12 ms·

The Virus Can Be Stopped, but Only with Harsh Steps, Experts Say

90 points by sciurus 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
dzdt 7y ago
I do not believe the US nor any of its states have made it a goal to stop the virus. Please give me links if this is wrong. Everything I have seen from government sources talks about "flatten the curve" or "slow the spread" or similar. The end result of any flatten the curve effort is 40-80% of the population is infected until the combination of herd immunity and social distancing stops the spread. Please can anyone link to a government source saying that stopping the virus is a goal? I would love to be wrong.
- sjg007 7y ago
  Just wait until the virus mutates. Then things will really be fun.
  - drclau 7y ago
    I don’t know why you were downvoted. Maybe because of the second sentence? Mutation is a very real problem. After all flu goes through it all the time. That is the main reason why we get flu regularly. Second reason is that the immunity may be temporary.
    - umanwizard 7y ago
      Flu is not a Coronavirus.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      Influenza is not a coronavirus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomyxoviridae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomyxoviridae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
      - drclau 7y ago
        You are right, I edited it out. The mutation remains a potential issue though.
    - deng 7y ago
      So how do you fight mutation? By avoiding further spread of the virus. So really, this "danger of mutation" talk does not add anything to the discussion. In fact, it could equally well happen that the virus mutates to something less lethal.
      - drclau 7y ago
        I disagree that the danger of mutation does not add anything to the conversation. If it is real, then it just shows how important it is to act now swiftly and to not rely on developing herd immunity. And you are right, mutations can go both ways.
    - CaptArmchair 7y ago
      What we understand under "mutation" consists of 2 basic facts: * During replication of cells, DNA changes happen by accident and random chance. This yields random new traits. * A random trait might be useful to survival and reproduction, or it might be a hindrance. Maybe a trait that was once beneficial becomes a hindrance when the environment in which an organism lives shifts (i.e. higher Ph values of a pond of water will cause a shift in which bacteria will thrive, and which won't) Regardless of what you do, you can't stop mutation as long as cells are living and replicating. You don't control the appearance of traits directly as replication is basically a roll of the dice. (Technically, you can through genetic engineering, but we're talking about what happens outside the lab). Finally, viruses are arguably life. They are envelopes with genetic material. They aren't a hive mind following a conscious strategy. Their emergent behavior is dictated by the traits they happen to have, and a gazillion environmental factors. Nothing else. So, when we say "The virus is spreading", we are really saying "More people are infected and infecting others as well." a virus doesn't willfully jump between hosts. Lethality isn't a good trait either. The goal of a virus is to spread genetic material, killing its host is an inadvertent second order effect of replication. Viruses that are inadvertently too lethal will run out of hosts rather quickly. This SARS-Cov2 is a perfect storm because (a) of the properties of the virus itself - very contagious in 1-1 contact, low lethality, it's entirely new - and (b) because of environmental circumstances: 7.75 billion available hosts and globalisation / massive mobility. While we don't control mutation, the best case scenario is that quarantines, lockdown and eventual treatments will subdue that people keep spreading this strain. But replication might yield other traits and less harmful cousins of this virus might spread instead. (edit: lest we forget, homo sapiens sapiens is the net result of many mutations over the course of millions of years. So, beware of inadvertent value attribution!)
      - drclau 7y ago
        As much as I appreciate the lengthy explanation, my concern was strictly related to the possibility that immunity gained by getting over the infection once, may be cancelled if/when the virus mutates (enough).
      - brmgb 7y ago
        > The goal of a virus is to spread genetic material, killing its host is an inadvertent second order effect of replication. As an aside, I find it very amusing that you used this sentence after your paragraphes on emergent behavior and randomness. Finalism and anthropomorphism are really hard to avoid even when you clearly know virus have no goal.
  - marcosdumay 7y ago
    Looks like there are already 2 strains of it. Just keep in mind that less lethal (and disabling) strains are inherently better fit and will thus spread faster than more lethal ones. (But yes, it can also contaminate again everybody that has had the virus, most likely with much milder simptoms.) Virus mutation is not cause for despair.
- mrdrozdov 7y ago
  Look up the press conference by Cuomo.
  - leetrout 7y ago
    “The timeline, nobody can tell you, it depends on how we handle it,” Mr. Cuomo said. “But 40 percent, up to 80 percent of the population will wind up getting this virus. All we’re trying to do is slow the spread, but it will spread.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/nyregion/Coronavirus-new-York-epicenter.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/nyregion/Coronavirus-new-...
  - amalter 7y ago
    I’ve watched every one of Cuomo’s press conferences. He message is always clear - that we are trying to not overwhelm the health system. He doesn’t say “flatten the curve” because he believes words matter and tries to communicate to avoid panic (Hence his refusal to call “Stay Indoors” as “Shelter in Place”) But the medical side of the state government - along with their action - has been consistently flatten the curve. No one but the highly delusional believes we can roll back community spread.
    - magic_beans 7y ago
      I've been blown away by Cuomo's steady hand and calm reassurance in this time. While De Blasio has flip-flopped from apathy to utter panic, Cuomo has remained fairly consistent. I appreciate his insistence on preventing panic by using specific language.
    - scruple 7y ago
      > call “Stay Indoors” as “Shelter in Place” This piece of this story is utterly fascinating to me right now. It's like half the population has a completely different interpretation of the phrase shelter-in-place. I feel like it's entirely too vague and has led to a situation where, in my neck of the woods in Orange county, CA, people are using the ambiguous language to justify going about their daily lives. Where, to me, the order is very clear: stay in or near your home. The beach isn't in or near my home. It isn't in or near the majority of our homes. And neither is the dog park, or the county or state parks, or the national forest near us, etc.. And, yet, on social media, it's very easy to find people complaining about how surprised they were when they went to the beach, or where ever, and it was totally packed with people. It's making me question my sanity that we can have such wildly different interpretations of this situation.
- loopz 7y ago
  There are two sides of this coin, that are sort of mutually exclusive: 1) On one hand, it's sort of a "competition" to gain "herd immunity". Of course if this is achievable, every country would want this, but not while disrupting civil society. So the measures makes sense for controllable scenarios, if introduction is managable. 2) COVID-19 is a completely new ("Novela") virus. We don't know long-term health impacts or long-term branches of mutation. Introduction to the masses is not without risks and costs. So if possible, stopping the virus would be preferable. There are uncountable potential viruses that are just waiting to be introduced as well, so an "open policy" doesn't necessarily make any sense. This shows how interconnected humans are today, that the "Me Only"-mantra is unsustainable, and that Capitalism crumbles in the face of real existential, uncertain adversity. This crisis is really minor. UPDATE: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_virus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_virus - https://www.newscientist.com/term/covid-19/ https://www.newscientist.com/term/covid-19/ "The cause of the disease was soon confirmed as a new kind of coronavirus, and the infection has spread to a number of countries around the world." There's no pre-existing immunity. All ages may require ICU and people without pre-existing conditions may get damages to their lungs. In addition to handling known unknowns, states must also manage unknown unknowns.
  - kabapadum 7y ago
    COVID-19 is a completely new (Novela) virus. That's not true. Coronaviruses did exist, and they are not new. //"Me Only"-mantra is unsustainable.// Exactly opposite, we will see in the near future that the government which one destroyed their economy will eat shit in next years.
    - rhn_mk1 7y ago
      Coronaviruses did exist, but not this one.
    - DennisP 7y ago
      > The overall molecular structure of this virus is distinct from the known coronaviruses and instead most closely resembles viruses found in bats and pangolins that had been little studied and never known to cause humans any harm. https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-la...
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
  There's more to the world than the US. Quite a few Asian states are aiming for zero, and so are some subnational entities like Tasmania in Australia. We may well end up in a world where corona-free islands float in a sea of infection: https://gyrovague.com/2020/03/20/islands-in-the-sea-a-simple-model-of-a-world-with-endemic-coronavirus/ https://gyrovague.com/2020/03/20/islands-in-the-sea-a-simple...
tines 7y ago
In other words, it won't be stopped.
- mythrwy 7y ago
  Until it runs it's course or we have a vaccine. But we do have some measure of control on the timing of this.
oefrha 7y ago
If there’s anything the current debacles in Europe and the U.S. has taught us, it’s that selfish and/or irrational jerks abound, and asking nicely doesn’t work at all.
- mrdrozdov 7y ago
  I don’t believe most people are jerks. They are just in disbelief that such a dire situation is possible. Yes, it’s important to ask and with a high level of seriousness. If the internet has taught me anything, it’s that people need to read something 8 or more times before fully internalizing it.
  - nkrisc 7y ago
    It's the same reason people climb over fences and past signs at the Grand Canyon for a photo and end up falling: they've never experienced mortal danger and and have been so coddled by modern society that they don't even know what it looks like.
  - oefrha 7y ago
    I didn’t say most people, I said “abound”. Even 5% of people ignoring “asking nicely” could deal critical damage containment efforts, and I suspect the number is more than 5%.
    - smichel17 7y ago
      The Imperial College report[1] found suppression to be effective even with much less compliance. Here are the different measures they modeled and the assumed compliance, taken from the table on page 6 of the report and edited out the info about assumed impact on transmission, for brevity. > Case isolation in the home — Assume 70% compliance — Symptomatic cases stay at home for 7 days. Household contacts remain unchanged. > Voluntary home quarantine — Assume 50% compliance — Following identification of a symptomaticcase in the household, all household members remain at home for 14 days. > Social distancing of those over 70 years of age — Assume 75% compliance > Social distancing of entire population — Assume 75% reduced contact outside household, school or workplace (the wording here is different, does not mention "compliance") > Closure of schools and universities — 100% of schools, 75% of universities I would recommend reading the report. Unlike certain summaries, the report itself is very clear about all the assumptions baked in, and so you won't get a false sense of "This is 100% how it will be". (That said, I'm not questioning their numbers since I think they're likely more accurate than any I could come up with myself). [1]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...
corporateslave5 7y ago
China lying to the United States is an act of war
danmaz74 7y ago
I'm an Italian living in the UK, so I've been following both the stats and the debate in Italy (and elsewhere) very closely. My conclusion is that whoever thinks that this problem can be not stopped, but contained to a manageable level without very strict steps is in for a bad surprise. And, given the exponential nature of initial growth, the earlier these steps are adopted, the less harsh they need to be.
- throwaway4787 7y ago
  If that's any reassurance to you they are observing an inflection in Italy, potentially a sign that the lockdowns have their desired effects. We just need to hold on for a couple weeks before it curves back as in China. And that's discounting the ongoing trials for treatments that could solve this quicker than expected.
  - danmaz74 7y ago
    That's my point - it took pretty harsh measures before we started getting any signs of the spread slowing down (and we'll need a few more days to verify that those signs are actually reliable).
- tim333 7y ago
  One hopeful thing from Italy is Vo Euganeo where they stopped it completely by testing everyone and separating those who had it. Nothing harsh, just a lot of testing https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-vo-euganeo-blanket-testing-veneto-luca-zaia-a9411201.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-... Now obviously there are scaling issues going from 3300 people to millions but I'm not sure it's impossible. S Korea also mostly controlled things by testing.
  - turbojerry 7y ago
    Training the postal service to be able to take nasal swabs could scale this though you would need to robocall all those on the postal route what time to present themselves at the edge of their property. Starting with geographic locations where there have been clusters, then individual cases, then the general population. Also when an antibody test is available have them delivered by the postal service with instructions and URL for a video on how to administer it.
dis-sys 7y ago
There is no way to stop the virus in the US - 10 million undocumented immigrants in the US can not afford to sit at home and watch TV for 3 months, they can't help you to do your fancy contact tracing to expose their families and friends who are also undocumented. They can't afford to be tested or treated as none of them will be on the government hands out list. How could you stop the coronavirus when 10 million REAL people are totally ignored from all these measures? That is the size of the Wuhan population.
- Proziam 7y ago
  I see you're being downvoted, but I don't sense any malice in your post. You're also not incorrect in your assessment, but your scope is a bit limited. There are far more than just undocumented immigrants who can't afford to stay home and will have to do whatever they can do to keep life going for themselves. This is true everywhere, not just the US. The last to comply won't be holding out due to malice or ignorance, but necessity.
  - aquaticsunset 7y ago
    But the OP is misguided and targeting a beaten down population. What difference does it make if you’re making $7.25/hr as a natural born citizen or an undocumented immigrant? Either way this thing is hurting you hard, and people are going to act like people. It’s really, really misinformed to think that undocumented immigrants are the only ones suffering, and that “good natural born Americans” can all afford to sit inside for a few weeks.
    - melling 7y ago
      the difference? Undocumented people are less likely to seek medical care if they become ill. At least in our political climate. During a pandemic that’s dangerous for everyone. The general population and for them and their families
    - Proziam 7y ago
      People are quick to assume the intent of another. The quickest way to make the point that a non-compliant, but non-malicious population exists is to give an example. OP gave one, but now people seem to assume that because of the (heavily politicized) example given that they've "targeted" a group. Overreactive responses make it difficult to have a serious discussion about all sorts of issues. OP also hasn't said anything even remotely akin to: > undocumented immigrants are the only ones suffering, and that “good natural-born Americans” can all afford to sit inside for a few weeks. It seems intellectually dishonest to make such lofty assumptions based on a post the length of a tweet or two. Imagine if instead of assuming ill-intent we just said 'hey he's right there are people that can't afford to comply...we should consider that in our policy to the benefit of everyone involved...' The world would be a better place.
MiguelVieira 7y ago
It feels like Europe and the US only have a few options: * Let the virus run its course and accept a huge death count. * Continue the lockdowns for months, strangling the economy. * Do what's in this article and allow life and the economy to return to normal. * Hope for a miracle. Am I missing something?
- dbbk 7y ago
  I believe the UK just ordered millions of antibody tests, that will tell you if you've previously had the virus. If we can confirm that people who previously had it are immune, we should be able to selectively let those back into normal society a lot faster. That's my understanding, I may be wrong.
  - Narty 7y ago
    Does the antibody test even exist yet? I was under the impression it doesn't.
    - DennisP 7y ago
      The FDA just approved one, and the company says it will ramp up production fast, but as far as I know it's not available in quantity yet. https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/20-20-bioresponse-to-launch-rapid-coronavirus-test-kits-in-u-s-following-green-light-from-fda/ https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/20-20-bioresponse-... The FDA has given states the authority to approve antibody tests on their own. https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/03/16/fda-pandemic-response-states-can-now-approve-covid-19-diagnostics-serology-testing/ https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/03/16/fda-pandemic-respons...
    - dbbk 7y ago
      They're due to arrive in weeks so I assume they do: https://www.cityam.com/millions-of-coronavirus-antibody-tests-expected-to-arrive-in-weeks/ https://www.cityam.com/millions-of-coronavirus-antibody-test...
      - 7y ago
austincheney 7y ago
Stopping the virus takes a negative growth rate, such that the rate of recovery exceeds the number of new cases. Like the article said some East Asian countries are proof it can be done, but it requires great deliberate inconvenience.
jtdev 7y ago
I find it incredibly hard to believe that China has stopped community spread within the country - I hope I’m wrong, but I think we’re getting PRC propaganda when we hear about “all new cases we’re imported”.
- actuator 7y ago
  They might have contained it better as they went pretty intense on lockdown. There were lots of videos on internet from their lockdown on which people were laughing at China being an authoritarian state. The videos displayed homes being taped from outside if someone in that home was suspected of having it, people being picked from streets etc. Being an authoritarian state really helps in these scenarios as you can suppress liberties easily without people rising up in arms about it. Having said this though, being an authoritarian state with constant efforts to have a good image, they might have underreported the numbers of actual cases.
- dntbnmpls 7y ago
  That's fair, but aren't all the comments talking about PRC propaganda propaganda itself? > I hope I’m wrong Do you really? It seems to me that many who share your sentiments actually want things to get worse both in china and around the world. That's just the feeling I get reading the comments. Also, it would be interesting if there was a study done on the "PRC propaganda" crowd and the "CCP propaganda" crowd - from a linguistic and propaganda standpoint.
- blisterpeanuts 7y ago
  Maybe they stopped the spread in Hubei, but suppose just one infected person travels to another heavily populated province. What is the contingency plan for this obviously dangerous scenario?
  - baybal2 7y ago
    Isolate, test, quarantine, repeat
- seqastian 7y ago
  Have you seen their lockdown? their lockdown laughs at Europes lockdown.
jpxw 7y ago
People in the UK aren’t taking the advice of the government. Many think a full lockdown is coming, possibly today.
ShorsHammer 7y ago
South Korea has virtually no new active cases daily, only 100 deaths after 4 months of exposure and hasn't brought in any laws even close the authoritarian stuff that is going on elsewhere across the planet in the name of covid-19/sars-cov-2 Buyer beware. Undoing laws and measures is a lot harder than enacting them in a "crisis". "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
- goblin89 7y ago
  In Seoul, multiple emergency alerts asking people to keep 2 meter distance and to cancel trips and meetings were pushed to mobile phones for the first time yesterday morning. Pedestrian streets in popular districts are still fairly bustling tonight, even if less crowded given the season.
  - ShorsHammer 7y ago
    Pushing mobile alerts is what any country with half a clue should be doing. I get regular ones telling me to wash my hands and avoid contact, it's comforting to see them everyfew days.
    - goblin89 7y ago
      In South Korea they were a bit overused I think. In addition to hand washing reminders, each phone is getting up to 2 loud but not-really-quite-actionable alerts per day, which report on 2–3 new cases discovered in nearby city districts. (But then the government uses the same alerts to notify about strong winds and elevated pollution levels, so it’s more or less a given.) The ones from yesterday were the first to ask people to limit their mobility.
      - lostmsu 7y ago
        I don't know. That actually sounds like a good option to trace/warn contacts.
- 7y ago
cracker_jacks 7y ago
Which experts are proposing the way forward is actually a total lockdown? This article is distorting what experts are actually saying. This virus will not go away, it needs to be managed. Please consider the following articles of what experts are ACTUALLY saying: https://medium.com/@AmeshAA/covid19-a-path-forward-868d5e8dc53 https://medium.com/@AmeshAA/covid19-a-path-forward-868d5e8dc... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/coronavirus-us-must-confront-how-were-going-to-live-with-it-expert-says.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/coronavirus-us-must-confront...
- lower 7y ago
  > Which experts are proposing the way forward is actually a total lockdown? The Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, for example: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... In Germany, the Society for Epidemiology has a similar analysis with similar conclusions: https://www.dgepi.de/assets/Stellungnahmen/Stellungnahme2020Corona_DGEpi-21032020.pdf https://www.dgepi.de/assets/Stellungnahmen/Stellungnahme2020...
  - Mvandenbergh 7y ago
    It is important to understand the context and timing of the Imperial paper. It was produced as part of UK government decision making in the days leading up to the 12th of March in order to make a binary decision between to immediate alternatives: Mitigate and flatten the curve or suppress and crush the curve. It was well understood by the authors that a permanent lockdown was not possible and that there would need to be a step 2. They did some modelling of possible step 2 (proposing alternating lockdowns with relaxations for example) but did not go into detail on other options such as enhanced contact tracing, widespread testing, or other options.
    - lower 7y ago
      Right, both papers are mainly what should be done right now. They both conclude that a hard lockdown is the only realistic option that won't overload the health system in the next few months. It's not so clear what to do afterwards.
drinchev 7y ago
Back in time ( end of January ) when I heard the news about Wuhan and what happened there I was a bit worried, but always positive. When the virus spread in Italy ( I live in Berlin ) I was daily asking "Why don't they stop people from / to Italy?", "Why don't they go and help Italy?", "Where is a plan for handling the situation?", "Why nobody knows >how< to handle the situation, don't they see how China managed?" All in all the answers were : "They don't want to kill the economy, that's why no restrictions.", "We are democracy, that's why no restrictions." Look at the situation now. Killed economy, unstoppable virus and nobody knows for how long. They can't contain it anymore. What we do is flattening the curve, not eliminating the thread. Come on. These politicians, IMO should be investigated for committing crime agains humanity. I can't believe that in 2020 there is no such thing as emergency procedure / plan in case of ... well ... emergency. I tend to think that all government decision makers make a "daily" for what should happen today and then wait for tomorrow, with no further planning. That's just irresponsible.
- ensiferum 7y ago
  Proactively shutting things down and restricting freedoms are politically impossible to implement. There's no incentive for any single politician to do anything like this because if it actually worked there'd be no visibility to the general public and thus nobody would understand what they actually did. It's like the proverbial secret goverment agency that stops a bomb from going off and nobody knows what they did. In politics this mean that the general public would only see the downsides of such measures and not the gains. This would not get a single politician re-elected. Therefore in terms of politics it's much better and safer to be reactive only rather than proactive. Later speech can include statements "we could not have possibly known", "there was no indication that...", "it was a complete surprise...", "we acted as quickly as possbile..."
  - lb0 7y ago
    Not true, because there will be enough "test groups" due to this thinking already (and I believe now even the last one realized that this will now go everyhwere). China locked down around ~400 known infections, in terms of spread we will soon learn what it means to have only done similar but much less strict lockdown at 1000, 4000, 8000 infections, actually it is all a number game, and the numbers were sharp enough and visible for everyone during February already.. we will pay a lot four our stupidity and "politically impossible", we said this since start of the year about Chinas measures, but what was politically impossible will now take longer and almost reach same strictness levels here..
baybal2 7y ago
Mass testing, and quarantine is very simple. Tell me why what some countries in Africa managed to do to reverse trends in their countries early, cannot be done in the West. Instead, the West went to listen to bizarre "management" theories, over something clear, and obvious.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
  Did you mean Asia? The jury is still very much out on Africa, but it's not looking great at the moment: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236760-we-dont-know-why-so-few-covid-19-cases-have-been-reported-in-africa/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236760-we-dont-know-wh...
- bitcharmer 7y ago
  > some countries in Africa managed to do to reverse trends in their countries early Source? AFAIK the low number of reported cases is a direct consequence of not running tests.
m23khan 7y ago
There is one harsh reality I see in all this: World screwed itself by being over reliant on China. At least Canada did. Big time. Big percentage of things here in Canada is 'Made in China' - yup, you name it -- Masks, gloves, and items such as syringes, etc. heck even plastic cutlery and tooth brushes are made in China. Now that Chinese economy got shutdown and people in Canada went into panic mode, we have severely decimated supply of essential items such as hand sanitizers, masks, gloves, etc even for the health workers! I know this pandemic nor future pandemic/wars would change anything because humans are just collateral (and sometimes even treated as adversary) for the mega corporations, but my wish is each Country (or atleast Geographical region) learn to become self sufficient when it comes to making items such as Clothing, medical and sanitary supplies, etc. This may mean that in places like the West where Corporations have to hire local workers at higher cost to produce the same clothing items being produced by $1/hr workers in Bangladesh, but so be it -- in times of emergency, you need local production of items to save you. No need to put so much reliance on countries like China (manufacturing, assembly, electronics, clothing, plastics), Germany (Manufacturing, machinery), South Korea (Electronics, appliances), India (textile, assembly), Mexico (assembly) and Bangladesh (textile).
- Daishiman 7y ago
  That's really not an issue at all. Asian countries that managed this crisis correctly took steps to prepare, which mostly means having quick access to testing, and stockpiling materials. Any Western government had in its power the ability to invoke urgent measure to redirect production for face masks and equipment. That equipment could have been bought beforehand if the governments had listened to the advice of its own experts.
neonate 7y ago
Some experts say. From the article: "Americans must be persuaded to stay home, they said, and a system put in place to isolate the infected and care for them outside the home. Travel restrictions should be extended, they said; productions of masks and ventilators must be accelerated, and testing problems must be resolved. But tactics like forced isolation, school closings and pervasive GPS tracking of patients brought more divided reactions."
vanniv 7y ago
Amazing how the NYT always proposes more authoritarianism as the solution to every problem.
nikolay 7y ago
I hear many keep saying "stay positive"! Wishful thinking and optimism typically lead to shorter lifespans and the reasoning is optimists underestimate threats, ignore symptoms, don't prepare to handle threats. Not to panic, but be more on the pessimistic side, save lives - including your own! We have an excellent saying here in America, which the young do not follow (especially in Flordia!) these days: "Better safe than sorry!"

90 points by sciurus 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

dzdt 7y ago

I do not believe the US nor any of its states have made it a goal to stop the virus. Please give me links if this is wrong. Everything I have seen from government sources talks about "flatten the curve" or "slow the spread" or similar. The end result of any flatten the curve effort is 40-80% of the population is infected until the combination of herd immunity and social distancing stops the spread. Please can anyone link to a government source saying that stopping the virus is a goal? I would love to be wrong.

sjg007 7y ago
Just wait until the virus mutates. Then things will really be fun.
- drclau 7y ago
  I don’t know why you were downvoted. Maybe because of the second sentence? Mutation is a very real problem. After all flu goes through it all the time. That is the main reason why we get flu regularly. Second reason is that the immunity may be temporary.
  - umanwizard 7y ago
    Flu is not a Coronavirus.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    Influenza is not a coronavirus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomyxoviridae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthomyxoviridae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
    - drclau 7y ago
      You are right, I edited it out. The mutation remains a potential issue though.
  - deng 7y ago
    So how do you fight mutation? By avoiding further spread of the virus. So really, this "danger of mutation" talk does not add anything to the discussion. In fact, it could equally well happen that the virus mutates to something less lethal.
    - drclau 7y ago
      I disagree that the danger of mutation does not add anything to the conversation. If it is real, then it just shows how important it is to act now swiftly and to not rely on developing herd immunity. And you are right, mutations can go both ways.
  - CaptArmchair 7y ago
    What we understand under "mutation" consists of 2 basic facts: * During replication of cells, DNA changes happen by accident and random chance. This yields random new traits. * A random trait might be useful to survival and reproduction, or it might be a hindrance. Maybe a trait that was once beneficial becomes a hindrance when the environment in which an organism lives shifts (i.e. higher Ph values of a pond of water will cause a shift in which bacteria will thrive, and which won't) Regardless of what you do, you can't stop mutation as long as cells are living and replicating. You don't control the appearance of traits directly as replication is basically a roll of the dice. (Technically, you can through genetic engineering, but we're talking about what happens outside the lab). Finally, viruses are arguably life. They are envelopes with genetic material. They aren't a hive mind following a conscious strategy. Their emergent behavior is dictated by the traits they happen to have, and a gazillion environmental factors. Nothing else. So, when we say "The virus is spreading", we are really saying "More people are infected and infecting others as well." a virus doesn't willfully jump between hosts. Lethality isn't a good trait either. The goal of a virus is to spread genetic material, killing its host is an inadvertent second order effect of replication. Viruses that are inadvertently too lethal will run out of hosts rather quickly. This SARS-Cov2 is a perfect storm because (a) of the properties of the virus itself - very contagious in 1-1 contact, low lethality, it's entirely new - and (b) because of environmental circumstances: 7.75 billion available hosts and globalisation / massive mobility. While we don't control mutation, the best case scenario is that quarantines, lockdown and eventual treatments will subdue that people keep spreading this strain. But replication might yield other traits and less harmful cousins of this virus might spread instead. (edit: lest we forget, homo sapiens sapiens is the net result of many mutations over the course of millions of years. So, beware of inadvertent value attribution!)
    - drclau 7y ago
      As much as I appreciate the lengthy explanation, my concern was strictly related to the possibility that immunity gained by getting over the infection once, may be cancelled if/when the virus mutates (enough).
    - brmgb 7y ago
      > The goal of a virus is to spread genetic material, killing its host is an inadvertent second order effect of replication. As an aside, I find it very amusing that you used this sentence after your paragraphes on emergent behavior and randomness. Finalism and anthropomorphism are really hard to avoid even when you clearly know virus have no goal.
- marcosdumay 7y ago
  Looks like there are already 2 strains of it. Just keep in mind that less lethal (and disabling) strains are inherently better fit and will thus spread faster than more lethal ones. (But yes, it can also contaminate again everybody that has had the virus, most likely with much milder simptoms.) Virus mutation is not cause for despair.
mrdrozdov 7y ago
Look up the press conference by Cuomo.
- leetrout 7y ago
  “The timeline, nobody can tell you, it depends on how we handle it,” Mr. Cuomo said. “But 40 percent, up to 80 percent of the population will wind up getting this virus. All we’re trying to do is slow the spread, but it will spread.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/nyregion/Coronavirus-new-York-epicenter.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/nyregion/Coronavirus-new-...
- amalter 7y ago
  I’ve watched every one of Cuomo’s press conferences. He message is always clear - that we are trying to not overwhelm the health system. He doesn’t say “flatten the curve” because he believes words matter and tries to communicate to avoid panic (Hence his refusal to call “Stay Indoors” as “Shelter in Place”) But the medical side of the state government - along with their action - has been consistently flatten the curve. No one but the highly delusional believes we can roll back community spread.
  - magic_beans 7y ago
    I've been blown away by Cuomo's steady hand and calm reassurance in this time. While De Blasio has flip-flopped from apathy to utter panic, Cuomo has remained fairly consistent. I appreciate his insistence on preventing panic by using specific language.
  - scruple 7y ago
    > call “Stay Indoors” as “Shelter in Place” This piece of this story is utterly fascinating to me right now. It's like half the population has a completely different interpretation of the phrase shelter-in-place. I feel like it's entirely too vague and has led to a situation where, in my neck of the woods in Orange county, CA, people are using the ambiguous language to justify going about their daily lives. Where, to me, the order is very clear: stay in or near your home. The beach isn't in or near my home. It isn't in or near the majority of our homes. And neither is the dog park, or the county or state parks, or the national forest near us, etc.. And, yet, on social media, it's very easy to find people complaining about how surprised they were when they went to the beach, or where ever, and it was totally packed with people. It's making me question my sanity that we can have such wildly different interpretations of this situation.
loopz 7y ago
There are two sides of this coin, that are sort of mutually exclusive: 1) On one hand, it's sort of a "competition" to gain "herd immunity". Of course if this is achievable, every country would want this, but not while disrupting civil society. So the measures makes sense for controllable scenarios, if introduction is managable. 2) COVID-19 is a completely new ("Novela") virus. We don't know long-term health impacts or long-term branches of mutation. Introduction to the masses is not without risks and costs. So if possible, stopping the virus would be preferable. There are uncountable potential viruses that are just waiting to be introduced as well, so an "open policy" doesn't necessarily make any sense. This shows how interconnected humans are today, that the "Me Only"-mantra is unsustainable, and that Capitalism crumbles in the face of real existential, uncertain adversity. This crisis is really minor. UPDATE: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_virus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_virus - https://www.newscientist.com/term/covid-19/ https://www.newscientist.com/term/covid-19/ "The cause of the disease was soon confirmed as a new kind of coronavirus, and the infection has spread to a number of countries around the world." There's no pre-existing immunity. All ages may require ICU and people without pre-existing conditions may get damages to their lungs. In addition to handling known unknowns, states must also manage unknown unknowns.
- kabapadum 7y ago
  COVID-19 is a completely new (Novela) virus. That's not true. Coronaviruses did exist, and they are not new. //"Me Only"-mantra is unsustainable.// Exactly opposite, we will see in the near future that the government which one destroyed their economy will eat shit in next years.
  - rhn_mk1 7y ago
    Coronaviruses did exist, but not this one.
  - DennisP 7y ago
    > The overall molecular structure of this virus is distinct from the known coronaviruses and instead most closely resembles viruses found in bats and pangolins that had been little studied and never known to cause humans any harm. https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-la...
9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
There's more to the world than the US. Quite a few Asian states are aiming for zero, and so are some subnational entities like Tasmania in Australia. We may well end up in a world where corona-free islands float in a sea of infection: https://gyrovague.com/2020/03/20/islands-in-the-sea-a-simple-model-of-a-world-with-endemic-coronavirus/ https://gyrovague.com/2020/03/20/islands-in-the-sea-a-simple...

tines 7y ago

In other words, it won't be stopped.

mythrwy 7y ago
Until it runs it's course or we have a vaccine. But we do have some measure of control on the timing of this.

oefrha 7y ago

If there’s anything the current debacles in Europe and the U.S. has taught us, it’s that selfish and/or irrational jerks abound, and asking nicely doesn’t work at all.

mrdrozdov 7y ago
I don’t believe most people are jerks. They are just in disbelief that such a dire situation is possible. Yes, it’s important to ask and with a high level of seriousness. If the internet has taught me anything, it’s that people need to read something 8 or more times before fully internalizing it.
- nkrisc 7y ago
  It's the same reason people climb over fences and past signs at the Grand Canyon for a photo and end up falling: they've never experienced mortal danger and and have been so coddled by modern society that they don't even know what it looks like.
- oefrha 7y ago
  I didn’t say most people, I said “abound”. Even 5% of people ignoring “asking nicely” could deal critical damage containment efforts, and I suspect the number is more than 5%.
  - smichel17 7y ago
    The Imperial College report[1] found suppression to be effective even with much less compliance. Here are the different measures they modeled and the assumed compliance, taken from the table on page 6 of the report and edited out the info about assumed impact on transmission, for brevity. > Case isolation in the home — Assume 70% compliance — Symptomatic cases stay at home for 7 days. Household contacts remain unchanged. > Voluntary home quarantine — Assume 50% compliance — Following identification of a symptomaticcase in the household, all household members remain at home for 14 days. > Social distancing of those over 70 years of age — Assume 75% compliance > Social distancing of entire population — Assume 75% reduced contact outside household, school or workplace (the wording here is different, does not mention "compliance") > Closure of schools and universities — 100% of schools, 75% of universities I would recommend reading the report. Unlike certain summaries, the report itself is very clear about all the assumptions baked in, and so you won't get a false sense of "This is 100% how it will be". (That said, I'm not questioning their numbers since I think they're likely more accurate than any I could come up with myself). [1]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...

corporateslave5 7y ago

China lying to the United States is an act of war

danmaz74 7y ago

I'm an Italian living in the UK, so I've been following both the stats and the debate in Italy (and elsewhere) very closely. My conclusion is that whoever thinks that this problem can be not stopped, but contained to a manageable level without very strict steps is in for a bad surprise. And, given the exponential nature of initial growth, the earlier these steps are adopted, the less harsh they need to be.

throwaway4787 7y ago
If that's any reassurance to you they are observing an inflection in Italy, potentially a sign that the lockdowns have their desired effects. We just need to hold on for a couple weeks before it curves back as in China. And that's discounting the ongoing trials for treatments that could solve this quicker than expected.
- danmaz74 7y ago
  That's my point - it took pretty harsh measures before we started getting any signs of the spread slowing down (and we'll need a few more days to verify that those signs are actually reliable).
tim333 7y ago
One hopeful thing from Italy is Vo Euganeo where they stopped it completely by testing everyone and separating those who had it. Nothing harsh, just a lot of testing https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-vo-euganeo-blanket-testing-veneto-luca-zaia-a9411201.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-... Now obviously there are scaling issues going from 3300 people to millions but I'm not sure it's impossible. S Korea also mostly controlled things by testing.
- turbojerry 7y ago
  Training the postal service to be able to take nasal swabs could scale this though you would need to robocall all those on the postal route what time to present themselves at the edge of their property. Starting with geographic locations where there have been clusters, then individual cases, then the general population. Also when an antibody test is available have them delivered by the postal service with instructions and URL for a video on how to administer it.

dis-sys 7y ago

There is no way to stop the virus in the US - 10 million undocumented immigrants in the US can not afford to sit at home and watch TV for 3 months, they can't help you to do your fancy contact tracing to expose their families and friends who are also undocumented. They can't afford to be tested or treated as none of them will be on the government hands out list. How could you stop the coronavirus when 10 million REAL people are totally ignored from all these measures? That is the size of the Wuhan population.

Proziam 7y ago
I see you're being downvoted, but I don't sense any malice in your post. You're also not incorrect in your assessment, but your scope is a bit limited. There are far more than just undocumented immigrants who can't afford to stay home and will have to do whatever they can do to keep life going for themselves. This is true everywhere, not just the US. The last to comply won't be holding out due to malice or ignorance, but necessity.
- aquaticsunset 7y ago
  But the OP is misguided and targeting a beaten down population. What difference does it make if you’re making $7.25/hr as a natural born citizen or an undocumented immigrant? Either way this thing is hurting you hard, and people are going to act like people. It’s really, really misinformed to think that undocumented immigrants are the only ones suffering, and that “good natural born Americans” can all afford to sit inside for a few weeks.
  - melling 7y ago
    the difference? Undocumented people are less likely to seek medical care if they become ill. At least in our political climate. During a pandemic that’s dangerous for everyone. The general population and for them and their families
  - Proziam 7y ago
    People are quick to assume the intent of another. The quickest way to make the point that a non-compliant, but non-malicious population exists is to give an example. OP gave one, but now people seem to assume that because of the (heavily politicized) example given that they've "targeted" a group. Overreactive responses make it difficult to have a serious discussion about all sorts of issues. OP also hasn't said anything even remotely akin to: > undocumented immigrants are the only ones suffering, and that “good natural-born Americans” can all afford to sit inside for a few weeks. It seems intellectually dishonest to make such lofty assumptions based on a post the length of a tweet or two. Imagine if instead of assuming ill-intent we just said 'hey he's right there are people that can't afford to comply...we should consider that in our policy to the benefit of everyone involved...' The world would be a better place.

MiguelVieira 7y ago

It feels like Europe and the US only have a few options: * Let the virus run its course and accept a huge death count. * Continue the lockdowns for months, strangling the economy. * Do what's in this article and allow life and the economy to return to normal. * Hope for a miracle. Am I missing something?

dbbk 7y ago
I believe the UK just ordered millions of antibody tests, that will tell you if you've previously had the virus. If we can confirm that people who previously had it are immune, we should be able to selectively let those back into normal society a lot faster. That's my understanding, I may be wrong.
- Narty 7y ago
  Does the antibody test even exist yet? I was under the impression it doesn't.
  - DennisP 7y ago
    The FDA just approved one, and the company says it will ramp up production fast, but as far as I know it's not available in quantity yet. https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/20-20-bioresponse-to-launch-rapid-coronavirus-test-kits-in-u-s-following-green-light-from-fda/ https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/20-20-bioresponse-... The FDA has given states the authority to approve antibody tests on their own. https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/03/16/fda-pandemic-response-states-can-now-approve-covid-19-diagnostics-serology-testing/ https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/03/16/fda-pandemic-respons...
  - dbbk 7y ago
    They're due to arrive in weeks so I assume they do: https://www.cityam.com/millions-of-coronavirus-antibody-tests-expected-to-arrive-in-weeks/ https://www.cityam.com/millions-of-coronavirus-antibody-test...
    - 7y ago

austincheney 7y ago

Stopping the virus takes a negative growth rate, such that the rate of recovery exceeds the number of new cases. Like the article said some East Asian countries are proof it can be done, but it requires great deliberate inconvenience.

jtdev 7y ago

I find it incredibly hard to believe that China has stopped community spread within the country - I hope I’m wrong, but I think we’re getting PRC propaganda when we hear about “all new cases we’re imported”.

actuator 7y ago
They might have contained it better as they went pretty intense on lockdown. There were lots of videos on internet from their lockdown on which people were laughing at China being an authoritarian state. The videos displayed homes being taped from outside if someone in that home was suspected of having it, people being picked from streets etc. Being an authoritarian state really helps in these scenarios as you can suppress liberties easily without people rising up in arms about it. Having said this though, being an authoritarian state with constant efforts to have a good image, they might have underreported the numbers of actual cases.
dntbnmpls 7y ago
That's fair, but aren't all the comments talking about PRC propaganda propaganda itself? > I hope I’m wrong Do you really? It seems to me that many who share your sentiments actually want things to get worse both in china and around the world. That's just the feeling I get reading the comments. Also, it would be interesting if there was a study done on the "PRC propaganda" crowd and the "CCP propaganda" crowd - from a linguistic and propaganda standpoint.
blisterpeanuts 7y ago
Maybe they stopped the spread in Hubei, but suppose just one infected person travels to another heavily populated province. What is the contingency plan for this obviously dangerous scenario?
- baybal2 7y ago
  Isolate, test, quarantine, repeat
seqastian 7y ago
Have you seen their lockdown? their lockdown laughs at Europes lockdown.

jpxw 7y ago

People in the UK aren’t taking the advice of the government. Many think a full lockdown is coming, possibly today.

ShorsHammer 7y ago

South Korea has virtually no new active cases daily, only 100 deaths after 4 months of exposure and hasn't brought in any laws even close the authoritarian stuff that is going on elsewhere across the planet in the name of covid-19/sars-cov-2 Buyer beware. Undoing laws and measures is a lot harder than enacting them in a "crisis". "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

goblin89 7y ago
In Seoul, multiple emergency alerts asking people to keep 2 meter distance and to cancel trips and meetings were pushed to mobile phones for the first time yesterday morning. Pedestrian streets in popular districts are still fairly bustling tonight, even if less crowded given the season.
- ShorsHammer 7y ago
  Pushing mobile alerts is what any country with half a clue should be doing. I get regular ones telling me to wash my hands and avoid contact, it's comforting to see them everyfew days.
  - goblin89 7y ago
    In South Korea they were a bit overused I think. In addition to hand washing reminders, each phone is getting up to 2 loud but not-really-quite-actionable alerts per day, which report on 2–3 new cases discovered in nearby city districts. (But then the government uses the same alerts to notify about strong winds and elevated pollution levels, so it’s more or less a given.) The ones from yesterday were the first to ask people to limit their mobility.
    - lostmsu 7y ago
      I don't know. That actually sounds like a good option to trace/warn contacts.
7y ago

cracker_jacks 7y ago

Which experts are proposing the way forward is actually a total lockdown? This article is distorting what experts are actually saying. This virus will not go away, it needs to be managed. Please consider the following articles of what experts are ACTUALLY saying: https://medium.com/@AmeshAA/covid19-a-path-forward-868d5e8dc53 https://medium.com/@AmeshAA/covid19-a-path-forward-868d5e8dc... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/coronavirus-us-must-confront-how-were-going-to-live-with-it-expert-says.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/17/coronavirus-us-must-confront...

lower 7y ago
> Which experts are proposing the way forward is actually a total lockdown? The Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, for example: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... In Germany, the Society for Epidemiology has a similar analysis with similar conclusions: https://www.dgepi.de/assets/Stellungnahmen/Stellungnahme2020Corona_DGEpi-21032020.pdf https://www.dgepi.de/assets/Stellungnahmen/Stellungnahme2020...
- Mvandenbergh 7y ago
  It is important to understand the context and timing of the Imperial paper. It was produced as part of UK government decision making in the days leading up to the 12th of March in order to make a binary decision between to immediate alternatives: Mitigate and flatten the curve or suppress and crush the curve. It was well understood by the authors that a permanent lockdown was not possible and that there would need to be a step 2. They did some modelling of possible step 2 (proposing alternating lockdowns with relaxations for example) but did not go into detail on other options such as enhanced contact tracing, widespread testing, or other options.
  - lower 7y ago
    Right, both papers are mainly what should be done right now. They both conclude that a hard lockdown is the only realistic option that won't overload the health system in the next few months. It's not so clear what to do afterwards.

drinchev 7y ago

Back in time ( end of January ) when I heard the news about Wuhan and what happened there I was a bit worried, but always positive. When the virus spread in Italy ( I live in Berlin ) I was daily asking "Why don't they stop people from / to Italy?", "Why don't they go and help Italy?", "Where is a plan for handling the situation?", "Why nobody knows >how< to handle the situation, don't they see how China managed?" All in all the answers were : "They don't want to kill the economy, that's why no restrictions.", "We are democracy, that's why no restrictions." Look at the situation now. Killed economy, unstoppable virus and nobody knows for how long. They can't contain it anymore. What we do is flattening the curve, not eliminating the thread. Come on. These politicians, IMO should be investigated for committing crime agains humanity. I can't believe that in 2020 there is no such thing as emergency procedure / plan in case of ... well ... emergency. I tend to think that all government decision makers make a "daily" for what should happen today and then wait for tomorrow, with no further planning. That's just irresponsible.

ensiferum 7y ago
Proactively shutting things down and restricting freedoms are politically impossible to implement. There's no incentive for any single politician to do anything like this because if it actually worked there'd be no visibility to the general public and thus nobody would understand what they actually did. It's like the proverbial secret goverment agency that stops a bomb from going off and nobody knows what they did. In politics this mean that the general public would only see the downsides of such measures and not the gains. This would not get a single politician re-elected. Therefore in terms of politics it's much better and safer to be reactive only rather than proactive. Later speech can include statements "we could not have possibly known", "there was no indication that...", "it was a complete surprise...", "we acted as quickly as possbile..."
- lb0 7y ago
  Not true, because there will be enough "test groups" due to this thinking already (and I believe now even the last one realized that this will now go everyhwere). China locked down around ~400 known infections, in terms of spread we will soon learn what it means to have only done similar but much less strict lockdown at 1000, 4000, 8000 infections, actually it is all a number game, and the numbers were sharp enough and visible for everyone during February already.. we will pay a lot four our stupidity and "politically impossible", we said this since start of the year about Chinas measures, but what was politically impossible will now take longer and almost reach same strictness levels here..

baybal2 7y ago

Mass testing, and quarantine is very simple. Tell me why what some countries in Africa managed to do to reverse trends in their countries early, cannot be done in the West. Instead, the West went to listen to bizarre "management" theories, over something clear, and obvious.

9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
Did you mean Asia? The jury is still very much out on Africa, but it's not looking great at the moment: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236760-we-dont-know-why-so-few-covid-19-cases-have-been-reported-in-africa/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236760-we-dont-know-wh...
bitcharmer 7y ago
> some countries in Africa managed to do to reverse trends in their countries early Source? AFAIK the low number of reported cases is a direct consequence of not running tests.

m23khan 7y ago

There is one harsh reality I see in all this: World screwed itself by being over reliant on China. At least Canada did. Big time. Big percentage of things here in Canada is 'Made in China' - yup, you name it -- Masks, gloves, and items such as syringes, etc. heck even plastic cutlery and tooth brushes are made in China. Now that Chinese economy got shutdown and people in Canada went into panic mode, we have severely decimated supply of essential items such as hand sanitizers, masks, gloves, etc even for the health workers! I know this pandemic nor future pandemic/wars would change anything because humans are just collateral (and sometimes even treated as adversary) for the mega corporations, but my wish is each Country (or atleast Geographical region) learn to become self sufficient when it comes to making items such as Clothing, medical and sanitary supplies, etc. This may mean that in places like the West where Corporations have to hire local workers at higher cost to produce the same clothing items being produced by $1/hr workers in Bangladesh, but so be it -- in times of emergency, you need local production of items to save you. No need to put so much reliance on countries like China (manufacturing, assembly, electronics, clothing, plastics), Germany (Manufacturing, machinery), South Korea (Electronics, appliances), India (textile, assembly), Mexico (assembly) and Bangladesh (textile).

Daishiman 7y ago
That's really not an issue at all. Asian countries that managed this crisis correctly took steps to prepare, which mostly means having quick access to testing, and stockpiling materials. Any Western government had in its power the ability to invoke urgent measure to redirect production for face masks and equipment. That equipment could have been bought beforehand if the governments had listened to the advice of its own experts.

neonate 7y ago

Some experts say. From the article: "Americans must be persuaded to stay home, they said, and a system put in place to isolate the infected and care for them outside the home. Travel restrictions should be extended, they said; productions of masks and ventilators must be accelerated, and testing problems must be resolved. But tactics like forced isolation, school closings and pervasive GPS tracking of patients brought more divided reactions."

vanniv 7y ago

Amazing how the NYT always proposes more authoritarianism as the solution to every problem.

nikolay 7y ago

I hear many keep saying "stay positive"! Wishful thinking and optimism typically lead to shorter lifespans and the reasoning is optimists underestimate threats, ignore symptoms, don't prepare to handle threats. Not to panic, but be more on the pessimistic side, save lives - including your own! We have an excellent saying here in America, which the young do not follow (especially in Flordia!) these days: "Better safe than sorry!"