13 ms·

>Which is the goal, reduce infection rates. Based on the localized infection cases I see across the US and have been watching as well as the characteristics of

>Which is the goal, reduce infection rates. Based on the localized infection cases I see across the US and have been watching as well as the characteristics of the virus (life outside host/on surfaces, in air, the degree of asymptomatic transference, etc.), it's well beyond containment IMHO. Travel isn't going to do too much to reduce infection rates alone. We need significant cultural changes to reduce infection rates, but I don't see that happening for a variety of reasons. This country isn't about proactive action and is all about reactionary action though, so we're just waiting for that reactionary threshold. Some preventative measures have been pushed but they're no where near aggressive enough at this point. It will be interesting how this is handled in our modern cultural, current political and work culture, etc. I suspect it's going to be fairly nasty but certainly hope not. I've been advising my parents to stock up and minimize any outside interactions for awhile.

kortex 7y ago
There were just 2 cases detected at the gym down the street from me. I'm in a medium town of about 40k in upstate NY. Not podunk, but hardly bustling. I'm considering the USA fully seeded at this point.
- penagwin 7y ago
  IMO the only reason we aren't reporting large numbers of new cases is because of the lack of widespread testing currently being done compared to other countries at this moment (other countries are performing magnitudes higher tests a day). Even if you think you have it, there's still not enough test kits available yet - even if you're swabbed it can be days for a result(Saying this from west michigan).
  - chasd00 7y ago
    yes, the case count is about to sky rocket because wide spread testing is coming online but hopefully the fatality count doesn't. I think the authorities need to do a better job communicating that a steep rise in cases detected doesn't mean a steep rise in severe or lethal cases.
    - Frost1x 7y ago
      I think a steep rise in infection counts due to increased testing/detection would be a great thing. More data is always better in these situations and more confirmed infections with confirmed recoveries would probably ease everyone's minds a bit more. To be clear I'm not saying more infections are a good thing, simply that if there are a lot more cases that already exist, knowing they exist and having more accurate data that shows us COVID19 is less harmful than currently perceived/projected would be good for everyone.
    - astronautjones 7y ago
      you could start with getting the president and his sycophants to stop claiming its a partisan hoax and that it's going to go away in a few days
      - gwright 7y ago
        The president didn't say that the virus is a partisan hoax. His actions clearly indicate he doesn't believe it is a hoax. The president did claim that some criticisms about his handling of the situation were a "new hoax" in the same way he has labeled previous unfounded criticism and accusations as hoaxes.
        gwicks56 7y ago
        ""When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."
        gwright 7y ago
        so? That is not the same thing as saying it is a hoax. Plenty of reasonable criticisms to make but that doesn’t mean the President thinks the virus itself is a hoax. I am arguing for clear communication and facts and people are basically saying screw that let’s just spread rumors because, reasons. How is that helpful?
        hcknwscommenter 7y ago
  - dorchadas 7y ago
    And because people with mild symptoms aren't likely going to the doctor. They can't afford to take off work and go, and if it's simply mild right now, why risk their livelihood? I kinda hope this whole thing is a wake-up call for why our system is so unsustainable.
    - hnick 7y ago
      People on reddit (take that as you will) have been reporting that even if the symptoms are significant and match the profile, tests aren't being run if no travel has taken place recently. These people get turned away. It matches this article on restrictive testing. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-testing-numbers/607714/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavir...
      - blaser-waffle 7y ago
        COVID-19 doesn't mean there aren't regular flu / colds going around, too. Long distance travel and exposure to those who have been (e.g. hugging your wife got off a plane from Spain 2 days ago) is still a top predictor for exposure.
        Seenso 7y ago
        > COVID-19 doesn't mean there aren't regular flu / colds going around, too. Which is exactly why everyone with those symptoms needs to be tested. One of the most important things we need to do right now is detect the people who got the virus through community transmission. > Long distance travel and exposure to those who have been (e.g. hugging your wife got off a plane from Spain 2 days ago) is still a top predictor for exposure. I'd say that testing those people should be lower priority, since an assumption they're infected is more likely to be accurate, so they can take preventative measures without needing a test.
        penagwin 7y ago
        > Which is exactly why everyone with those symptoms needs to be tested. This. I'm in my twenties so it's very possible for me to get COVID and only experience cold like symptoms (or less!). I'm sorry to everyone, but I won't self-quarantine myself for 14 days just because I have a stuffy nose (it's likely a cold right?). I'm fortunate enough to have the ability to take time off/work remote - but what if it's a cold this week and COVID in two weeks? I can't take a month off. I'm from West Michigan - ATM there's very little testing available, and I'd only be tested if I had recently traveled. But we're past the point where recently traveling is such a big indicator - we're seeing plenty of community transmission for me to believe it's very likely everywhere already, and any lack of cases is because of a lack of testing.
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    > Even if you think you have it, there's still not enough test kits available yet The messaging on this has been pathetic. The other day UW in Seattle announced they had a capacity to test 1,000/day. Not adequate for the nation, but for the PNW, sure.
    - protein_lense 7y ago
      I'm in Seattle. While there may be official "kits" for this, the protocol can be run in any competent lab set up for this type of assay. DNA primers specific for covid-19 would need to be ordered, but this is routine. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-detection-instructions.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-detecti... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-panel-primer-probes.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-panel-p... ETA: I'm having trouble locating positive control template sequences. I am happy for S. Korea running 100,000+ tests, and embarrassed that the US has maybe run 1000s at this point. I also think that the virus is widely dispersed in the US and the best we can hope for is to keep the case load at a level manageable by our health care system. I'm pretty worried about that though.
    - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
      That is not an adequate number for the PNW. Full stop. You have no idea what you are talking about.
  - LeoTinnitus 7y ago
    Also it is entirely dependent upon if they get tested too. In the US, most people are wasting their time.
- divbzero 7y ago
  Does this mean we need a more robust domestic response to contain coronavirus, instead of or in addition to restricting travel to the US? Akin to how securing a network is more than setting up a firewall at the perimeter.
  - irq11 7y ago
    It cannot be contained. That’s what the pandemic declaration means (even though the WHO should have done this weeks ago). At this point, the only rational thing to do is to try to slow the spread. The good news is that this is a very mild virus, and the vast majority of infected people will have minor symptoms. The fatality rate in Korea is currently 0.6%, and becuase of the comprehensive nature of their testing, this should be considered the upper bound on CFR.
    - tunesmith 7y ago
      South Korea has been at 0.8% the last two days, and will continue to climb as their open cases resolve one way or another. Plus, didn't they just have a spike in Seoul?
      - irq11 7y ago
        There was a spike in Seoul. Based on their reaction so far, I have a great deal of confidence in their ability to isolate it and react effectively. Regarding the rise in CFR: it will naturally go up as cases decline, because fatalities stem from a time when the case rate was more rapidly increasing. Korea’s case rate had been declining for several days: https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1229708001243795458 https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/12297080012... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/health/coronavirus-deaths-rates.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/heal...
    - wbl 7y ago
      Until the hospitals are overloaded.
- tunesmith 7y ago
  We're not really hearing any reports of unexplained deaths that might be covid deaths, and the US is advanced enough to not miss deaths like that, so one thing that might put an upper bound on how behind we are. Then again, there's a delay while symptoms progress.
  - smileysteve 7y ago
    Awkward, the CDC announced re attributed deaths today
  - ebrenes 7y ago
    This already happened in Seattle [1]. Undetected COVID deaths are not "unexplained" because they look like flu deaths, so they're simply catalogued as being from the flu. "In fact, officials would later discover through testing, the virus had already contributed to the deaths of two people, and it would go on to kill 20 more in the Seattle region over the following days." [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-de...
- yellowapple 7y ago
  I'm betting we've been seeded since even before Wuhan's quarantine started. My folks and I all got pretty thoroughly sick during a cruise in early January, and they're becoming increasingly convinced it was COVID (especially since my stepmom tested negative for any sort of flu, and this was well before there were reports of COVID outside of China so of course the doctors wouldn't think to test for it even if they happened to have a test kit); it's increasingly difficult for me to be skeptical of that conclusion. Thankfully all of us seemed to get over it without much complication, and it doesn't seem like very many of the people we've since interacted with have come down with it. We might very well have just been lucky, though.
  - boulos 7y ago
    I dunno, where was your cruise and were there lots of mainland Chinese people on it? Sadly the symptoms for CoVid-19 are pretty common across a variety of diseases, so “flu-like but not flu” doesn’t necessarily point to this. At that time during the outbreak, it seems likely you would have needed to have people from Wuhan on-board.
    - yellowapple 7y ago
      > where was your cruise Los Angeles → Catalina Islands → Ensenada → Los Angeles > and were there lots of mainland Chinese people on it? I mean, I didn't exactly go around asking people "are you from China?", but based on the number of people who sounded like they were speaking Mandarin I'd tentatively answer "yes". > Sadly the symptoms for CoVid-19 are pretty common across a variety of diseases, so “flu-like but not flu” doesn’t necessarily point to this. Indeed, which is why I'm still at least somewhat skeptical. Still, it's hard to rule it out, especially given the relatively-severe symptoms (not the absolute worst I've felt, but it was pretty bad).
      - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
        Lots of people live in LA who haven't been to China in decades speak Chinese as a first language. The relevant question is whether there were many people on that cruise directly visiting directly from Wuhan/Hubei. LA-catalina-ensenada-LA? Doubt it. Not exactly the type of cruise someone flies thousands of miles for.
organsnyder 7y ago
I'm seeing more indications of people taking things seriously. The first cases were announced in my state (Michigan) today, and already most universities have cancelled in-person learning, various gatherings are being cancelled, etc. It sounds like my church—on the west side of the state (the two confirmed cases are on the east side)—will be altering plans, perhaps even cancelling services as early as this Sunday. The concept of "social distancing" is rapidly gaining steam.
logjammin 7y ago
"it's well beyond containment IMHO" This depends on how you're defining containment. Grounding aircraft may not decrease the current case count, you're right, but it may help not adding to it, or adding as much, or as fast. Because of this, it may still be worth doing. The notion that we're going to abandon containment measures in favor of mitigation, which I've seen in many places (not in your comment though of course), is wrong. We're going to be doing both.
rsj_hn 7y ago
My 2 cents. All reductions in (non-essential) travel are good in a pandemic. That doesn't mean it's sufficient, but it's something positive. I think we would all like to see stronger social distancing rules domestically (in the US), but here the US has a problem as it granted the President broad discretionary powers to suspend international travel but not domestic gatherings, which can't be banned via executive order and even if congress were to pass a law banning such gatherings, there would be first amendment implications as well as federalism issues. It's not easy to pass a law giving the President this type of power and I suspect many in congress already rue passing the laws that gave the president power to suspend international travel. That's one of the prices of living in a federal government with separation of powers and a bill of rights guaranteeing right to assembly rather than in a place like China. For example, the CDC has issued social distancing guidelines but they are only guidelines not laws: Santa Clara county has said "no thank you we'll follow our own guidelines" instead, when the CDC asked to ban meetings of more than 250 but Santa Clara banned meetings of more than 1000, and just refused to change their target to the CDC recommendation. So the US simply lacks the tools that would allow the President to go on the air and announce "I'm declaring that the MLB season needs to be delayed and Disneyland must close." He can try to exert pressure, or rather have the CDC exert pressure, but these types of declarations are not going to happen in America.
- KarlKemp 7y ago
  OP's point wasn't "this is only going to have very limited effect", to which your reply "better than nothing" would be appropriate. Their point is that there's absolutely no effect of banning travel between two areas with similar prevalence, based on rather simple logic. Take two bags with mostly white and a similar number of red balls in them. Then, twenty times, grab one hand from each bag and empty it in the other. What's the expected change in number of red balls?
  - T-hawk 7y ago
    There is an effect, because traveling itself creates chances for exposure. Anyone traveling on an airplane or train in close quarters, or passing through an airport or transit facility, can pick up or pass on an infection. By your last analogy, the red balls would have paint rubbed off them in the exchanges.
6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
It's not just about containment, which signs point to being past us. If we slow the infection and spread it out over time, we do a couple things. Slowing it gives us time to develop tests and treatment and processes and systems to deal with it. Spreading it out over time means that at any given moment fewer people need medical care. Like, if everyone needs care tomorrow, obviously the system can't handle it, but if a few people need it tomorrow, and a few the day after and so on, spreading it out over time, the system can handle a few at a time. https://www.flattenthecurve.com/ https://www.flattenthecurve.com/
- Frost1x 7y ago
  Travel bans alone will not flatten out peak infections that are going to overload our existing healthcare infrastructure that already run at near maximum capacity during regular, non-epidemic periods. There is a lot more leadership across government (federal, state, local), private industry, and independent individuals could be doing to proactively reduce transference and even stomp out significant portions of infection is followed through. My point is that our cultural trends surrounding all of these (governments, work, personal action) are almost all running counter to what we need to be doing. We need strong government leadership at all levels pushing support out where possible, be it resources, accurate non-politically influenced/dictated information, etc. Businesses can be more proactively supporting work from home more where feasible, extend sick leave or create sick leave options to reduce pressures to work, provide some security/continued employment for those who need it (especially demographics at high risk). People can avoid attending work when sick, reduce/limit public exposure (be it out shopping, attending an event, etc.), practice frequent hand washing, limit exposing themselves to at risk populations, etc. Economically it's a disaster (as the markets are also anticipating) but it's going to be one way or another. It seems to me that you're better off to take a well calculated hit that can bounce back to a healthy workforce that doesn't strain existing healthcare infrastructure than trying to pretend nothing is going on, minimal fallout will occur, and play-it-by ear.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
    When you say "take a well calculated hit" do you mean "let a ton of people die?"
AlexCoventry 7y ago
In Boston, at least, I'm seeing significant cultural changes. It's gotten much, much quieter, and meetings are all going online.
- andrewem 7y ago
  I've seen many tech companies in the Boston area announce employees can (or must) work from home, since the governor of Massachusetts declared a state of emergency on Tuesday and encouraged such actions. All governors should do likewise.
- eli_gottlieb 7y ago
  Admittedly, the Biogen conference was... a bit of a fuck-up. But yes, all our universities are sending their kids home, white-collar workplaces are moving towards WFH policies, etc. I've been WFH since earlier this week myself, and I went shopping for food and soap with my wife Tuesday night.
LeoTinnitus 7y ago
It'd be pretty sweet if it took a pandemic for the government to solidify sick day laws. Too bad money making is somehow above preventing others getting sick. People wouldnt show up to work if they didn't have to worry about their wages. I'm sorry but 3 sick days is garbage and requiring doctors notes is asine when your healthcare plan is shite. Not to mention wasting a day in a hospital. Companies can afford this stuff. It's not often and it's minimal to say the least. But God forbid a small business can't have someone for 80 hours a week at minimum wage!
Shivetya 7y ago
Which democratic(* - I was going to use Western) nations do though? Seriously the freedom enjoyed by those in these nations and the significant time any global conflict or pandemic have pretty much restricted the ability of leadership in those countries from taking action that would have any true effect short of trying to implement martial law, which in most countries would be met with protests and in some with courts being tied up. Now I will not attempt to speak for Europe but the US government could certainly push short public advisories and messages to adults and children through broadcast TV and even get the cooperation of streaming services as well. Short thirty to ninety second spots that give helpful non panic information. The US President is hamstrung by both political disagreement and the law. There were articles he is loathe to declare any national emergency declaration until approached by the governors of many of the states. If he did without states approaching him and asking you can damn well guarantee there were would be Democrats out there claiming he was trying to be a Dictator and comparing him to Putin. The same article concerning the declaration also reveals all the behind the scenes work going on with Congress to get funds in place before any message is put forth so that the government as a whole looks to be cooperating as well as acting appropriately.
collyw 7y ago
As someone posted on FB, the infection rate spikes a lot more with no measures, and flattens with more preventative measures. So while the same number of people may be infected overall, it lessens stress on the healthcare system when it is more spread out.
stronglikedan 7y ago
The current administration in the US has been more proactive than any previous administration during any previous outbreak, despite the deluge of criticisms that were surprisingly absent during said previous outbreaks. The measures that have been taken thus far are more than aggressive enough, based on the information we currently have. We're just a few steps away from shutting everything down completely, which wouldn't be good for anything at this point. It doesn't get much more proactive than that.
- hastes 7y ago
  Be careful here with an opinion like that, it doesn't fare well most of the time unfortunately.
  - stronglikedan 7y ago
    Hah, yes indeed! But I got the karma to spare. ;-)

kortex 7y ago

There were just 2 cases detected at the gym down the street from me. I'm in a medium town of about 40k in upstate NY. Not podunk, but hardly bustling. I'm considering the USA fully seeded at this point.

penagwin 7y ago
IMO the only reason we aren't reporting large numbers of new cases is because of the lack of widespread testing currently being done compared to other countries at this moment (other countries are performing magnitudes higher tests a day). Even if you think you have it, there's still not enough test kits available yet - even if you're swabbed it can be days for a result(Saying this from west michigan).
- chasd00 7y ago
  yes, the case count is about to sky rocket because wide spread testing is coming online but hopefully the fatality count doesn't. I think the authorities need to do a better job communicating that a steep rise in cases detected doesn't mean a steep rise in severe or lethal cases.
  - Frost1x 7y ago
    I think a steep rise in infection counts due to increased testing/detection would be a great thing. More data is always better in these situations and more confirmed infections with confirmed recoveries would probably ease everyone's minds a bit more. To be clear I'm not saying more infections are a good thing, simply that if there are a lot more cases that already exist, knowing they exist and having more accurate data that shows us COVID19 is less harmful than currently perceived/projected would be good for everyone.
  - astronautjones 7y ago
    you could start with getting the president and his sycophants to stop claiming its a partisan hoax and that it's going to go away in a few days
    - gwright 7y ago
      The president didn't say that the virus is a partisan hoax. His actions clearly indicate he doesn't believe it is a hoax. The president did claim that some criticisms about his handling of the situation were a "new hoax" in the same way he has labeled previous unfounded criticism and accusations as hoaxes.
      - gwicks56 7y ago
        ""When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."
        gwright 7y ago
        so? That is not the same thing as saying it is a hoax. Plenty of reasonable criticisms to make but that doesn’t mean the President thinks the virus itself is a hoax. I am arguing for clear communication and facts and people are basically saying screw that let’s just spread rumors because, reasons. How is that helpful?
      - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
- dorchadas 7y ago
  And because people with mild symptoms aren't likely going to the doctor. They can't afford to take off work and go, and if it's simply mild right now, why risk their livelihood? I kinda hope this whole thing is a wake-up call for why our system is so unsustainable.
  - hnick 7y ago
    People on reddit (take that as you will) have been reporting that even if the symptoms are significant and match the profile, tests aren't being run if no travel has taken place recently. These people get turned away. It matches this article on restrictive testing. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavirus-testing-numbers/607714/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/coronavir...
    - blaser-waffle 7y ago
      COVID-19 doesn't mean there aren't regular flu / colds going around, too. Long distance travel and exposure to those who have been (e.g. hugging your wife got off a plane from Spain 2 days ago) is still a top predictor for exposure.
      - Seenso 7y ago
        > COVID-19 doesn't mean there aren't regular flu / colds going around, too. Which is exactly why everyone with those symptoms needs to be tested. One of the most important things we need to do right now is detect the people who got the virus through community transmission. > Long distance travel and exposure to those who have been (e.g. hugging your wife got off a plane from Spain 2 days ago) is still a top predictor for exposure. I'd say that testing those people should be lower priority, since an assumption they're infected is more likely to be accurate, so they can take preventative measures without needing a test.
        penagwin 7y ago
        > Which is exactly why everyone with those symptoms needs to be tested. This. I'm in my twenties so it's very possible for me to get COVID and only experience cold like symptoms (or less!). I'm sorry to everyone, but I won't self-quarantine myself for 14 days just because I have a stuffy nose (it's likely a cold right?). I'm fortunate enough to have the ability to take time off/work remote - but what if it's a cold this week and COVID in two weeks? I can't take a month off. I'm from West Michigan - ATM there's very little testing available, and I'd only be tested if I had recently traveled. But we're past the point where recently traveling is such a big indicator - we're seeing plenty of community transmission for me to believe it's very likely everywhere already, and any lack of cases is because of a lack of testing.
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  > Even if you think you have it, there's still not enough test kits available yet The messaging on this has been pathetic. The other day UW in Seattle announced they had a capacity to test 1,000/day. Not adequate for the nation, but for the PNW, sure.
  - protein_lense 7y ago
    I'm in Seattle. While there may be official "kits" for this, the protocol can be run in any competent lab set up for this type of assay. DNA primers specific for covid-19 would need to be ordered, but this is routine. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-detection-instructions.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-detecti... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-panel-primer-probes.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/rt-pcr-panel-p... ETA: I'm having trouble locating positive control template sequences. I am happy for S. Korea running 100,000+ tests, and embarrassed that the US has maybe run 1000s at this point. I also think that the virus is widely dispersed in the US and the best we can hope for is to keep the case load at a level manageable by our health care system. I'm pretty worried about that though.
  - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
    That is not an adequate number for the PNW. Full stop. You have no idea what you are talking about.
- LeoTinnitus 7y ago
  Also it is entirely dependent upon if they get tested too. In the US, most people are wasting their time.
divbzero 7y ago
Does this mean we need a more robust domestic response to contain coronavirus, instead of or in addition to restricting travel to the US? Akin to how securing a network is more than setting up a firewall at the perimeter.
- irq11 7y ago
  It cannot be contained. That’s what the pandemic declaration means (even though the WHO should have done this weeks ago). At this point, the only rational thing to do is to try to slow the spread. The good news is that this is a very mild virus, and the vast majority of infected people will have minor symptoms. The fatality rate in Korea is currently 0.6%, and becuase of the comprehensive nature of their testing, this should be considered the upper bound on CFR.
  - tunesmith 7y ago
    South Korea has been at 0.8% the last two days, and will continue to climb as their open cases resolve one way or another. Plus, didn't they just have a spike in Seoul?
    - irq11 7y ago
      There was a spike in Seoul. Based on their reaction so far, I have a great deal of confidence in their ability to isolate it and react effectively. Regarding the rise in CFR: it will naturally go up as cases decline, because fatalities stem from a time when the case rate was more rapidly increasing. Korea’s case rate had been declining for several days: https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/1229708001243795458 https://mobile.twitter.com/AdamJKucharski/status/12297080012... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/health/coronavirus-deaths-rates.amp.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/heal...
  - wbl 7y ago
    Until the hospitals are overloaded.
tunesmith 7y ago
We're not really hearing any reports of unexplained deaths that might be covid deaths, and the US is advanced enough to not miss deaths like that, so one thing that might put an upper bound on how behind we are. Then again, there's a delay while symptoms progress.
- smileysteve 7y ago
  Awkward, the CDC announced re attributed deaths today
- ebrenes 7y ago
  This already happened in Seattle [1]. Undetected COVID deaths are not "unexplained" because they look like flu deaths, so they're simply catalogued as being from the flu. "In fact, officials would later discover through testing, the virus had already contributed to the deaths of two people, and it would go on to kill 20 more in the Seattle region over the following days." [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/coronavirus-testing-de...
yellowapple 7y ago
I'm betting we've been seeded since even before Wuhan's quarantine started. My folks and I all got pretty thoroughly sick during a cruise in early January, and they're becoming increasingly convinced it was COVID (especially since my stepmom tested negative for any sort of flu, and this was well before there were reports of COVID outside of China so of course the doctors wouldn't think to test for it even if they happened to have a test kit); it's increasingly difficult for me to be skeptical of that conclusion. Thankfully all of us seemed to get over it without much complication, and it doesn't seem like very many of the people we've since interacted with have come down with it. We might very well have just been lucky, though.
- boulos 7y ago
  I dunno, where was your cruise and were there lots of mainland Chinese people on it? Sadly the symptoms for CoVid-19 are pretty common across a variety of diseases, so “flu-like but not flu” doesn’t necessarily point to this. At that time during the outbreak, it seems likely you would have needed to have people from Wuhan on-board.
  - yellowapple 7y ago
    > where was your cruise Los Angeles → Catalina Islands → Ensenada → Los Angeles > and were there lots of mainland Chinese people on it? I mean, I didn't exactly go around asking people "are you from China?", but based on the number of people who sounded like they were speaking Mandarin I'd tentatively answer "yes". > Sadly the symptoms for CoVid-19 are pretty common across a variety of diseases, so “flu-like but not flu” doesn’t necessarily point to this. Indeed, which is why I'm still at least somewhat skeptical. Still, it's hard to rule it out, especially given the relatively-severe symptoms (not the absolute worst I've felt, but it was pretty bad).
    - hcknwscommenter 7y ago
      Lots of people live in LA who haven't been to China in decades speak Chinese as a first language. The relevant question is whether there were many people on that cruise directly visiting directly from Wuhan/Hubei. LA-catalina-ensenada-LA? Doubt it. Not exactly the type of cruise someone flies thousands of miles for.

organsnyder 7y ago

I'm seeing more indications of people taking things seriously. The first cases were announced in my state (Michigan) today, and already most universities have cancelled in-person learning, various gatherings are being cancelled, etc. It sounds like my church—on the west side of the state (the two confirmed cases are on the east side)—will be altering plans, perhaps even cancelling services as early as this Sunday. The concept of "social distancing" is rapidly gaining steam.

logjammin 7y ago

"it's well beyond containment IMHO" This depends on how you're defining containment. Grounding aircraft may not decrease the current case count, you're right, but it may help not adding to it, or adding as much, or as fast. Because of this, it may still be worth doing. The notion that we're going to abandon containment measures in favor of mitigation, which I've seen in many places (not in your comment though of course), is wrong. We're going to be doing both.

rsj_hn 7y ago

My 2 cents. All reductions in (non-essential) travel are good in a pandemic. That doesn't mean it's sufficient, but it's something positive. I think we would all like to see stronger social distancing rules domestically (in the US), but here the US has a problem as it granted the President broad discretionary powers to suspend international travel but not domestic gatherings, which can't be banned via executive order and even if congress were to pass a law banning such gatherings, there would be first amendment implications as well as federalism issues. It's not easy to pass a law giving the President this type of power and I suspect many in congress already rue passing the laws that gave the president power to suspend international travel. That's one of the prices of living in a federal government with separation of powers and a bill of rights guaranteeing right to assembly rather than in a place like China. For example, the CDC has issued social distancing guidelines but they are only guidelines not laws: Santa Clara county has said "no thank you we'll follow our own guidelines" instead, when the CDC asked to ban meetings of more than 250 but Santa Clara banned meetings of more than 1000, and just refused to change their target to the CDC recommendation. So the US simply lacks the tools that would allow the President to go on the air and announce "I'm declaring that the MLB season needs to be delayed and Disneyland must close." He can try to exert pressure, or rather have the CDC exert pressure, but these types of declarations are not going to happen in America.

KarlKemp 7y ago
OP's point wasn't "this is only going to have very limited effect", to which your reply "better than nothing" would be appropriate. Their point is that there's absolutely no effect of banning travel between two areas with similar prevalence, based on rather simple logic. Take two bags with mostly white and a similar number of red balls in them. Then, twenty times, grab one hand from each bag and empty it in the other. What's the expected change in number of red balls?
- T-hawk 7y ago
  There is an effect, because traveling itself creates chances for exposure. Anyone traveling on an airplane or train in close quarters, or passing through an airport or transit facility, can pick up or pass on an infection. By your last analogy, the red balls would have paint rubbed off them in the exchanges.

6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago

It's not just about containment, which signs point to being past us. If we slow the infection and spread it out over time, we do a couple things. Slowing it gives us time to develop tests and treatment and processes and systems to deal with it. Spreading it out over time means that at any given moment fewer people need medical care. Like, if everyone needs care tomorrow, obviously the system can't handle it, but if a few people need it tomorrow, and a few the day after and so on, spreading it out over time, the system can handle a few at a time. https://www.flattenthecurve.com/ https://www.flattenthecurve.com/

Frost1x 7y ago
Travel bans alone will not flatten out peak infections that are going to overload our existing healthcare infrastructure that already run at near maximum capacity during regular, non-epidemic periods. There is a lot more leadership across government (federal, state, local), private industry, and independent individuals could be doing to proactively reduce transference and even stomp out significant portions of infection is followed through. My point is that our cultural trends surrounding all of these (governments, work, personal action) are almost all running counter to what we need to be doing. We need strong government leadership at all levels pushing support out where possible, be it resources, accurate non-politically influenced/dictated information, etc. Businesses can be more proactively supporting work from home more where feasible, extend sick leave or create sick leave options to reduce pressures to work, provide some security/continued employment for those who need it (especially demographics at high risk). People can avoid attending work when sick, reduce/limit public exposure (be it out shopping, attending an event, etc.), practice frequent hand washing, limit exposing themselves to at risk populations, etc. Economically it's a disaster (as the markets are also anticipating) but it's going to be one way or another. It seems to me that you're better off to take a well calculated hit that can bounce back to a healthy workforce that doesn't strain existing healthcare infrastructure than trying to pretend nothing is going on, minimal fallout will occur, and play-it-by ear.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
  When you say "take a well calculated hit" do you mean "let a ton of people die?"

AlexCoventry 7y ago

In Boston, at least, I'm seeing significant cultural changes. It's gotten much, much quieter, and meetings are all going online.

andrewem 7y ago
I've seen many tech companies in the Boston area announce employees can (or must) work from home, since the governor of Massachusetts declared a state of emergency on Tuesday and encouraged such actions. All governors should do likewise.
eli_gottlieb 7y ago
Admittedly, the Biogen conference was... a bit of a fuck-up. But yes, all our universities are sending their kids home, white-collar workplaces are moving towards WFH policies, etc. I've been WFH since earlier this week myself, and I went shopping for food and soap with my wife Tuesday night.

LeoTinnitus 7y ago

It'd be pretty sweet if it took a pandemic for the government to solidify sick day laws. Too bad money making is somehow above preventing others getting sick. People wouldnt show up to work if they didn't have to worry about their wages. I'm sorry but 3 sick days is garbage and requiring doctors notes is asine when your healthcare plan is shite. Not to mention wasting a day in a hospital. Companies can afford this stuff. It's not often and it's minimal to say the least. But God forbid a small business can't have someone for 80 hours a week at minimum wage!

Shivetya 7y ago

Which democratic(* - I was going to use Western) nations do though? Seriously the freedom enjoyed by those in these nations and the significant time any global conflict or pandemic have pretty much restricted the ability of leadership in those countries from taking action that would have any true effect short of trying to implement martial law, which in most countries would be met with protests and in some with courts being tied up. Now I will not attempt to speak for Europe but the US government could certainly push short public advisories and messages to adults and children through broadcast TV and even get the cooperation of streaming services as well. Short thirty to ninety second spots that give helpful non panic information. The US President is hamstrung by both political disagreement and the law. There were articles he is loathe to declare any national emergency declaration until approached by the governors of many of the states. If he did without states approaching him and asking you can damn well guarantee there were would be Democrats out there claiming he was trying to be a Dictator and comparing him to Putin. The same article concerning the declaration also reveals all the behind the scenes work going on with Congress to get funds in place before any message is put forth so that the government as a whole looks to be cooperating as well as acting appropriately.

collyw 7y ago

As someone posted on FB, the infection rate spikes a lot more with no measures, and flattens with more preventative measures. So while the same number of people may be infected overall, it lessens stress on the healthcare system when it is more spread out.

stronglikedan 7y ago

The current administration in the US has been more proactive than any previous administration during any previous outbreak, despite the deluge of criticisms that were surprisingly absent during said previous outbreaks. The measures that have been taken thus far are more than aggressive enough, based on the information we currently have. We're just a few steps away from shutting everything down completely, which wouldn't be good for anything at this point. It doesn't get much more proactive than that.

hastes 7y ago
Be careful here with an opinion like that, it doesn't fare well most of the time unfortunately.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  Hah, yes indeed! But I got the karma to spare. ;-)