get worse, then lift restrictions in places where a large outbreak is not current when more testing is available to implement widespread testing and tracing.  That way you minimize the current effects and get back to normal as quickly as possible (where "normal" means both more economic activity and no widespread outbreak).

Determining how/when to lift restrictions is a function of testing availability and current local health conditions.  This should be susceptible to optimization by public health experts.

No one is gonna consent to an open-ended house arrest order. That's the real reason there is so much opposition to a National lockdown. The proposed time frames keep getting longer and more insane and then conclude with "but it could take even longer". Schit, Jacobin was demanding EIGHT MONTHS minimum of National house arrest.

[Good Habit]

No one is gonna consent to an open-ended house arrest order. That's the real reason there is so much opposition to a National lockdown. The proposed time frames keep getting longer and more insane and then conclude with "but it could take even longer". Schit, Jacobin was demanding EIGHT MONTHS minimum of National house arrest.

Well, for every day you delay it, you will have to keep it at least a week longer....

[super6646]

Trump is really clowning this one lol

Nobody was blaming him for an economic crash, but he’s sowing is own crap by acting negligent.

[Xing]

We just passed China

I guess when Trump and the Republicans talked about being number one and exponential growth, they weren’t lying, they just needed to give us more context.

In all seriousness, terrible, and anyone with a brain can see that now isn’t the time to discuss “reopening” the country.

[GeorgiaModerate]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

...IF you have near-universal availability of tests.  We're far from it in the US.

A general comment (not directed specifically at you, NickG):

Why do most people here see this as an either/or strategy?  Don't you see that there's a middle course is optimal for both the economy and public health?  Lock things down now before they get worse, then lift restrictions in places where a large outbreak is not current when more testing is available to implement widespread testing and tracing.  That way you minimize the current effects and get back to normal as quickly as possible (where "normal" means both more economic activity and no widespread outbreak).

Determining how/when to lift restrictions is a function of testing availability and current local health conditions.  This should be susceptible to optimization by public health experts.

No one is gonna consent to an open-ended house arrest order. That's the real reason there is so much opposition to a National lockdown. The proposed time frames keep getting longer and more insane and then conclude with "but it could take even longer". Schit, Jacobin was demanding EIGHT MONTHS minimum of National house arrest.

AFAIK, Jacobin isn't in a position of government authority.    The point is to buy time in small increments, like 2 or 3 weeks. 

Nobody likes being stuck indoors, and even then I don't think anyone is proposing a 100% house arrest; even in the locked-down locations in the US, you can still go out for essential functions.  But sometimes the situation is serious enough that it calls for some sacrifices on the part of citizens.  I remember my mother talking about rationing during WW2.  If the American public could put up with that inconvenience for the sake of the war effort, have we really become so selfish that we can't put up with a temporary restriction on movement for the sake of everyone's health?

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

Social Distancing may be working as infection rate slows down in Washington....

Gov. Jay Inslee said Thursday morning that the infection rate from the coronavirus in Washington state is slowing compared to other states.

Using data from other states, with a starting point of when each state had 20 infections, Washington has seen at least a "slight reduction" in the rate of acceleration.

https://www.king5.com/mobile/article/news/health/coronavirus/a-glimmer-of-hope-amid-coronavirus-pandemic/281-5269288d-9fe8-4ee6-a2a4-1d5f4f29c836

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I would actually support a national lockdown as long as it was for a short and definite period of time.  Most of the people advocating for this are citing a length of time that is far too long though.

If a community has zero known infections right now, you could still argue for a short-term lockdown because there may be people in the community who don’t yet know they are infect.  

But if after two weeks of lockdown, you still have no infections, you can be reasonably confident that indeed no one in the community has the virus.  At least confident enough that the marginal value of additional weeks on lockdown balances against it.

[Mr. Reactionary]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

...IF you have near-universal availability of tests.  We're far from it in the US.

A general comment (not directed specifically at you, NickG):

Why do most people here see this as an either/or strategy?  Don't you see that there's a middle course is optimal for both the economy and public health?  Lock things down now before they get worse, then lift restrictions in places where a large outbreak is not current when more testing is available to implement widespread testing and tracing.  That way you minimize the current effects and get back to normal as quickly as possible (where "normal" means both more economic activity and no widespread outbreak).

Determining how/when to lift restrictions is a function of testing availability and current local health conditions.  This should be susceptible to optimization by public health experts.

No one is gonna consent to an open-ended house arrest order. That's the real reason there is so much opposition to a National lockdown. The proposed time frames keep getting longer and more insane and then conclude with "but it could take even longer". Schit, Jacobin was demanding EIGHT MONTHS minimum of National house arrest.

AFAIK, Jacobin isn't in a position of government authority.    The point is to buy time in small increments, like 2 or 3 weeks. 

Nobody likes being stuck indoors, and even then I don't think anyone is proposing a 100% house arrest; even in the locked-down locations in the US, you can still go out for essential functions.  But sometimes the situation is serious enough that it calls for some sacrifices on the part of citizens.  I remember my mother talking about rationing during WW2.  If the American public could put up with that inconvenience for the sake of the war effort, have we really become so selfish that we can't put up with a temporary restriction on movement for the sake of everyone's health?

All I'm going to say is that a lot of us find the comparison of Coronavirus to World War 2 such an obscene false equivalency that it immediately shuts down any hope of our respective positions reconciling on prevention strategies.

[FrancoAgo]

I would actually support a national lockdown as long as it was for a short and definite period of time.  Most of the people advocating for this are citing a length of time that is far too long though.

If a community has zero known infections right now, you could still argue for a short-term lockdown because there may be people in the community who don’t yet know they are infect.  

But if after two weeks of lockdown, you still have no infections, you can be reasonably confident that indeed no one in the community has the virus.  At least confident enough that the marginal value of additional weeks on lockdown balances against it.

2 weeks are too few, someones can be sick but asymptomatic, so you need 4 weeks

[ProudModerate2]

There are still so many areas of the country where a nationwide lockdown doesn’t make any sense.  My own region has only had one confirmed case.  It was a kid at a nearby college coming back from spring break.   There is still no evidence of community spread here.  This sort of situation can still be effectively combated through testing and tracing like Korea did so successfully.

...IF you have near-universal availability of tests.  We're far from it in the US.

A general comment (not directed specifically at you, NickG):

Why do most people here see this as an either/or strategy?  Don't you see that there's a middle course is optimal for both the economy and public health?  Lock things down now before they get worse, then lift restrictions in places where a large outbreak is not current when more testing is available to implement widespread testing and tracing.  That way you minimize the current effects and get back to normal as quickly as possible (where "normal" means both more economic activity and no widespread outbreak).

Determining how/when to lift restrictions is a function of testing availability and current local health conditions.  This should be susceptible to optimization by public health experts.

No one is gonna consent to an open-ended house arrest order. That's the real reason there is so much opposition to a National lockdown. The proposed time frames keep getting longer and more insane and then conclude with "but it could take even longer". Schit, Jacobin was demanding EIGHT MONTHS minimum of National house arrest.

AFAIK, Jacobin isn't in a position of government authority.    The point is to buy time in small increments, like 2 or 3 weeks. 

Nobody likes being stuck indoors, and even then I don't think anyone is proposing a 100% house arrest; even in the locked-down locations in the US, you can still go out for essential functions.  But sometimes the situation is serious enough that it calls for some sacrifices on the part of citizens.  I remember my mother talking about rationing during WW2.  If the American public could put up with that inconvenience for the sake of the war effort, have we really become so selfish that we can't put up with a temporary restriction on movement for the sake of everyone's health?

Agree.
And take into consideration, that during WWII, in places like London and the entire southern portion of the UK (England), they sacrificed their "normal freedoms" for 3 or 4 years, and especially so during the time when the Luftwaffe was extensively bombing the hell out of them (known as The Battle of Britain which lasted about 4 months).