12 ms·

Seattle’s leaders let scientists take the lead, New York’s did not

176 points by prostoalex 7y ago

jniedrauer 7y ago
The social engineering aspect of pandemic control is fascinating and something I had never considered before. It's not enough to put the right policies in place. You have to get people to actually follow them (voluntarily). It's like writing a user story on a grand scale.
- thomascgalvin 7y ago
  There are basically three groups of people now: those who are taking this seriously and social distancing, those who think this is some kind of hoax and are gleefully ignoring any advice or orders from the government, and those that are "essential" and have no choice in the matter. The hoaxers are a clear and present threat to the essential workers. The number of MBTA staff infected with COVID-19 has more than doubled in the past week; they can't avoid people, and they're being infected by those who won't.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    I think it is disingenuous to imply that the only people on public transit right now are those working there and those ignorant people treating it all as a hoax and taking the transit anyway. You would be surprised to find out how many of essential workers rely on public transport to get to their jobs.
    - thomascgalvin 7y ago
      I was only using the MBTA as an example of essential workers. There is a large segment of the public that is fucked right now because we need them to work, and have no way to protect them. The fact that there is a large segment of the population that is happy to spread this virus only exacerbates the issue.
      - paypalcust83 7y ago
        Yep. Thank both the greed of the ruling class and the cowardice of the serf class to assent to even more dire poverty. A few UBI crumbs "that will last 10 weeks" could be the "let them eat cake"-moment, but it is extremely unlikely because the vasty majority of people are cowards and will take any injustice over a barrel because they believe they have no power (learned helplessness).
        downerending 7y ago
        > Thank both the greed of the ruling class He didn't say "they need to work" (although they might). He said "we need them to work". No matter how greedy the ruling class might be, we still need medical people to staff hospitals, police to police, firemen, etc. These people are not serfs or cowards because they're going to their jobs.
  - pengaru 7y ago
    We're not stopping the spread of covid, with or without "hoaxers", this is going to run its course. We're just slowing it to a manageable rate with fairly extreme measures like lock-downs (which will likely be loosening soon anyways), and I don't see small pockets of uncooperative people making a sizable difference in the general outcome, not at this stage.
  - lisper 7y ago
    > The hoaxers A minor but salient point: in common usage, a hoaxer would be a person perpetrating a hoax, not a person who believes (incorrectly) that someone else is perpetrating a hoax. The people who you are referring to hear are better labelled "denialists" than "hoaxers".
    - felipemnoa 7y ago
      I think he is using it in the same spirit as the word "truther".
      - mlyle 7y ago
        I think so too, but it still breaks the language by rendering the main word we have for "someone who perpetuates a hoax" ambiguous.
      - lisper 7y ago
        Yes, but the difference is that "hoaxer" is already an English word with an established meaning, namely, one who perpetrates a hoax. "Truther" did not already have an established meaning before it was coined to mean what it does.
      - lowdose 7y ago
        I think by reversing the meaning of the word hoaxer he can maintain the same rhetoric from his 2016 election to secure his next presidency while making 180 degree turn on what he is actually selling. The democrats will all fall over each other commenting how Trump bends the truth. This will waist so much attention time of the people that could have been used to actual sell on important issues. Donald steered the conversation once again captures momentum and wins.
    - klyrs 7y ago
      The irony is that misinformation campaigns are the actual hoax here... calling them "hoaxers" is more accurate than you suggest. The real lesson I got from the article is that politicians are the worst face of a pandemic response: it risks that half of the populace will do the opposite of the advice given. Once the issue is politicized, that snowballs -- propaganda has infected modern discourse to a disturbing degree, and it's hard to see well-organized denialism being amplified by far-right media as anything but a cold-hearted hoax.
  - listenallyall 7y ago
    Vast simplification that undermines working-class people. Tens of millions of people have lost their job and income, while bills continue to accumulate. It's fair to acknowledge the potential risks of contracting COVID-19, and still decide, I'd prefer to work, observing sanitization & social distancing measures, than to have my entire financial life ruined. We just had the NFL draft this week. Plenty of these players will have their bodies seriously harmed in the next few years, while others will get multiple concussions and potentially set themselves up for CTE or other brain damage. Not once did anyone raise any alarms about, maybe these young people shouldn't go into this line of work...
    - pgsbathhouse2 7y ago
      >than to have my entire financial life ruined. You know we can just literally choose to not have this problem, instead of buying into other people's narratives. >Not once did anyone raise any alarms about, maybe these young people shouldn't go into this line of work Actually plenty of people do. It's just not a very thrilling subject to the U.S. populace.
      - willvarfar 7y ago
        > we can just literally choose to not have this problem how can people facing financial ruin right now choose not to have it?
        maxerickson 7y ago
        That clearly isn't what they mean, they are talking about society taking steps to minimize the financial harm. The feasibility of succeeding at that is a different thing than your question.
        scottLobster 7y ago
        So technically correct is the best kind of correct? The feasibility of succeeding makes the point moot, and frankly makes it sound like puerile moralizing. You might as well say, in the wake of a murder, "well your society could stop murder altogether if they decided not to kill each other". Especially considering that we've already passed the largest economic bailout/safety net measures in world history in a matter of 3 weeks, and it looks like more is on the way. It would seem that "society" is doing its best over here given the realities of the situation, theoretical Kumbaya ideals aside.
  - lixtra 7y ago
    > basically three groups of people now I can imagine more groups. For example people might need to get out of the city/house for psychological reasons. Taking a small chance to get/spread the virus might be better than hurting oneself/others.
  - cactus2093 7y ago
    I’m seeing a lot of in between in my own friend/friend of friends networks. Particularly in SF it seems a lot of people don’t quite think this is a hoax, but just aren’t very concerned and are stretching the boundaries of the stay at home order as much as they can. Big groups are meeting up in parks where they don’t all live walking distance away, just hanging out having picnics. Lots of people are eating together in the street outside of takeout places. And lots of politicians are even encouraging this kind of thing. So aside from the shit show of the Trump administration, I’m not seeing even the areas that are being praised as being the “best” in America really take this seriously. At this point, it looks like we’re way off the trajectory of squashing the outbreak. The curve has plateaued, but we aren’t on track to get the numbers low enough to safely open businesses again and go back to containment and contact tracing. We’re failing at the “hammer” stage of the hammer and the dance, and it seems to me like the probable outcome at this point is a whack a mole of continuous, half hearted hammering for the next year or more where we won’t be able to lift this lockdown much at all.
  - closeparen 7y ago
    Maybe you’ve stopped seeing friends but still have sex your non-cohabitating partner. Maybe you went for a walk with a friend and tried to keep 6 feet away but slipped up. Maybe there was an emotional moment and you touched them before you could think. Maybe you had one person over for a special occasion. Lots of people have at least some intention to take it seriously, but not the steely heart for the hardcore isolation that’s required.
- paypalcust83 7y ago
  The world isn't software engineering; if anything, it's philosophy. I look at it this way, and it sounds harsh but it's big-time decision-making life: 1. You could compel people to listen to something to ensure their safety by force, and then have a riot. OR 2. You could urge sensible people do something for their own safety while letting the idiots commit suicide and clean-up the gene pool in the process. I say take option #2 all-day, everyday because it's easier, cheaper, and better for others who do listen to have one less fewer, stupid liability in the world who would otherwise put others in danger.
  - qqssccfftt 7y ago
    I would rather take 100 "idiots" in the gene pool for genetic diversity Of course, "idiot" is pretty relative, and not everyone going out is an idiot, but that would undermine your eugenics argument
  - mlyle 7y ago
    Option 2 doesn't really work with an exponential process. There are people who have to work for society to continue functioning who have no choice but to be exposed to the "idiots", and even people able to self-isolated generally cannot completely remove encounters that could cause infection, but instead just greatly reduce them.
    - NotSammyHagar 7y ago
      Correct. Other people's idiotic choices have deadly implications for everyone else. That's why we can't just let people ignore this problem. They don't just hurt themselves.
      - mlyle 7y ago
        At the same time, we can't just let zeal/fear drive us into making the short-term safest choices that may not be safest in the long run. I do think we're overshooting the other way.
        7y ago
- bb2018 7y ago
  I agree. I think the issue with mask recommendations was ultimately that politicians/public health officials were worried people would put on a mask and then feel invincible, therefore leading to more spread. I think that is the case with lots of calls to re-open now. There are so many businesses that could return safely now if people followed safety protocol, but realistically not only will there be unintentional safety errors but loosening of some government restrictions will lead to the loosening of people's personal safetly restrictions they have been doing since the start.
untog 7y ago
As a New Yorker it's been eye opening to see the extent of the Cuomo worship nation (world?!) wide during the COVID outbreak. The view of Cuomo from many in the city was quite negative before, and I've been waiting to see how long it'll be before perceptions snap back to reality. Stories like this feel like the start of that, and there will be much more to come.
- MiroF 7y ago
  I find it particularly odd given that the reason Cuomo is in the spotlight is because his state has done so so poorly, even compared to areas with similar density.
  - airstrike 7y ago
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any area in the US has "similar density" to NYC
    - mlyle 7y ago
      OK, correcting you since you're wrong: It's not just New York City that's done badly, but smaller cities and areas of upstate New York that are quite similar to large parts of the rest of the country (that have done comparatively better).
      - airstrike 7y ago
        > OK, correcting you since you're wrong: It's not just New York City that's done badly, but smaller cities and areas of upstate New York that are quite similar to large parts of the rest of the country (that have done comparatively better). If by upstate NYC you mean Westchester County, that's still largely affected by the spread of the virus in NYC given how interlinked the two communities are. Going by https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronavirus-cases.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronav..., NYC is the most affected per capita, with Westchester placing #3
    - 7y ago
3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
I think it’s a good thing that the states have taken different approaches at solving the problem. This is how we experiment and improve on the system. You can’t make innovation without experimentation. If the federal government rolled in with a heavy hand, we’re all stuck with whatever they think is best. The governors should be the ones that decide for their state, and the federal government should support that in whatever way possible. The same is said for countries. When the dust settles we can examine the data and see what really worked and what made things worse. This is how we become stronger.
- untog 7y ago
  > Tom Frieden, the former C.D.C. director, has estimated that, if New York had started implementing stay-at-home orders ten days earlier than it did, it might have reduced COVID-19 deaths by fifty to eighty per cent. Obviously that's one person's view, but if it's true that means somewhere between 5,550 and 8,800 people have died needlessly. Innovation is good, but not at any cost.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    More local control might actually have helped in New York, as Governor Cuomo initially blocked stronger measures proposed by Mayor DeBlasio.
    - untog 7y ago
      I don't think that's actually true. On the 17th de Blasio announced that it might happen and he'd release the decision within 48 hours. Cuomo smacked that down but then issued a shelter in place order on the 20th. So there's up to three days variance there. Realistically it's one day. But the point in the article is that both politicians should have been considering shelter in place ten days before.
      - leereeves 7y ago
        I didn't mean to imply that DeBlasio might have locked down NY City 10 days earlier; just that he probably would have done so a couple days earlier. And even a couple of days might have helped. I think he would have because DeBlasio implemented quite a few restrictions earlier. On the 13th, he cancelled large gatherings and limited smaller venues to 50% capacity. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/138-20/mayor-de-blasio-issues-state-emergency https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/138-20/mayor-d... On the 15th, he issued an order closing bars and restaurants, https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/152-20/statement-mayor-de-blasio-bars-restaurants-entertainment-venues https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/152-20/stateme... and closed schools. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/151-20/new-york-city-close-all-school-buildings-transition-remote-learning https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/151-20/new-yor... Even San Francisco didn't issue a lockdown order until the 16th, and Washington state was even later than NY. I don't remember anyone considering a lockdown on the 10th.
mschuster91 7y ago
Under normal conditions, people should follow the scientists without requiring orders from politicians out of their own common sense and could differ between quackery and actual science - instead we have 100 people calling the Maryland covid19 hotline about injecting disinfectant and 30 ppl in NYC actually consuming disinfectant. What happened instead is the result of decades of underfunding in the educational system colliding with years of trust in media being undermined (most obviously with the current Presidency, but mis-information was a thing before his campaign), trust in politicians generally being eroded for decades (gridlocked Congress, Iraq WMD lie) and decades of underfunding of social security nets - of course it is a hard decision to close schools when literally tens of thousands of kids rely on them for basic needs such as food and clothes washing! The crisis is entirely on the last decades of inaction and underfunding. And not only in the USA (where it is the worst) but also in other parts of the world. I hope that the world at least learns from all the needless death...
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  This just seems like an ahistorical summary. Lots of people were following the science without requiring orders. Until mid-March, most American politicians were trying to get people to stop being cautious, because their caution was bad for business.
DenisM 7y ago
[...] For three days, dozens of that man’s family members had sat at his bedside in the hospital [...] The next day, the man with all the family visitors died. [...] So I am not easily impressed, but this freaked me out for a second. Just to be clear - one man had died on that day, not dozens of people. Sheesh. I suppose there's some valuable comma somewhere in that sentence, or absence thereof, that should have kept me on the even keel? Or did they just did that on purpose? I would have written it off as just another error, but I am having hard time accepting that The New Yorker would let that slip through by accident.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  I don't see it as ambiguous but I see what you are referring to.
- uranusjr 7y ago
  Asking as a non-native speaker, how would you write this sentence instead? I tried but cannot produce any syntactically correct alternative better than this.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    "For three days, dozens of his family members sat at his bedside in the hospital. The next day he died." Still a little awkward but not bending the language to the breaking point. Pretty sad considering New Yorker's editorial prowess.
    - maxerickson 7y ago
      The next day, when the patient in his 50's died, Reido's thoughts immediately went to the dozens of visitors the man had in the previous days.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    The man, who had had all the visitors, died. The frequently-visited man died. The day after he'd had all the visitors, he died.
paypalcust83 7y ago
Dunning-Kruger has the best science.
throwawaysea 7y ago
This is a rosy take to fit the narrative, although the article is correct that New York made some big mistakes. Seattle leaders have also taken missteps. For example they closed all the parks on Easter weekend, an unnecessarily drastic step that probably just resulted in people grouping elsewhere in smaller, more crowded spaces. The parking lots at most parks remain closed, making it much harder for people needing a mental break to deal with all this. More broadly, Washington state also has restrictions other states don’t - for instance fishing is banned, which makes no sense given that it is a pastime that naturally requires distancing. Same with golfing. Private construction is banned but public construction is not. State parks and national forest lands are closed, despite most being desolate and full of space. Cycling and jogging on Seattle’s popular citywide trails however, are not banned, despite it being a much more likely vector for spreading via aerosol particles (note, some other areas like France have banned cycling for this reason). There is an inconsistency and inequality in how these restrictions were selected. The arbitrary nature makes me think it is simply was what was politically expedient, rather some principled design. As for an example of political expediency, right now the city’s socialist council is trying to pass an “Amazon tax” under the auspices of the mayor’s emergency proclamation, which due to a technicality would make it immune to subsequent referendum even after the emergency expires (https://sccinsight.com/2020/04/08/the-amazon-tax-bill-is-designed-to-be-immune-to-referendum/ https://sccinsight.com/2020/04/08/the-amazon-tax-bill-is-des...). If Seattle or Washington were truly responsible, they should’ve shut port traffic (at airports) early and aggressively. Even if that wouldn’t have stopped the coronavirus from arriving ultimately, it would have at least delayed it and provided more time to prepare. I think they should also have taken steps to make their shelter orders more nuanced, rather than the blunt weapon one size fits all approach.
- plandis 7y ago
  I live near Green Lake in Seattle and in my experience on nice days Green Lake is so crowded that people are certainly not 6ft apart consistently. I also do a lot of hiking and on nice days the popular (and most accessible) trails are utterly packed with people. There would be no way you would be able to consistently stay 6ft apart.
  - 7y ago
kerng 7y ago
I think that many large corporations announced March 6th, that their workforce stay home until at least end of month helped raise awareness throughout the Seattle area, and made people become a lot more conscious. The government did not act as fast on the West Coast either.
phasnox 7y ago
How many flights does NYC receive per day? How many does Seattle receive? The current state of both cities has nothing to do with what they did or didn't. Same thing with Europe. The most affected countries are the most visited ones. Which also makes me question about the effectiveness of lockdowns.
- rishirishi 7y ago
  As I see it, lockdowns are not effective and were a massive mistake. You may find this epidemiologist's perspective to be interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY
  - TimJRobinson 7y ago
    From looking at the current infection graphs Sweden is about to have a very bad time. When 99% of epidemiologists are saying one thing and you have to seek out a contrarion ask yourself if you're really being helpful or just trying to confirm your existing beliefs.
    - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
      That is an important question to ask, but I think in this case the answer is that it's helpful. That other 99% really don't seem to know for sure lockdowns are effective; the only arguments I've ever seen them present are "my model says they're effective" or "it would be strange in principle if they weren't". (Some laypeople draw dishonest comparisons to control measures for the Spanish Flu, but epidemiologists know that these measures didn't include orders to stay at home or close all businesses.)
    - mardifoufs 7y ago
      People have been saying that about Sweden for about 2 months now yet we still don't see any catastrophe happening there. Their hospitals are doing just fine, they aren't overwhelmed and there is no uncontrollable mortality. Why would Sweden suddenly do much worst now? It's curve has flattened and they are even closing emergency ICUs they setup but never had to use.
sigzero 7y ago
Virginia isn't doing it either. Northam (a doctor) doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing.
enitihas 7y ago
I read this article long back and it really resonated with me https://threader.app/thread/1218724150312751104 https://threader.app/thread/1218724150312751104 . It explains why people solving problems proactively before they become huge issues get much less credit than people doing it reactively when the problem has become much worse and putting heroic efforts.
- ISL 7y ago
  Investors who nurture a good bet early do get rewarded. Not always, but sometimes. Covid-19 makes clear that we should be showering the people who stopped SARS, the many Ebola outbreaks, and more with gratitude.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  It's pretty much the same thing as the classic hero problem solver and it's in computer programming too. The person who does a good design, tests, finds bugs ... doesn't get as much credit as the person who puts in Herculean efforts at the last moment to save the day.
  - runawaybottle 7y ago
    Many a career has been birthed from Hero coding, sadly.
    - rxhernandez 7y ago
      Maybe heroes are needed just as much as people that do good designs. Maybe it's more akin to a dichotomy of people that build good houses that hardly catch fire and firefighters who put out fires; even in the extreme case that you build nothing but houses that hardly catch fire, it won't mean that you don't need firefighters; in the nominal case of an economically feasible amount (I doubt many MVPs could take on the cost to make them near fireproof) of almost fireproof houses, it might approximate to needing both equally as much. Frankly, I've been on both sides of the aisle when it comes to projects that allowed for great design and projects that resulted in doing an endless marathon for 3 weeks straight to put out a fire because of poor design; I can tell you without a doubt that doing great design doesn't take anywhere near as much of a toll on your body and mind as doing an endless marathon; I've severely damaged interpersonal relationships (that I can't undamage) through these marathons.
yters 7y ago
To be a truly scientific study, we need to look at more than two instances of scientists leading and not leading.
- notatoad 7y ago
  anecdotes are really the only way to know whether or not science can be trusted. (/s)
grej 7y ago
I think this kind of retrospective look at these two datapoints is probably not focused on the right thing at this point. This article picks on DeBlasio / Cuomo and indirectly DeBlasio’s health commissioner heavily for encouraging continued going out to restaurants and events and riding the subway in late Feb and into mid-March. But remember in late Feb the President was still saying it was going to just magically go away. Bay Area politicians including the speaker of the house Pelosi were encouraging lots of people to come to Chinatown parades. Florida even left their beaches open all the way through mid March for spring breakers to come. While those events have almost certainly led to additional cases and deaths, other areas of the country seem to have largely gotten away with a less proactive and later response than Seattle. I think we are probably going to see that the real challenge on NY is that we just don’t have another city in the US with New York’s density, air travel volume, and high utilization of public transit. Comparing NY to Seattle just because they are both in the US is probably not as relevant. Given what we know now about the propensity of high volume super spreader events to drive the bulk of the R0, NY can probably only really fairly be compared to London and Paris in the Western world, at least.
- ianlevesque 7y ago
  > other areas of the country seem to have largely gotten away with a less proactive and later response Seattle. This assessment is really premature.
  - grej 7y ago
    Of course you are correct, but the article is also a “so far” assessment. We’re right now in the middle of the response. Every assessment, right now, is at a point in time. And so, to a degree, premature. We can only look at the information we have currently.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  No, I'm sorry, you're missing the point of the article. One of those places had politicians using more economic and political considerations leading to their choices. Seattle has those forces but generally acceded to the guidance of scientists.
dekhn 7y ago
In a few years, not now, we'll be able to look back and say with some confidence which actions saved lives (and didn't have an equivalently large negative effect on the economy). It does seem likely that, in areas with dense populations like cities, rapid early isolation made a significant difference in the overall impact on the care system. It is still entirely unclear what the longer term outcomes will be, since we can't all isolate indefinitely, so presumably, everybody will get infected eventually.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  We won't have the economic counterfactuals really. At some point, people would have got the idea about reducing contacts for themselves, but say that didn't happen in New York until 2 or 3 or 4 times as many people were infected. Not a ridiculous scenario, and who knows what the economic situation would be.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- lokl 7y ago
  No, we might not all get infected eventually, if there is an effective vaccine.
  - theferalrobot 7y ago
    And/or it mutates (which will in all likelihood be into something less deadly/more like the typical flu).
- toyg 7y ago
  Not everyone gets the flu every year.
  - greedo 7y ago
    That's because the flu isn't as contagious.
AzzieElbab 7y ago
NYC, to put it bluntly is a country of its own. It requires a completely different calibre of management in the City Hall. Definitely not what they have right now
carapace 7y ago
> One of the E.I.S.’s core principles is that a pandemic is a communications emergency as much as a medical crisis.
wishdev 7y ago
The revisionist history attempts by the "scientists" in Seattle are staggering. On Feb 26th, every single level of the Seattle "scientific" community laughed at Ms. Reid, the Superintendent of the Northshore School District when she closed Bothell High School over a potent positive case of a staff member that travelled overseas. She wanted to make sure her students were safe and the building was disinfected. The "scientific" King County Deptartment of Health went as far as to specifcally send out a document stating that closure was unwarranted - they did not just sit there and let her do her job - they went out of their way to ensure the public was informed they thought she was nuts. You do not get to do that and then claim to be the greatest organization of all time 2 days later.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  I have a different understanding. Before there was evidence, the health depts were not pushing things. The article goes over that. As soon as they got evidence (that's what those pesky scientists like, darn them), then they started doing what this article says. One of the earliest public things I'm aware of this posting from a scientist in Seattle on Feb 29th, by researcher Trevor Bedford, part of the Seattle Flu Study about covid-19 tracing genetically. They were testing flu samples for covid-19 (the govt refused permission for them to do that but eventually they just did it, because it was so important). https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1233970271318503426 https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1233970271318503426
  - wishdev 7y ago
    Sorry - this is the original letter that went out on Feb 26th - https://www.nsd.org/blog/~board/superintendent-blog/post/letter-to-families-bothell-high-school-closure https://www.nsd.org/blog/~board/superintendent-blog/post/let... 3rd paragraph is the grovelling the school district needed to do to deal with the interference of the King County Health Department. There is also the "red dawn" emails which clearly show that King County was not doing a single thing in the face of knowing it was a problem - Dr. Duchin (King County Health) on March 1st - not 4 days after this public rebuke of the school idstrict. "We are having a very serious challenge related to hospital exposures and impact on the healthcare system. Would be great to have a call to discuss. Will be meeting with your team here this morning and then maybe we can chat after that" So it goes from laughing to all hell breaking loose to doing nothing for almost 2 more weeks? That's the Health Department leading the way?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
daxfohl 7y ago
I'd love to agree with this article, but I don't think it holds much water. * Washington schools closed very late. My friends' schools in Indianapolis had already been closed a week. * Barely any of the volunteer WFH was taken, at least among my group at Microsoft. Maybe 10% participation. * Volunteer child removal from school was spotty, maybe 25%, not enough to make a huge difference. While I like most of how our governor has managed it, and I like science, I have a hard time saying that it's more than marginally responsible for the NYC - SEA disparity. In fact as the article alludes, many of the decisions were driven by factors beyond the need to minimize covid deaths, like providing school lunches for families who couldn't afford them. So coming to the conclusion that these decisions are responsible for the disparity is disingenuous. All the other points in the article, including luck, carry a lot more weight. NYC is the city that never sleeps. SEA is the city where if one person is Sleepless then they make a bestselling movie about it.... The other things really that might make a difference, that few have mentioned is that * The first hit of the virus was ripping through a life care center. That put people naturally on edge. * Knicks and Nets both had long homestands during the beginning of the outbreak, whereas let's just say the Sonics have been on a rather long road trip.
- kixiQu 7y ago
  Seattle public schools closed before the whole state, which is what you would expect. I think if the experts of evaluating these policies are saying that putting them in place without delay saved lives, it's probably unwise for all us armchair epidemiologists to sit around coming up with other things we think might explain it.
irrational 7y ago
I see some states saying that they want to reopen by a certain day. I appreciate my governor’s proclamation that she’s not going to give a date but the lock down will continue until she says so. That seems a lot more logical than setting a arbitrary date in the future and either disappointing people when it turns out to not be realistic or going for it anyway and creating a massive health crisis.
jfnixon 7y ago
Ah, letting scientists take the lead would explain why WA State shut down the Seattle Flu Study's efforts to pivot to investigate Covid-19. https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/seattle-flu-study-allegedly-tested-samples-for-covid-19-against-federal-state-guidelines https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/seattle-flu-study-alle...

176 points by prostoalex 7y ago

The social engineering aspect of pandemic control is fascinating and something I had never considered before. It's not enough to put the right policies in place. You have to get people to actually follow them (voluntarily). It's like writing a user story on a grand scale.

thomascgalvin 7y ago
There are basically three groups of people now: those who are taking this seriously and social distancing, those who think this is some kind of hoax and are gleefully ignoring any advice or orders from the government, and those that are "essential" and have no choice in the matter. The hoaxers are a clear and present threat to the essential workers. The number of MBTA staff infected with COVID-19 has more than doubled in the past week; they can't avoid people, and they're being infected by those who won't.
- filoleg 7y ago
  I think it is disingenuous to imply that the only people on public transit right now are those working there and those ignorant people treating it all as a hoax and taking the transit anyway. You would be surprised to find out how many of essential workers rely on public transport to get to their jobs.
  - thomascgalvin 7y ago
    I was only using the MBTA as an example of essential workers. There is a large segment of the public that is fucked right now because we need them to work, and have no way to protect them. The fact that there is a large segment of the population that is happy to spread this virus only exacerbates the issue.
    - paypalcust83 7y ago
      Yep. Thank both the greed of the ruling class and the cowardice of the serf class to assent to even more dire poverty. A few UBI crumbs "that will last 10 weeks" could be the "let them eat cake"-moment, but it is extremely unlikely because the vasty majority of people are cowards and will take any injustice over a barrel because they believe they have no power (learned helplessness).
      - downerending 7y ago
        > Thank both the greed of the ruling class He didn't say "they need to work" (although they might). He said "we need them to work". No matter how greedy the ruling class might be, we still need medical people to staff hospitals, police to police, firemen, etc. These people are not serfs or cowards because they're going to their jobs.
- pengaru 7y ago
  We're not stopping the spread of covid, with or without "hoaxers", this is going to run its course. We're just slowing it to a manageable rate with fairly extreme measures like lock-downs (which will likely be loosening soon anyways), and I don't see small pockets of uncooperative people making a sizable difference in the general outcome, not at this stage.
- lisper 7y ago
  > The hoaxers A minor but salient point: in common usage, a hoaxer would be a person perpetrating a hoax, not a person who believes (incorrectly) that someone else is perpetrating a hoax. The people who you are referring to hear are better labelled "denialists" than "hoaxers".
  - felipemnoa 7y ago
    I think he is using it in the same spirit as the word "truther".
    - mlyle 7y ago
      I think so too, but it still breaks the language by rendering the main word we have for "someone who perpetuates a hoax" ambiguous.
    - lisper 7y ago
      Yes, but the difference is that "hoaxer" is already an English word with an established meaning, namely, one who perpetrates a hoax. "Truther" did not already have an established meaning before it was coined to mean what it does.
    - lowdose 7y ago
      I think by reversing the meaning of the word hoaxer he can maintain the same rhetoric from his 2016 election to secure his next presidency while making 180 degree turn on what he is actually selling. The democrats will all fall over each other commenting how Trump bends the truth. This will waist so much attention time of the people that could have been used to actual sell on important issues. Donald steered the conversation once again captures momentum and wins.
  - klyrs 7y ago
    The irony is that misinformation campaigns are the actual hoax here... calling them "hoaxers" is more accurate than you suggest. The real lesson I got from the article is that politicians are the worst face of a pandemic response: it risks that half of the populace will do the opposite of the advice given. Once the issue is politicized, that snowballs -- propaganda has infected modern discourse to a disturbing degree, and it's hard to see well-organized denialism being amplified by far-right media as anything but a cold-hearted hoax.
- listenallyall 7y ago
  Vast simplification that undermines working-class people. Tens of millions of people have lost their job and income, while bills continue to accumulate. It's fair to acknowledge the potential risks of contracting COVID-19, and still decide, I'd prefer to work, observing sanitization & social distancing measures, than to have my entire financial life ruined. We just had the NFL draft this week. Plenty of these players will have their bodies seriously harmed in the next few years, while others will get multiple concussions and potentially set themselves up for CTE or other brain damage. Not once did anyone raise any alarms about, maybe these young people shouldn't go into this line of work...
  - pgsbathhouse2 7y ago
    >than to have my entire financial life ruined. You know we can just literally choose to not have this problem, instead of buying into other people's narratives. >Not once did anyone raise any alarms about, maybe these young people shouldn't go into this line of work Actually plenty of people do. It's just not a very thrilling subject to the U.S. populace.
    - willvarfar 7y ago
      > we can just literally choose to not have this problem how can people facing financial ruin right now choose not to have it?
      - maxerickson 7y ago
        That clearly isn't what they mean, they are talking about society taking steps to minimize the financial harm. The feasibility of succeeding at that is a different thing than your question.
        scottLobster 7y ago
        So technically correct is the best kind of correct? The feasibility of succeeding makes the point moot, and frankly makes it sound like puerile moralizing. You might as well say, in the wake of a murder, "well your society could stop murder altogether if they decided not to kill each other". Especially considering that we've already passed the largest economic bailout/safety net measures in world history in a matter of 3 weeks, and it looks like more is on the way. It would seem that "society" is doing its best over here given the realities of the situation, theoretical Kumbaya ideals aside.
- lixtra 7y ago
  > basically three groups of people now I can imagine more groups. For example people might need to get out of the city/house for psychological reasons. Taking a small chance to get/spread the virus might be better than hurting oneself/others.
- cactus2093 7y ago
  I’m seeing a lot of in between in my own friend/friend of friends networks. Particularly in SF it seems a lot of people don’t quite think this is a hoax, but just aren’t very concerned and are stretching the boundaries of the stay at home order as much as they can. Big groups are meeting up in parks where they don’t all live walking distance away, just hanging out having picnics. Lots of people are eating together in the street outside of takeout places. And lots of politicians are even encouraging this kind of thing. So aside from the shit show of the Trump administration, I’m not seeing even the areas that are being praised as being the “best” in America really take this seriously. At this point, it looks like we’re way off the trajectory of squashing the outbreak. The curve has plateaued, but we aren’t on track to get the numbers low enough to safely open businesses again and go back to containment and contact tracing. We’re failing at the “hammer” stage of the hammer and the dance, and it seems to me like the probable outcome at this point is a whack a mole of continuous, half hearted hammering for the next year or more where we won’t be able to lift this lockdown much at all.
- closeparen 7y ago
  Maybe you’ve stopped seeing friends but still have sex your non-cohabitating partner. Maybe you went for a walk with a friend and tried to keep 6 feet away but slipped up. Maybe there was an emotional moment and you touched them before you could think. Maybe you had one person over for a special occasion. Lots of people have at least some intention to take it seriously, but not the steely heart for the hardcore isolation that’s required.
paypalcust83 7y ago
The world isn't software engineering; if anything, it's philosophy. I look at it this way, and it sounds harsh but it's big-time decision-making life: 1. You could compel people to listen to something to ensure their safety by force, and then have a riot. OR 2. You could urge sensible people do something for their own safety while letting the idiots commit suicide and clean-up the gene pool in the process. I say take option #2 all-day, everyday because it's easier, cheaper, and better for others who do listen to have one less fewer, stupid liability in the world who would otherwise put others in danger.
- qqssccfftt 7y ago
  I would rather take 100 "idiots" in the gene pool for genetic diversity Of course, "idiot" is pretty relative, and not everyone going out is an idiot, but that would undermine your eugenics argument
- mlyle 7y ago
  Option 2 doesn't really work with an exponential process. There are people who have to work for society to continue functioning who have no choice but to be exposed to the "idiots", and even people able to self-isolated generally cannot completely remove encounters that could cause infection, but instead just greatly reduce them.
  - NotSammyHagar 7y ago
    Correct. Other people's idiotic choices have deadly implications for everyone else. That's why we can't just let people ignore this problem. They don't just hurt themselves.
    - mlyle 7y ago
      At the same time, we can't just let zeal/fear drive us into making the short-term safest choices that may not be safest in the long run. I do think we're overshooting the other way.
      - 7y ago
bb2018 7y ago
I agree. I think the issue with mask recommendations was ultimately that politicians/public health officials were worried people would put on a mask and then feel invincible, therefore leading to more spread. I think that is the case with lots of calls to re-open now. There are so many businesses that could return safely now if people followed safety protocol, but realistically not only will there be unintentional safety errors but loosening of some government restrictions will lead to the loosening of people's personal safetly restrictions they have been doing since the start.

untog 7y ago

As a New Yorker it's been eye opening to see the extent of the Cuomo worship nation (world?!) wide during the COVID outbreak. The view of Cuomo from many in the city was quite negative before, and I've been waiting to see how long it'll be before perceptions snap back to reality. Stories like this feel like the start of that, and there will be much more to come.

MiroF 7y ago
I find it particularly odd given that the reason Cuomo is in the spotlight is because his state has done so so poorly, even compared to areas with similar density.
- airstrike 7y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any area in the US has "similar density" to NYC
  - mlyle 7y ago
    OK, correcting you since you're wrong: It's not just New York City that's done badly, but smaller cities and areas of upstate New York that are quite similar to large parts of the rest of the country (that have done comparatively better).
    - airstrike 7y ago
      > OK, correcting you since you're wrong: It's not just New York City that's done badly, but smaller cities and areas of upstate New York that are quite similar to large parts of the rest of the country (that have done comparatively better). If by upstate NYC you mean Westchester County, that's still largely affected by the spread of the virus in NYC given how interlinked the two communities are. Going by https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronavirus-cases.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/new-york-coronav..., NYC is the most affected per capita, with Westchester placing #3
  - 7y ago

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago

I think it’s a good thing that the states have taken different approaches at solving the problem. This is how we experiment and improve on the system. You can’t make innovation without experimentation. If the federal government rolled in with a heavy hand, we’re all stuck with whatever they think is best. The governors should be the ones that decide for their state, and the federal government should support that in whatever way possible. The same is said for countries. When the dust settles we can examine the data and see what really worked and what made things worse. This is how we become stronger.

untog 7y ago
> Tom Frieden, the former C.D.C. director, has estimated that, if New York had started implementing stay-at-home orders ten days earlier than it did, it might have reduced COVID-19 deaths by fifty to eighty per cent. Obviously that's one person's view, but if it's true that means somewhere between 5,550 and 8,800 people have died needlessly. Innovation is good, but not at any cost.
- leereeves 7y ago
  More local control might actually have helped in New York, as Governor Cuomo initially blocked stronger measures proposed by Mayor DeBlasio.
  - untog 7y ago
    I don't think that's actually true. On the 17th de Blasio announced that it might happen and he'd release the decision within 48 hours. Cuomo smacked that down but then issued a shelter in place order on the 20th. So there's up to three days variance there. Realistically it's one day. But the point in the article is that both politicians should have been considering shelter in place ten days before.
    - leereeves 7y ago
      I didn't mean to imply that DeBlasio might have locked down NY City 10 days earlier; just that he probably would have done so a couple days earlier. And even a couple of days might have helped. I think he would have because DeBlasio implemented quite a few restrictions earlier. On the 13th, he cancelled large gatherings and limited smaller venues to 50% capacity. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/138-20/mayor-de-blasio-issues-state-emergency https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/138-20/mayor-d... On the 15th, he issued an order closing bars and restaurants, https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/152-20/statement-mayor-de-blasio-bars-restaurants-entertainment-venues https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/152-20/stateme... and closed schools. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/151-20/new-york-city-close-all-school-buildings-transition-remote-learning https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/151-20/new-yor... Even San Francisco didn't issue a lockdown order until the 16th, and Washington state was even later than NY. I don't remember anyone considering a lockdown on the 10th.

mschuster91 7y ago

Under normal conditions, people should follow the scientists without requiring orders from politicians out of their own common sense and could differ between quackery and actual science - instead we have 100 people calling the Maryland covid19 hotline about injecting disinfectant and 30 ppl in NYC actually consuming disinfectant. What happened instead is the result of decades of underfunding in the educational system colliding with years of trust in media being undermined (most obviously with the current Presidency, but mis-information was a thing before his campaign), trust in politicians generally being eroded for decades (gridlocked Congress, Iraq WMD lie) and decades of underfunding of social security nets - of course it is a hard decision to close schools when literally tens of thousands of kids rely on them for basic needs such as food and clothes washing! The crisis is entirely on the last decades of inaction and underfunding. And not only in the USA (where it is the worst) but also in other parts of the world. I hope that the world at least learns from all the needless death...

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
This just seems like an ahistorical summary. Lots of people were following the science without requiring orders. Until mid-March, most American politicians were trying to get people to stop being cautious, because their caution was bad for business.

DenisM 7y ago

[...] For three days, dozens of that man’s family members had sat at his bedside in the hospital [...] The next day, the man with all the family visitors died. [...] So I am not easily impressed, but this freaked me out for a second. Just to be clear - one man had died on that day, not dozens of people. Sheesh. I suppose there's some valuable comma somewhere in that sentence, or absence thereof, that should have kept me on the even keel? Or did they just did that on purpose? I would have written it off as just another error, but I am having hard time accepting that The New Yorker would let that slip through by accident.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago
I don't see it as ambiguous but I see what you are referring to.
uranusjr 7y ago
Asking as a non-native speaker, how would you write this sentence instead? I tried but cannot produce any syntactically correct alternative better than this.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  "For three days, dozens of his family members sat at his bedside in the hospital. The next day he died." Still a little awkward but not bending the language to the breaking point. Pretty sad considering New Yorker's editorial prowess.
  - maxerickson 7y ago
    The next day, when the patient in his 50's died, Reido's thoughts immediately went to the dozens of visitors the man had in the previous days.
- mlyle 7y ago
  The man, who had had all the visitors, died. The frequently-visited man died. The day after he'd had all the visitors, he died.

paypalcust83 7y ago

Dunning-Kruger has the best science.

throwawaysea 7y ago

This is a rosy take to fit the narrative, although the article is correct that New York made some big mistakes. Seattle leaders have also taken missteps. For example they closed all the parks on Easter weekend, an unnecessarily drastic step that probably just resulted in people grouping elsewhere in smaller, more crowded spaces. The parking lots at most parks remain closed, making it much harder for people needing a mental break to deal with all this. More broadly, Washington state also has restrictions other states don’t - for instance fishing is banned, which makes no sense given that it is a pastime that naturally requires distancing. Same with golfing. Private construction is banned but public construction is not. State parks and national forest lands are closed, despite most being desolate and full of space. Cycling and jogging on Seattle’s popular citywide trails however, are not banned, despite it being a much more likely vector for spreading via aerosol particles (note, some other areas like France have banned cycling for this reason). There is an inconsistency and inequality in how these restrictions were selected. The arbitrary nature makes me think it is simply was what was politically expedient, rather some principled design. As for an example of political expediency, right now the city’s socialist council is trying to pass an “Amazon tax” under the auspices of the mayor’s emergency proclamation, which due to a technicality would make it immune to subsequent referendum even after the emergency expires (https://sccinsight.com/2020/04/08/the-amazon-tax-bill-is-designed-to-be-immune-to-referendum/ https://sccinsight.com/2020/04/08/the-amazon-tax-bill-is-des...). If Seattle or Washington were truly responsible, they should’ve shut port traffic (at airports) early and aggressively. Even if that wouldn’t have stopped the coronavirus from arriving ultimately, it would have at least delayed it and provided more time to prepare. I think they should also have taken steps to make their shelter orders more nuanced, rather than the blunt weapon one size fits all approach.

plandis 7y ago
I live near Green Lake in Seattle and in my experience on nice days Green Lake is so crowded that people are certainly not 6ft apart consistently. I also do a lot of hiking and on nice days the popular (and most accessible) trails are utterly packed with people. There would be no way you would be able to consistently stay 6ft apart.
- 7y ago

kerng 7y ago

I think that many large corporations announced March 6th, that their workforce stay home until at least end of month helped raise awareness throughout the Seattle area, and made people become a lot more conscious. The government did not act as fast on the West Coast either.

phasnox 7y ago

How many flights does NYC receive per day? How many does Seattle receive? The current state of both cities has nothing to do with what they did or didn't. Same thing with Europe. The most affected countries are the most visited ones. Which also makes me question about the effectiveness of lockdowns.

rishirishi 7y ago
As I see it, lockdowns are not effective and were a massive mistake. You may find this epidemiologist's perspective to be interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY
- TimJRobinson 7y ago
  From looking at the current infection graphs Sweden is about to have a very bad time. When 99% of epidemiologists are saying one thing and you have to seek out a contrarion ask yourself if you're really being helpful or just trying to confirm your existing beliefs.
  - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
    That is an important question to ask, but I think in this case the answer is that it's helpful. That other 99% really don't seem to know for sure lockdowns are effective; the only arguments I've ever seen them present are "my model says they're effective" or "it would be strange in principle if they weren't". (Some laypeople draw dishonest comparisons to control measures for the Spanish Flu, but epidemiologists know that these measures didn't include orders to stay at home or close all businesses.)
  - mardifoufs 7y ago
    People have been saying that about Sweden for about 2 months now yet we still don't see any catastrophe happening there. Their hospitals are doing just fine, they aren't overwhelmed and there is no uncontrollable mortality. Why would Sweden suddenly do much worst now? It's curve has flattened and they are even closing emergency ICUs they setup but never had to use.

sigzero 7y ago

Virginia isn't doing it either. Northam (a doctor) doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing.

enitihas 7y ago

I read this article long back and it really resonated with me https://threader.app/thread/1218724150312751104 https://threader.app/thread/1218724150312751104 . It explains why people solving problems proactively before they become huge issues get much less credit than people doing it reactively when the problem has become much worse and putting heroic efforts.

ISL 7y ago
Investors who nurture a good bet early do get rewarded. Not always, but sometimes. Covid-19 makes clear that we should be showering the people who stopped SARS, the many Ebola outbreaks, and more with gratitude.
NotSammyHagar 7y ago
It's pretty much the same thing as the classic hero problem solver and it's in computer programming too. The person who does a good design, tests, finds bugs ... doesn't get as much credit as the person who puts in Herculean efforts at the last moment to save the day.
- runawaybottle 7y ago
  Many a career has been birthed from Hero coding, sadly.
  - rxhernandez 7y ago
    Maybe heroes are needed just as much as people that do good designs. Maybe it's more akin to a dichotomy of people that build good houses that hardly catch fire and firefighters who put out fires; even in the extreme case that you build nothing but houses that hardly catch fire, it won't mean that you don't need firefighters; in the nominal case of an economically feasible amount (I doubt many MVPs could take on the cost to make them near fireproof) of almost fireproof houses, it might approximate to needing both equally as much. Frankly, I've been on both sides of the aisle when it comes to projects that allowed for great design and projects that resulted in doing an endless marathon for 3 weeks straight to put out a fire because of poor design; I can tell you without a doubt that doing great design doesn't take anywhere near as much of a toll on your body and mind as doing an endless marathon; I've severely damaged interpersonal relationships (that I can't undamage) through these marathons.

yters 7y ago

To be a truly scientific study, we need to look at more than two instances of scientists leading and not leading.

notatoad 7y ago
anecdotes are really the only way to know whether or not science can be trusted. (/s)

grej 7y ago

I think this kind of retrospective look at these two datapoints is probably not focused on the right thing at this point. This article picks on DeBlasio / Cuomo and indirectly DeBlasio’s health commissioner heavily for encouraging continued going out to restaurants and events and riding the subway in late Feb and into mid-March. But remember in late Feb the President was still saying it was going to just magically go away. Bay Area politicians including the speaker of the house Pelosi were encouraging lots of people to come to Chinatown parades. Florida even left their beaches open all the way through mid March for spring breakers to come. While those events have almost certainly led to additional cases and deaths, other areas of the country seem to have largely gotten away with a less proactive and later response than Seattle. I think we are probably going to see that the real challenge on NY is that we just don’t have another city in the US with New York’s density, air travel volume, and high utilization of public transit. Comparing NY to Seattle just because they are both in the US is probably not as relevant. Given what we know now about the propensity of high volume super spreader events to drive the bulk of the R0, NY can probably only really fairly be compared to London and Paris in the Western world, at least.

ianlevesque 7y ago
> other areas of the country seem to have largely gotten away with a less proactive and later response Seattle. This assessment is really premature.
- grej 7y ago
  Of course you are correct, but the article is also a “so far” assessment. We’re right now in the middle of the response. Every assessment, right now, is at a point in time. And so, to a degree, premature. We can only look at the information we have currently.
NotSammyHagar 7y ago
No, I'm sorry, you're missing the point of the article. One of those places had politicians using more economic and political considerations leading to their choices. Seattle has those forces but generally acceded to the guidance of scientists.

dekhn 7y ago

In a few years, not now, we'll be able to look back and say with some confidence which actions saved lives (and didn't have an equivalently large negative effect on the economy). It does seem likely that, in areas with dense populations like cities, rapid early isolation made a significant difference in the overall impact on the care system. It is still entirely unclear what the longer term outcomes will be, since we can't all isolate indefinitely, so presumably, everybody will get infected eventually.

maxerickson 7y ago
We won't have the economic counterfactuals really. At some point, people would have got the idea about reducing contacts for themselves, but say that didn't happen in New York until 2 or 3 or 4 times as many people were infected. Not a ridiculous scenario, and who knows what the economic situation would be.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
lokl 7y ago
No, we might not all get infected eventually, if there is an effective vaccine.
- theferalrobot 7y ago
  And/or it mutates (which will in all likelihood be into something less deadly/more like the typical flu).
toyg 7y ago
Not everyone gets the flu every year.
- greedo 7y ago
  That's because the flu isn't as contagious.

AzzieElbab 7y ago

NYC, to put it bluntly is a country of its own. It requires a completely different calibre of management in the City Hall. Definitely not what they have right now

carapace 7y ago

> One of the E.I.S.’s core principles is that a pandemic is a communications emergency as much as a medical crisis.

wishdev 7y ago

The revisionist history attempts by the "scientists" in Seattle are staggering. On Feb 26th, every single level of the Seattle "scientific" community laughed at Ms. Reid, the Superintendent of the Northshore School District when she closed Bothell High School over a potent positive case of a staff member that travelled overseas. She wanted to make sure her students were safe and the building was disinfected. The "scientific" King County Deptartment of Health went as far as to specifcally send out a document stating that closure was unwarranted - they did not just sit there and let her do her job - they went out of their way to ensure the public was informed they thought she was nuts. You do not get to do that and then claim to be the greatest organization of all time 2 days later.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago
I have a different understanding. Before there was evidence, the health depts were not pushing things. The article goes over that. As soon as they got evidence (that's what those pesky scientists like, darn them), then they started doing what this article says. One of the earliest public things I'm aware of this posting from a scientist in Seattle on Feb 29th, by researcher Trevor Bedford, part of the Seattle Flu Study about covid-19 tracing genetically. They were testing flu samples for covid-19 (the govt refused permission for them to do that but eventually they just did it, because it was so important). https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1233970271318503426 https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1233970271318503426
- wishdev 7y ago
  Sorry - this is the original letter that went out on Feb 26th - https://www.nsd.org/blog/~board/superintendent-blog/post/letter-to-families-bothell-high-school-closure https://www.nsd.org/blog/~board/superintendent-blog/post/let... 3rd paragraph is the grovelling the school district needed to do to deal with the interference of the King County Health Department. There is also the "red dawn" emails which clearly show that King County was not doing a single thing in the face of knowing it was a problem - Dr. Duchin (King County Health) on March 1st - not 4 days after this public rebuke of the school idstrict. "We are having a very serious challenge related to hospital exposures and impact on the healthcare system. Would be great to have a call to discuss. Will be meeting with your team here this morning and then maybe we can chat after that" So it goes from laughing to all hell breaking loose to doing nothing for almost 2 more weeks? That's the Health Department leading the way?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

daxfohl 7y ago

I'd love to agree with this article, but I don't think it holds much water. * Washington schools closed very late. My friends' schools in Indianapolis had already been closed a week. * Barely any of the volunteer WFH was taken, at least among my group at Microsoft. Maybe 10% participation. * Volunteer child removal from school was spotty, maybe 25%, not enough to make a huge difference. While I like most of how our governor has managed it, and I like science, I have a hard time saying that it's more than marginally responsible for the NYC - SEA disparity. In fact as the article alludes, many of the decisions were driven by factors beyond the need to minimize covid deaths, like providing school lunches for families who couldn't afford them. So coming to the conclusion that these decisions are responsible for the disparity is disingenuous. All the other points in the article, including luck, carry a lot more weight. NYC is the city that never sleeps. SEA is the city where if one person is Sleepless then they make a bestselling movie about it.... The other things really that might make a difference, that few have mentioned is that * The first hit of the virus was ripping through a life care center. That put people naturally on edge. * Knicks and Nets both had long homestands during the beginning of the outbreak, whereas let's just say the Sonics have been on a rather long road trip.

kixiQu 7y ago
Seattle public schools closed before the whole state, which is what you would expect. I think if the experts of evaluating these policies are saying that putting them in place without delay saved lives, it's probably unwise for all us armchair epidemiologists to sit around coming up with other things we think might explain it.

irrational 7y ago

I see some states saying that they want to reopen by a certain day. I appreciate my governor’s proclamation that she’s not going to give a date but the lock down will continue until she says so. That seems a lot more logical than setting a arbitrary date in the future and either disappointing people when it turns out to not be realistic or going for it anyway and creating a massive health crisis.

jfnixon 7y ago

Ah, letting scientists take the lead would explain why WA State shut down the Seattle Flu Study's efforts to pivot to investigate Covid-19. https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/seattle-flu-study-allegedly-tested-samples-for-covid-19-against-federal-state-guidelines https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/seattle-flu-study-alle...