8 ms·

Michael Burry of ‘The Big Short’ Slams Virus Lockdown

43 points by starpilot 6y ago

cecja 6y ago
Pls... go work and die my stonks are falling.
KaiserPro 6y ago
If we are lucky, and there is a miracle, the mortality rate will be < 0.2%. Even more of a miracle and the R0 is ~6 and most people are asymptomatic. However, we could still be on course for a second wave, like 1919, then we are totally fucked. But we don't know, and really didn't know when europe went into lockdown. It looked like the mortality was ~7% which would have been devastating. I have yet to see any double blind study that suggests _any_ drug makes an impact. Barring vitamin D, but thats a metastudy, and also its too late for most people (you need a month.) In short, he asking us to make a massive gamble. Yes, the poor are suffering, but helicoptering money is a piece of piss compared to re-building a community. if the US had decent unemployment insurance, like germany, then unemployment would be 10% of what it is now.
- cm2187 6y ago
  We might be lucky to have a low mortality rate but why does it require a miracle? All new evidence seems to suggest a <0.5% fatility rate and a large number of infected people with mild or no symptoms.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    I think initial concerns were the mortality rate would be much, much higher without the sometimes draconian shelter in place measures. It may be lower now because we are able to devote more intense resources (ventilators) to those who are sick. Burry seems to overlook that without implementing social distancing policies we may have had a huge surge in sick people all at once, which would have left many without access to potentially life saving equipment. Cases where a ventilator or other resources save someone and lower the overall mortality rate would have resulted in more deaths because you’ve simply got far too many sick people. With that being said, I’m sympathetic toward the concerns about the economic cost, and think that we need to really focus on a reopen plan in May or June. Workers who can WFH should probably continue to do so, but if we’ve been able to flatten the curve it’s probably time to go back outside and see what happens. I’ll also say with respect to Burry that although he is a trained physician, it doesn’t make him an expert in epidemiology, so, frankly, I don’t really care for his opinion on the subject any more than anyone else who is moderately educated.
    - cm2187 6y ago
      I agree directionally, but the numbers matter as well. Depending on what study we look at, the survival rate of covid19 patients that require a ventilator is anywhere between 0% and 50%. For the sake of argument let’s assume the other patients can be treated in field hospitals that scale reasonably well, it means running out of ventilators would “only” double the mortality rate. But double a rate that is <0.5% may still be <0.5%.
    - travisoneill1 6y ago
      Only 1/3 of people with COVID who require ventilation survive, so lack of ventilators will raise mortality, but only by 50%.
      - DanBC 6y ago
        Ventilators are also used by people who don't have covid-19, so lack of access to ICU is going to affect more than just covid-19 patients.
        cm2187 6y ago
        Fine. Assume all ventilators used for non covid19 patients. The maths stay the same.
        DanBC 6y ago
        You haven't counted length of stay before death or transfer to a different ward (covid-19 patients stay in ICU longer before they die or recover), nor iatrogenic harm caused by non-intensivist doctors and nurses suddenly being pulled into ICU work.
    - amalter 6y ago
      Additionally, COVID-19 is a new disease and we have no data about the long term effects. This is true anecdotal, but I’m following a cohort of 5 MD friends who all experienced “walking COVID” (aka reached the loss of smell symptom, but required no hospitalization). This cohort is 35-45 and all previously highly athletic. They are between +20 and +45 days from being “symptom free”. Not one of them can perform cardiac challenged activities. I’ve heard things like “I get winded carrying groceries up the stairs” to “I cannot perform even a single push-up”. So before we take this big risk of letting the virus “burn” through the population, shouldn’t we understand just a bit more? Sure, maybe we’ll get lucky and the IFR will just be 2-10x flu. But there are worrying signs of permanent heart, lung and kidney damage. These costs will also stay with us long term. Mortality isn’t the concern when dealing with an unknown virus.
  - flohofwoe 6y ago
    As far as I understand it, fatality rate is only low as this as long as the health care system isn't overwhelmed, so that people in serious conditions can be treated (and the number of serious cases is a lot higher than 0.5%). As soon as hospitals are at their capacity, a lot more people will die which otherwise had survived (and this will also affect people which are in critical conditions for entirely different reasons).
    - rumanator 6y ago
      This. I don't understand how the whole point of flattening the curve was already forgotten. The whole point of the lockdown is not to act as a magic wand to make the pandemic vanish. The whole point is that, as it stands, emergency services are already operating beyond capacity. This means that your friends and loved ones risk needlessly dying for no reason just because they weren't able to have medical treatment, including from non-covid19 issues.
      - gremlinsinc 6y ago
        Also, if you're high risk (I may be - obesity) this is a scary disease, and honestly the longer you wait to get infected the better your chances. More local medical doctors will have experience treating it, there will be more studies on drugs, more help available etc. Your chances go up astronomically on a long enough time scale. So why rush it? I have the luxury of being a freelancer working from home, so this is mostly my normal, but I know it hurts a lot of people, but so does being dead - or having lung issues for life or neurological ones. Some broadway actor lost his leg over the weekend because of this. TLDR; It definitely helps w/ hospitals so they can still function it also gives time to find and create better treatments.
    - bob33212 6y ago
      We don't know yet how much of a difference that makes. For example how many infected 80 year olds without medical treatment die compared to those that do get medical treatment. Medical treatment is certainly going to have a better mortality rate but not 100%.
  - kgwgk 6y ago
    Where do you get that <0.5% fatality rate from? It seems to have caused already the death of between 0.1% (lab-confirmed) and 0.2% (excess deaths) of the population of NYC.
    - cm2187 6y ago
      Now that we start doing anti-body tests, there seems to be multiple studies surfacing all pointing to a much higher than anticipated number of people infected. A few sources pointing in that direction: https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/1249446561010106370 https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/124944656101010637... https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/1249020677551796224 https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/124902067755179622... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LG-so-8qwg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LG-so-8qwg
      - kgwgk 6y ago
        What would you say that the number of infected people in NYC may be? If 20% of them are infected, the infection fatality rate observed is already in the 0.5%-1% range.
        cm2187 6y ago
        I did that calculation for a similar objection a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22881103 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22881103
        kgwgk 6y ago
        Ok. If we take the observed data (0.15% mortality rate in the overall population) we can make hypothesis like “infection rate is 30%” and “infection fatality rate is 0.5%”. But being consistent and plausible doesn’t make them true. 15% and 1% are also plausible, as far as I know.
- bob33212 6y ago
  It is a similar situation to hurricane evacuations. A forced evacuation will save lives, but forced evacuations that turn out to be a false alarm because the storm changed direction causes people to ignore future evacuations leading to more deaths. There is no right answer
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    Look at NYC. They've been on lockdown weeks. The first responders and hospitals are STILL fighting a losing battle. Imagine if we weren't on lockdown and there were a ton of other emergencies like car crashes, accidental impalement, etc... a lot of non-covid emergencies are probably still happening, but we'd probably triple or quadruple the load on an already stressed hospital system. It'd be disastrous. The proof is right there in NYC. Now they're - their own thing. Not sure this would play out in most other cities being smaller than NYC, but if Italy has any bearing - Bergamo ran out of burial plots in the cemetary and had to start stacking bodies in churches like it's the 1420's. The right answer is caution > mass destruction. Another good case study is comparing the sweden to switzerland or denmark. I don't have high hopes in a vaccine before at least 2-3 years since the fastest vaccine ever took 5 years, but drugs to mitigate symptoms and outcomes -- the longer we slow it, the more lives saved when we do have a good treatment. HIV doesn't have a vaccine, but it does have decent treatment options now, I think covid will be easier to find good treatments but we just need time for all the studies to bear fruit.
- JackFr 6y ago
  > if the US had decent unemployment insurance, like germany, then unemployment would be 10% of what it is now. I’m not sure I understand how better UI reduces unemployment. But more importantly unemployment only captures half the problem. Businesses are not designed to go into hibernation. If asked you to hold your breath for two hours, it’s gonna be tough for you to start breathing again when I give the all clear.
  - boudin 6y ago
    All those are man made problem and have solution. Our system is not designed to be paused, but can be changed to do so. To pause the spread of a virus is much harder.
    - okr 6y ago
      Do you have an idea on how to implement a pause function into the economy? We live with the flue, but actually a pause could help there too to stop the spread in the season. Who pushes the pause button? How do the businesses agree on pushing their pause button at the same time? Should there be a pausing fund? Paid in by all businesses that make business overseas? I find this interesting. Reminds me a little bit on traffic jams. If cars were automated, all cars could start/stop at the same time.
      - rswail 6y ago
        We have a pause function, it is when governments issue public health and safety orders. The people that push the pause button are elected governments, There is a pausing fund, it is taxes and government borrowing through the national debt.
        okr 6y ago
        I agree. But did not consider it as a solution. :)
      - boudin 6y ago
        I don't have the magical answer, but there's some elements in place to allow companies to stop their activities for a short amount of time (like furlough with a pay, like it's done in some countries, not sure how it works in the USA). Looking at how beneficial reducing trade and manufacturing has been for the environment, i can't help but think that we need to be able to take the same kind of action we've been taking for COVID-19 to address the other big challenges we're facing.
- cmiles74 6y ago
  I disagree that he's asking people to take a big gamble. While it seems unrealistic to me, Dr. Burry made a point of tying his recommendation to widespread, rapid testing and contact tracing. If these things were in place, I do think letting people that aren't in the most vulnerable population groups out and about might be reasonable. "A more nuanced approach would be for at risk groups — the obese, old and already-sick — to shelter in place, to execute widespread mandatory testing, and to ID and track as necessary while allowing society to function. Again, Trump should get the massive contract manufacturers like Flextronics to make testing machines." That said, we are still having problems getting the tests out and people are still complaining that it will take days to get results back. I personally know a pharmacist with an at-risk child who can't get a test as of last week. So this seems like wishful thinking to me. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/next-covid-19-testing-crisis/609193/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/next-covi...
  - xtiansimon 6y ago
    I think you missed this gem: > "Vaccines are not coming anytime soon, so natural immunity is the only way out for now."
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  I've got vitamin D deficiency (gastric sleeve surgery)... usually forget my supplement. Been taking it religiously for a month... hope that helps if I get it (obese + sleep apnea + 40 are my only co-morbidities -that and I do get bronchitis a lot had it earlier in the spring from nasal drip.)
conformist 6y ago
He also publicly claimed that index funds are a bubble fairly recently. (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-09-04/michael-burry-explains-why-index-funds-are-like-subprime-cdos https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/arti...) Two thoughts: Maybe bloomberg will interview him whenever they want a somewhat contrarian bearish view? If he made money from short positions now, could it have been for a reason completely unrelated to COVID?
cm2187 6y ago
It reminds me the often quoted story of the paperclip maximiser. This powerful AI set up by a factory to improve its production of paperclips. Its objective function is solely to maximise the number of paperclips produced. So it does a great job at it, then becomes out of control, starts consuming all resources on earth to produce more paperclips, and once it has destroyed earth, goes on to take over the universe to produce paperclips. I feel a lot of the scientific advisors to governments are "covid19 death minimisers", solely focusing on people dying from this virus at the expense of any other consideration, like the effect of elective procedures being postponed indefinitely, tens of millions of families in hardship, economic collapse, etc.
- conformist 6y ago
  Nice analogy. Seems like politically it's hard to agree on how to compare deaths to other adverse consequences? I suspect some political leaders are just focusing on deaths as the quanitity that's easiest to measure, whereas others truly believe that deaths due to Covid should have a very high weight compared to everything else? It's kind of understandable that scientific advisors focus on their respective topic of expertise, maybe the problem is more the aggregation and evaluation of views.
- KozmoNau7 6y ago
  > "at the expense of any other consideration, like the effect of elective procedures being postponed indefinitely, tens of millions of families in hardship, economic collapse, etc." Ideology is causing this, specifically the idea that medical services must be profitable, and the idea that if you don't work, you don't get to eat. That we even accept this premise is utterly absurd.
  - JackFr 6y ago
    That’s ludicrous. And no one is saying that. The argument is how much is too much? Is there any limit to what the governors can ask? Cause it feels like they’re governing by diktat, with little transparency or accountability. People are ok with it, because there is enough trust in our institutions to carry us through public health crisis. But it will wear thin. Politicians and the chattering classes are far removed from the damage they are doing and far to self congratulatory.
KozmoNau7 6y ago
It is particularly ghoulish to accept the death of millions of people, simply because it would be better for the market. Really, this financial crisis was brewing and on its way, coronavirus or not, because we didn't take the lessons of the 2008 crash to heart. This pandemic was simply the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back, but it is very tempting for economists and politicians to place the blame squarely on this scapegoat, so they can continue the cycle of booms and busts, which benefits only those with enough capital to weather the risks and buy in at the bottom of the curve. If we want to break this destructive cycle, we need to rethink our approach to economics and society: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674980822 https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674980822
- drcode 6y ago
  Economic depressions kill people.
  - KozmoNau7 6y ago
    Then perhaps let's rethink economics into something more sustainable and not plagued by booms and busts and rent-seekers. As an added benefit, we can make human civilization less harmful to the environment, by reducing our massive overconsumption and focus on sustainability.
  - seamyb88 6y ago
    You spelt wealth inequality incorrectly.
- CuriousSkeptic 6y ago
  You might also enjoy the works of Mariana Mazzucato: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/18/the-covid-19-crisis-is-a-chance-to-do-capitalism-differently https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/18/the-co...
JackFr 6y ago
I think he is spot on. We are drowning in platitudes while people’s lives are being ruined. Entrepreneurs and small business owners are seeing their life’s work stripped from them by a policy choice served by ass covering politicians and a class of media elites ever willing to promote the post-modern illusion that death is subject to our whims and not the other way around.
- rswail 6y ago
  We are drowning in platitudes while people lives are being lost. People are having their lives stripped from them by economic policy choices that value unaccountable wealth accumulation combined with rent-seeking and corruption by a group of economic elites ever willing to promote the post-modern illusion that wealth and societal health is due to "job makers" and not the other way around. If the economy and business cannot survive what is now only 2 months of interruption, then perhaps the economic system needs to be more robust and structurally sound. Deregulation has led to an unaccountable financial "industry" that produces nothing except churn in the name of "liquidity". After the Great Depression, in addition to the economic stimulus in the US of WW2, the market and banking reforms led to a more proper focus on Main St and not Wall St. That focus needs to return.
- twhitmore 6y ago
  People's lives are worth millions of dollars. Each. Government estimates are around $5 million per life. It's the coronavirus causing economic damage, customers dying or having to stay home to avoid dying is bad for business. I don't know what planet this is not obvious to people on. Fastest way to address this is to quickly contain & suppress the virus -- isolation, testing, tracing, eradication -- after which careful & gradual reopening can occur. Of course this requires a competent government; a functioning health system would help too. So would a government capable of supporting businesses to put employees on paid furlough, pause interest on mortgages & debts, issue stimulus efficiently, etc. Many other countries are able to accomplish much of this -- unfortunately the US is largely not. Substantially due to the extractive capitalist/ monopolist attitudes of greed & "money at any cost" seen right above.
pinkfoot 6y ago
You will also note that Dr Burry doesn't live in Italy or NY and has enough money to escape to NZ in a private jet if he turns out to be wrong.
- JackFr 6y ago
  As someone who has been sheltering in place in NYC for the past three weeks, what is going on in the news media’s portrayal of New York? I’ve had random acquaintances reach out from abroad and across the country who I haven’t talked to in months or years reach out to see ‘how we’re surviving‘. The only people I know who fled New York did so because they owned larger homes which would be more comfortable, rather than a fear of the virus. You’d also be surprised how hard it is to escape to New Zealand right now.
  - EdwardDiego 6y ago
    > You’d also be surprised how hard it is to escape to Mew Zealand right now. Yep, closed to all but citizens and permanent residents - so unless you pulled off a Peter Thiel[1] (sigh), you're shit outta luck at the moment. [1]: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-got-new-zealand-citizenship/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-...
  - antidaily 6y ago
    13000 dead people tends to make headlines.
  - nwallin 6y ago
    9/11 killed 2,977 people, mostly in NYC. COVID has (at the time of this writing, 2020-04-19 5:40AM PDT) killed 13,157 people in NYC alone. If you scroll through the list of counties in the US sorted by COVID death toll, the majority of the places at the top of the list are within spitting distance of NYC. Of the top ten, two of them are places I don't associate with NYC. (Detroit and Chicago) (to be fair, one of the top ten is "Unassociated New York" which may include all sorts of stuff in upstate) These 8 areas total to 18,742 deaths, which is 48% of the total number of deaths in the United States, 11% of the total deaths in the world. It's nothing to do with the media. It's the pile of dead bodies. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594... Edit: There are 13,157 deaths, and 135,527 cases, which is about 10%. Los Angeles county has 577 deaths and 12,051 cases, which is less than half the fatality rate. Suffice to say it's overwhelmed the healthcare system there.
lordnacho 6y ago
I don't think it's crazy to balance the economy with lives lost. Much like how we accept that some people will die in traffic accidents if the speed limit is a certain number. However it seemed last month that the correct thing to do was to close down. At least so that hospitals were not overwhelmed, causing extra deaths beyond the "natural" amount for this disease and others that people use hospitals to treat. In other words, a non-linear effect on death rates caused by the sudden spike. Now we're between a rock and a hard place, because while taking a week or two off would be tough but OK for most businesses, taking 4 weeks or 8 weeks off is not simply 4x or 8x as bad. Thus, another, competing, non-linear effect. We also have the problem that the pandemic is not synchronized, so any area that does manage to keep it down is going to have to keep the border closed towards people from places where it's still going on. The only solution that seems like a good compromise is to have lots of testing so that people who know they are infected, even ones who don't feel ill, can be quarantined. Also of course generally keep old people away from too much contact with everyone else. But somehow even months after the virus was discovered, the number of people tested anywhere is not really high. I would have thought we'd ramp up production of test kits massively so that everyone who's been near someone positive is tested, plus everyone else is randomly tested.
- jdc 6y ago
  Part of me says well if we could just put rents on hold, that would take care of the obvious problem. But [K]N95/FFP2 masks for all, and high-scale testing and tracing makes going back to work a lot more appealing.
- imglorp 6y ago
  What if we spent $1 trillion on the science of testing and treatment instead of bailing out more congressional darlings? It's not like we don't have the dough.
  - travisoneill1 6y ago
    Past a certain point, you can't buy speed.
- 6y ago
transfire 6y ago
If the entire world would just agree that EVERYONE must stay home for two weeks at the same time, the whole thing would effectively be over and done with. In fact, I've been saying this for over a decade now... We should have a global holiday every ten years doing exactly this, as it would seriously decimate all contagious disease populations.
dna_polymerase 6y ago
Is there any legitimate study regarding Chloroquine by now? Last thing I heard was that it is useless. Michael Burry sounds like any other right winger by now.
spodek 6y ago
> “Universal stay-at-home is the most devastating economic force in modern history" Pursuing perpetual economic growth, combined with externalizing costs where possible, on a finite planet beats its devastation by far. Among other things, that growth and externalizing costs led to factory farming and encroaching into wildlife territory that have caused pandemics to increase in recent decades. Not limiting that growth -- at least limiting the number of animals we pack together -- will create more pandemics. Limiting it won't solve everything but it will decrease a lot of problems, including pandemics. Why pandemics will keep increasing: https://shows.acast.com/leadership-and-the-environment/episodes/318-why-pandemics-will-keep-increasing-and-how-we-can-revers https://shows.acast.com/leadership-and-the-environment/episo...
bitxbit 6y ago
If he’s so vocal about the virus lockdown destroying lives, why was he never vocal about wars? Wars literally destroy lives and economies. Total destruction. Gimme a break. He’s piping up because he bet on the Russell (which completely went against him earlier this year) and those companies will get punished disproportionately due to the lockdown. There’s way too much emphasis on listening to financial figures when in fact they are just as clueless if not more. Money does not equate to intelligence and wisdom. Be wary of listening to people with a lot to lose. By the way, his take on passive investing is only half right. There’s a reset every quarter. The way to play it is to short single name volatility at earnings.
- laminarflow 6y ago
  Did you read the article? "He told Bloomberg News last month that he placed a “significant bearish market bet that is working out for now,” without providing details except to say it was a trade of a “good size” against indexes."
xtiansimon 6y ago
> “It very suddenly reverses the gains of underprivileged groups, kills and creates drug addicts, beats and terrorizes women and children in violent now-jobless households, and more. It bleeds deep anguish and suicide.” This sounds the ravings of someone who acted like they saw the hidden gears moving the economy. Now they’re frighteningly uncertain, and want to exert their influence to regain their sense of comfortable uncertainty. And in the trade-offs, he's revealing his biases, which is careful to limit to good luck: > "Vaccines are not coming anytime soon, so natural immunity is the only way out for now." But we've heard enough from other people stupid enough to say it out loud--we're going to lose some % people, but the damage to the economy will be worse--to know what he's alluding to. Frighteningly uncertain, because if the absolute worst thing happens and everything goes MadMax, it's the wealthiest who will have targets on their backs--October Revolution. See. I can sound like an A$$, too.
GaryNumanVevo 6y ago
Those who control capital have decided that the human losses will largely be seen in the working class, who they see as expendable. People will die if the economy is re-opened, for them it's seen as an acceptable loss. Look at the minority of people protesting the lock down, a large majority are small business owners who want their employees to get back to work. Corona virus has effectively been a government mandated strike for labor (save "essential workers" at Amazon and the like) the likes of which the capitalist class haven't yet seen.

43 points by starpilot 6y ago

Pls... go work and die my stonks are falling.

If we are lucky, and there is a miracle, the mortality rate will be < 0.2%. Even more of a miracle and the R0 is ~6 and most people are asymptomatic. However, we could still be on course for a second wave, like 1919, then we are totally fucked. But we don't know, and really didn't know when europe went into lockdown. It looked like the mortality was ~7% which would have been devastating. I have yet to see any double blind study that suggests _any_ drug makes an impact. Barring vitamin D, but thats a metastudy, and also its too late for most people (you need a month.) In short, he asking us to make a massive gamble. Yes, the poor are suffering, but helicoptering money is a piece of piss compared to re-building a community. if the US had decent unemployment insurance, like germany, then unemployment would be 10% of what it is now.

cm2187 6y ago
We might be lucky to have a low mortality rate but why does it require a miracle? All new evidence seems to suggest a <0.5% fatility rate and a large number of infected people with mild or no symptoms.
- ericmay 6y ago
  I think initial concerns were the mortality rate would be much, much higher without the sometimes draconian shelter in place measures. It may be lower now because we are able to devote more intense resources (ventilators) to those who are sick. Burry seems to overlook that without implementing social distancing policies we may have had a huge surge in sick people all at once, which would have left many without access to potentially life saving equipment. Cases where a ventilator or other resources save someone and lower the overall mortality rate would have resulted in more deaths because you’ve simply got far too many sick people. With that being said, I’m sympathetic toward the concerns about the economic cost, and think that we need to really focus on a reopen plan in May or June. Workers who can WFH should probably continue to do so, but if we’ve been able to flatten the curve it’s probably time to go back outside and see what happens. I’ll also say with respect to Burry that although he is a trained physician, it doesn’t make him an expert in epidemiology, so, frankly, I don’t really care for his opinion on the subject any more than anyone else who is moderately educated.
  - cm2187 6y ago
    I agree directionally, but the numbers matter as well. Depending on what study we look at, the survival rate of covid19 patients that require a ventilator is anywhere between 0% and 50%. For the sake of argument let’s assume the other patients can be treated in field hospitals that scale reasonably well, it means running out of ventilators would “only” double the mortality rate. But double a rate that is <0.5% may still be <0.5%.
  - travisoneill1 6y ago
    Only 1/3 of people with COVID who require ventilation survive, so lack of ventilators will raise mortality, but only by 50%.
    - DanBC 6y ago
      Ventilators are also used by people who don't have covid-19, so lack of access to ICU is going to affect more than just covid-19 patients.
      - cm2187 6y ago
        Fine. Assume all ventilators used for non covid19 patients. The maths stay the same.
        DanBC 6y ago
        You haven't counted length of stay before death or transfer to a different ward (covid-19 patients stay in ICU longer before they die or recover), nor iatrogenic harm caused by non-intensivist doctors and nurses suddenly being pulled into ICU work.
  - amalter 6y ago
    Additionally, COVID-19 is a new disease and we have no data about the long term effects. This is true anecdotal, but I’m following a cohort of 5 MD friends who all experienced “walking COVID” (aka reached the loss of smell symptom, but required no hospitalization). This cohort is 35-45 and all previously highly athletic. They are between +20 and +45 days from being “symptom free”. Not one of them can perform cardiac challenged activities. I’ve heard things like “I get winded carrying groceries up the stairs” to “I cannot perform even a single push-up”. So before we take this big risk of letting the virus “burn” through the population, shouldn’t we understand just a bit more? Sure, maybe we’ll get lucky and the IFR will just be 2-10x flu. But there are worrying signs of permanent heart, lung and kidney damage. These costs will also stay with us long term. Mortality isn’t the concern when dealing with an unknown virus.
- flohofwoe 6y ago
  As far as I understand it, fatality rate is only low as this as long as the health care system isn't overwhelmed, so that people in serious conditions can be treated (and the number of serious cases is a lot higher than 0.5%). As soon as hospitals are at their capacity, a lot more people will die which otherwise had survived (and this will also affect people which are in critical conditions for entirely different reasons).
  - rumanator 6y ago
    This. I don't understand how the whole point of flattening the curve was already forgotten. The whole point of the lockdown is not to act as a magic wand to make the pandemic vanish. The whole point is that, as it stands, emergency services are already operating beyond capacity. This means that your friends and loved ones risk needlessly dying for no reason just because they weren't able to have medical treatment, including from non-covid19 issues.
    - gremlinsinc 6y ago
      Also, if you're high risk (I may be - obesity) this is a scary disease, and honestly the longer you wait to get infected the better your chances. More local medical doctors will have experience treating it, there will be more studies on drugs, more help available etc. Your chances go up astronomically on a long enough time scale. So why rush it? I have the luxury of being a freelancer working from home, so this is mostly my normal, but I know it hurts a lot of people, but so does being dead - or having lung issues for life or neurological ones. Some broadway actor lost his leg over the weekend because of this. TLDR; It definitely helps w/ hospitals so they can still function it also gives time to find and create better treatments.
  - bob33212 6y ago
    We don't know yet how much of a difference that makes. For example how many infected 80 year olds without medical treatment die compared to those that do get medical treatment. Medical treatment is certainly going to have a better mortality rate but not 100%.
- kgwgk 6y ago
  Where do you get that <0.5% fatality rate from? It seems to have caused already the death of between 0.1% (lab-confirmed) and 0.2% (excess deaths) of the population of NYC.
  - cm2187 6y ago
    Now that we start doing anti-body tests, there seems to be multiple studies surfacing all pointing to a much higher than anticipated number of people infected. A few sources pointing in that direction: https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/1249446561010106370 https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/124944656101010637... https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/1249020677551796224 https://mobile.twitter.com/AmeshAA/status/124902067755179622... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LG-so-8qwg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LG-so-8qwg
    - kgwgk 6y ago
      What would you say that the number of infected people in NYC may be? If 20% of them are infected, the infection fatality rate observed is already in the 0.5%-1% range.
      - cm2187 6y ago
        I did that calculation for a similar objection a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22881103 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22881103
        kgwgk 6y ago
        Ok. If we take the observed data (0.15% mortality rate in the overall population) we can make hypothesis like “infection rate is 30%” and “infection fatality rate is 0.5%”. But being consistent and plausible doesn’t make them true. 15% and 1% are also plausible, as far as I know.
bob33212 6y ago
It is a similar situation to hurricane evacuations. A forced evacuation will save lives, but forced evacuations that turn out to be a false alarm because the storm changed direction causes people to ignore future evacuations leading to more deaths. There is no right answer
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Look at NYC. They've been on lockdown weeks. The first responders and hospitals are STILL fighting a losing battle. Imagine if we weren't on lockdown and there were a ton of other emergencies like car crashes, accidental impalement, etc... a lot of non-covid emergencies are probably still happening, but we'd probably triple or quadruple the load on an already stressed hospital system. It'd be disastrous. The proof is right there in NYC. Now they're - their own thing. Not sure this would play out in most other cities being smaller than NYC, but if Italy has any bearing - Bergamo ran out of burial plots in the cemetary and had to start stacking bodies in churches like it's the 1420's. The right answer is caution > mass destruction. Another good case study is comparing the sweden to switzerland or denmark. I don't have high hopes in a vaccine before at least 2-3 years since the fastest vaccine ever took 5 years, but drugs to mitigate symptoms and outcomes -- the longer we slow it, the more lives saved when we do have a good treatment. HIV doesn't have a vaccine, but it does have decent treatment options now, I think covid will be easier to find good treatments but we just need time for all the studies to bear fruit.
JackFr 6y ago
> if the US had decent unemployment insurance, like germany, then unemployment would be 10% of what it is now. I’m not sure I understand how better UI reduces unemployment. But more importantly unemployment only captures half the problem. Businesses are not designed to go into hibernation. If asked you to hold your breath for two hours, it’s gonna be tough for you to start breathing again when I give the all clear.
- boudin 6y ago
  All those are man made problem and have solution. Our system is not designed to be paused, but can be changed to do so. To pause the spread of a virus is much harder.
  - okr 6y ago
    Do you have an idea on how to implement a pause function into the economy? We live with the flue, but actually a pause could help there too to stop the spread in the season. Who pushes the pause button? How do the businesses agree on pushing their pause button at the same time? Should there be a pausing fund? Paid in by all businesses that make business overseas? I find this interesting. Reminds me a little bit on traffic jams. If cars were automated, all cars could start/stop at the same time.
    - rswail 6y ago
      We have a pause function, it is when governments issue public health and safety orders. The people that push the pause button are elected governments, There is a pausing fund, it is taxes and government borrowing through the national debt.
      - okr 6y ago
        I agree. But did not consider it as a solution. :)
    - boudin 6y ago
      I don't have the magical answer, but there's some elements in place to allow companies to stop their activities for a short amount of time (like furlough with a pay, like it's done in some countries, not sure how it works in the USA). Looking at how beneficial reducing trade and manufacturing has been for the environment, i can't help but think that we need to be able to take the same kind of action we've been taking for COVID-19 to address the other big challenges we're facing.
cmiles74 6y ago
I disagree that he's asking people to take a big gamble. While it seems unrealistic to me, Dr. Burry made a point of tying his recommendation to widespread, rapid testing and contact tracing. If these things were in place, I do think letting people that aren't in the most vulnerable population groups out and about might be reasonable. "A more nuanced approach would be for at risk groups — the obese, old and already-sick — to shelter in place, to execute widespread mandatory testing, and to ID and track as necessary while allowing society to function. Again, Trump should get the massive contract manufacturers like Flextronics to make testing machines." That said, we are still having problems getting the tests out and people are still complaining that it will take days to get results back. I personally know a pharmacist with an at-risk child who can't get a test as of last week. So this seems like wishful thinking to me. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/next-covid-19-testing-crisis/609193/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/03/next-covi...
- xtiansimon 6y ago
  I think you missed this gem: > "Vaccines are not coming anytime soon, so natural immunity is the only way out for now."
gremlinsinc 6y ago
I've got vitamin D deficiency (gastric sleeve surgery)... usually forget my supplement. Been taking it religiously for a month... hope that helps if I get it (obese + sleep apnea + 40 are my only co-morbidities -that and I do get bronchitis a lot had it earlier in the spring from nasal drip.)

conformist 6y ago

He also publicly claimed that index funds are a bubble fairly recently. (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-09-04/michael-burry-explains-why-index-funds-are-like-subprime-cdos https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/arti...) Two thoughts: Maybe bloomberg will interview him whenever they want a somewhat contrarian bearish view? If he made money from short positions now, could it have been for a reason completely unrelated to COVID?

cm2187 6y ago

It reminds me the often quoted story of the paperclip maximiser. This powerful AI set up by a factory to improve its production of paperclips. Its objective function is solely to maximise the number of paperclips produced. So it does a great job at it, then becomes out of control, starts consuming all resources on earth to produce more paperclips, and once it has destroyed earth, goes on to take over the universe to produce paperclips. I feel a lot of the scientific advisors to governments are "covid19 death minimisers", solely focusing on people dying from this virus at the expense of any other consideration, like the effect of elective procedures being postponed indefinitely, tens of millions of families in hardship, economic collapse, etc.

conformist 6y ago
Nice analogy. Seems like politically it's hard to agree on how to compare deaths to other adverse consequences? I suspect some political leaders are just focusing on deaths as the quanitity that's easiest to measure, whereas others truly believe that deaths due to Covid should have a very high weight compared to everything else? It's kind of understandable that scientific advisors focus on their respective topic of expertise, maybe the problem is more the aggregation and evaluation of views.
KozmoNau7 6y ago
> "at the expense of any other consideration, like the effect of elective procedures being postponed indefinitely, tens of millions of families in hardship, economic collapse, etc." Ideology is causing this, specifically the idea that medical services must be profitable, and the idea that if you don't work, you don't get to eat. That we even accept this premise is utterly absurd.
- JackFr 6y ago
  That’s ludicrous. And no one is saying that. The argument is how much is too much? Is there any limit to what the governors can ask? Cause it feels like they’re governing by diktat, with little transparency or accountability. People are ok with it, because there is enough trust in our institutions to carry us through public health crisis. But it will wear thin. Politicians and the chattering classes are far removed from the damage they are doing and far to self congratulatory.

KozmoNau7 6y ago

It is particularly ghoulish to accept the death of millions of people, simply because it would be better for the market. Really, this financial crisis was brewing and on its way, coronavirus or not, because we didn't take the lessons of the 2008 crash to heart. This pandemic was simply the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back, but it is very tempting for economists and politicians to place the blame squarely on this scapegoat, so they can continue the cycle of booms and busts, which benefits only those with enough capital to weather the risks and buy in at the bottom of the curve. If we want to break this destructive cycle, we need to rethink our approach to economics and society: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674980822 https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674980822

drcode 6y ago
Economic depressions kill people.
- KozmoNau7 6y ago
  Then perhaps let's rethink economics into something more sustainable and not plagued by booms and busts and rent-seekers. As an added benefit, we can make human civilization less harmful to the environment, by reducing our massive overconsumption and focus on sustainability.
- seamyb88 6y ago
  You spelt wealth inequality incorrectly.
CuriousSkeptic 6y ago
You might also enjoy the works of Mariana Mazzucato: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/18/the-covid-19-crisis-is-a-chance-to-do-capitalism-differently https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/18/the-co...

JackFr 6y ago

I think he is spot on. We are drowning in platitudes while people’s lives are being ruined. Entrepreneurs and small business owners are seeing their life’s work stripped from them by a policy choice served by ass covering politicians and a class of media elites ever willing to promote the post-modern illusion that death is subject to our whims and not the other way around.

rswail 6y ago
We are drowning in platitudes while people lives are being lost. People are having their lives stripped from them by economic policy choices that value unaccountable wealth accumulation combined with rent-seeking and corruption by a group of economic elites ever willing to promote the post-modern illusion that wealth and societal health is due to "job makers" and not the other way around. If the economy and business cannot survive what is now only 2 months of interruption, then perhaps the economic system needs to be more robust and structurally sound. Deregulation has led to an unaccountable financial "industry" that produces nothing except churn in the name of "liquidity". After the Great Depression, in addition to the economic stimulus in the US of WW2, the market and banking reforms led to a more proper focus on Main St and not Wall St. That focus needs to return.
twhitmore 6y ago
People's lives are worth millions of dollars. Each. Government estimates are around $5 million per life. It's the coronavirus causing economic damage, customers dying or having to stay home to avoid dying is bad for business. I don't know what planet this is not obvious to people on. Fastest way to address this is to quickly contain & suppress the virus -- isolation, testing, tracing, eradication -- after which careful & gradual reopening can occur. Of course this requires a competent government; a functioning health system would help too. So would a government capable of supporting businesses to put employees on paid furlough, pause interest on mortgages & debts, issue stimulus efficiently, etc. Many other countries are able to accomplish much of this -- unfortunately the US is largely not. Substantially due to the extractive capitalist/ monopolist attitudes of greed & "money at any cost" seen right above.

pinkfoot 6y ago

You will also note that Dr Burry doesn't live in Italy or NY and has enough money to escape to NZ in a private jet if he turns out to be wrong.

JackFr 6y ago
As someone who has been sheltering in place in NYC for the past three weeks, what is going on in the news media’s portrayal of New York? I’ve had random acquaintances reach out from abroad and across the country who I haven’t talked to in months or years reach out to see ‘how we’re surviving‘. The only people I know who fled New York did so because they owned larger homes which would be more comfortable, rather than a fear of the virus. You’d also be surprised how hard it is to escape to New Zealand right now.
- EdwardDiego 6y ago
  > You’d also be surprised how hard it is to escape to Mew Zealand right now. Yep, closed to all but citizens and permanent residents - so unless you pulled off a Peter Thiel[1] (sigh), you're shit outta luck at the moment. [1]: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-got-new-zealand-citizenship/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/indepth/national/how-peter-thiel-...
- antidaily 6y ago
  13000 dead people tends to make headlines.
- nwallin 6y ago
  9/11 killed 2,977 people, mostly in NYC. COVID has (at the time of this writing, 2020-04-19 5:40AM PDT) killed 13,157 people in NYC alone. If you scroll through the list of counties in the US sorted by COVID death toll, the majority of the places at the top of the list are within spitting distance of NYC. Of the top ten, two of them are places I don't associate with NYC. (Detroit and Chicago) (to be fair, one of the top ten is "Unassociated New York" which may include all sorts of stuff in upstate) These 8 areas total to 18,742 deaths, which is 48% of the total number of deaths in the United States, 11% of the total deaths in the world. It's nothing to do with the media. It's the pile of dead bodies. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594... Edit: There are 13,157 deaths, and 135,527 cases, which is about 10%. Los Angeles county has 577 deaths and 12,051 cases, which is less than half the fatality rate. Suffice to say it's overwhelmed the healthcare system there.

lordnacho 6y ago

I don't think it's crazy to balance the economy with lives lost. Much like how we accept that some people will die in traffic accidents if the speed limit is a certain number. However it seemed last month that the correct thing to do was to close down. At least so that hospitals were not overwhelmed, causing extra deaths beyond the "natural" amount for this disease and others that people use hospitals to treat. In other words, a non-linear effect on death rates caused by the sudden spike. Now we're between a rock and a hard place, because while taking a week or two off would be tough but OK for most businesses, taking 4 weeks or 8 weeks off is not simply 4x or 8x as bad. Thus, another, competing, non-linear effect. We also have the problem that the pandemic is not synchronized, so any area that does manage to keep it down is going to have to keep the border closed towards people from places where it's still going on. The only solution that seems like a good compromise is to have lots of testing so that people who know they are infected, even ones who don't feel ill, can be quarantined. Also of course generally keep old people away from too much contact with everyone else. But somehow even months after the virus was discovered, the number of people tested anywhere is not really high. I would have thought we'd ramp up production of test kits massively so that everyone who's been near someone positive is tested, plus everyone else is randomly tested.

jdc 6y ago
Part of me says well if we could just put rents on hold, that would take care of the obvious problem. But [K]N95/FFP2 masks for all, and high-scale testing and tracing makes going back to work a lot more appealing.
imglorp 6y ago
What if we spent $1 trillion on the science of testing and treatment instead of bailing out more congressional darlings? It's not like we don't have the dough.
- travisoneill1 6y ago
  Past a certain point, you can't buy speed.
6y ago

transfire 6y ago

If the entire world would just agree that EVERYONE must stay home for two weeks at the same time, the whole thing would effectively be over and done with. In fact, I've been saying this for over a decade now... We should have a global holiday every ten years doing exactly this, as it would seriously decimate all contagious disease populations.

dna_polymerase 6y ago

Is there any legitimate study regarding Chloroquine by now? Last thing I heard was that it is useless. Michael Burry sounds like any other right winger by now.

spodek 6y ago

> “Universal stay-at-home is the most devastating economic force in modern history" Pursuing perpetual economic growth, combined with externalizing costs where possible, on a finite planet beats its devastation by far. Among other things, that growth and externalizing costs led to factory farming and encroaching into wildlife territory that have caused pandemics to increase in recent decades. Not limiting that growth -- at least limiting the number of animals we pack together -- will create more pandemics. Limiting it won't solve everything but it will decrease a lot of problems, including pandemics. Why pandemics will keep increasing: https://shows.acast.com/leadership-and-the-environment/episodes/318-why-pandemics-will-keep-increasing-and-how-we-can-revers https://shows.acast.com/leadership-and-the-environment/episo...

bitxbit 6y ago

If he’s so vocal about the virus lockdown destroying lives, why was he never vocal about wars? Wars literally destroy lives and economies. Total destruction. Gimme a break. He’s piping up because he bet on the Russell (which completely went against him earlier this year) and those companies will get punished disproportionately due to the lockdown. There’s way too much emphasis on listening to financial figures when in fact they are just as clueless if not more. Money does not equate to intelligence and wisdom. Be wary of listening to people with a lot to lose. By the way, his take on passive investing is only half right. There’s a reset every quarter. The way to play it is to short single name volatility at earnings.

laminarflow 6y ago
Did you read the article? "He told Bloomberg News last month that he placed a “significant bearish market bet that is working out for now,” without providing details except to say it was a trade of a “good size” against indexes."

xtiansimon 6y ago

> “It very suddenly reverses the gains of underprivileged groups, kills and creates drug addicts, beats and terrorizes women and children in violent now-jobless households, and more. It bleeds deep anguish and suicide.” This sounds the ravings of someone who acted like they saw the hidden gears moving the economy. Now they’re frighteningly uncertain, and want to exert their influence to regain their sense of comfortable uncertainty. And in the trade-offs, he's revealing his biases, which is careful to limit to good luck: > "Vaccines are not coming anytime soon, so natural immunity is the only way out for now." But we've heard enough from other people stupid enough to say it out loud--we're going to lose some % people, but the damage to the economy will be worse--to know what he's alluding to. Frighteningly uncertain, because if the absolute worst thing happens and everything goes MadMax, it's the wealthiest who will have targets on their backs--October Revolution. See. I can sound like an A$$, too.

GaryNumanVevo 6y ago

Those who control capital have decided that the human losses will largely be seen in the working class, who they see as expendable. People will die if the economy is re-opened, for them it's seen as an acceptable loss. Look at the minority of people protesting the lock down, a large majority are small business owners who want their employees to get back to work. Corona virus has effectively been a government mandated strike for labor (save "essential workers" at Amazon and the like) the likes of which the capitalist class haven't yet seen.