4 ms·

States have been chomping at the bit to end their lockdowns. The fact that cases are spiking again is precisely because states were too eager to end their lockd

by nxc18 6y ago

States have been chomping at the bit to end their lockdowns. The fact that cases are spiking again is precisely because states were too eager to end their lockdowns. China had a brutal lockdown early and thanks to that they are now largely back in business. Anti-lockdown sentiment early on is precisely the reason the US has had to prolong its suffering. The reason long lockdowns are happening is because we can’t muster strict.

commandlinefan 6y ago
> had a brutal lockdown early and thanks to that they are now largely back in business Wait, that doesn't make sense - are you saying that they locked down long enough that everybody who had the virus "lost it" (either by getting healthy or dying)? That doesn't sound very plausible given what we know about epidemiology. The lockdown was sold here as a way to "flatten the curve": everybody who would have gotten it will still get it, but not all at once, so the hospitals won't be overwhelmed. Is anybody claiming that China's lockdown actually eradicated the virus within its borders entirely?
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  > The lockdown was sold here as a way to "flatten the curve": everybody who would have gotten it will still get it, but not all at once, so the hospitals won't be overwhelmed. The lockdown was intended to do two things, not one: 1. What you say, reduce the rate of spread. The popular "flatten the curve" thing, which, when grossly simplified, suggests that if 1 million people were going to get it it was inevitable, but we could spread it out over months instead of weeks. 2. Reduce the total number of people exposed and thus reduce the total number who would eventually get it. The disease is not inevitable for anyone, it is not inevitable that 70% of the population (picking an arbitrary figure here) would get the disease. It is inevitable that it was going to spread, and with proper controls that spread could be changed both in rate and total number infected.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  Entirely? No. Nobody (I think) is claiming that. But if you lock down so that each infected person, on average, infects less than one new person, and you do it long enough, then yes, you can completely eliminate the virus that way. And yes, that is perfectly consistent with what we know about epidemiology. The cure may literally be worse than the disease, but we could do that. But there comes a point where the number of cases is small enough that you use testing and contact tracing to do the rest.
- fzeroracer 6y ago
  The point of flattening the curve is keeping the curve flat. No one anywhere has eradicated the virus, but through the strict initial lockdown plus constant vigilance on part of both the government and the individuals they can keep the curve flat and stop it from going exponential. The problem is that once we flattened the curve, we decided to go hogwild, masks off, open up everything and now we get to pay the price for that. Texas is a great example of that where our state government behaved like absolute jackoffs and now we're seeing a massive amount of new cases and increased pressure on hospitals. But people assumed that 'we're far below capacity! the lockdown is pointless!' as if the lockdown wasn't the reason for that in the first place.
wolco 6y ago
I believe the reason is because it was in the US for much longer than thought. Somewhere summer last year on it started to spread undetected.
chrisco255 6y ago
Deaths are still on the way down in Georgia, one of the earliest states to re-open: https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ I would say, excessive lockdowns are not effective at fighting the virus. You win a short term victory at the cost of your long term future. You can kick the can down the road, but as soon as you re-open, if you haven't achieved herd immunity, the virus will spike again. That's going to happen to any country, anywhere. As for China, we have no real idea of how much death or cases they have there. And from what I witnessed in Wuhan, where residents were bolted into their apartment complexes and barred from leaving, and whisked away from their homes at the first sign of a fever...I do not wish that on any free person. That is what happens when you live in a Communist prison state. I'll take liberty with all the risks that implies over Chinese tyranny any day.
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  Deaths are down in GA, but cases are on the rise which means that deaths will probably start rising again over the next 2 weeks. They've had 3500 new cases just today.
  - foogazi 6y ago
    Is there any data on what the 14 day trailing death rate looks like for the US?
starkd 6y ago
The lockdowns in China were indeed brutal, and involved a use of force that simply would not be acceptable in the U.S. But even there, there's evidence it was much more severe than the officials let on, and there was a rebound after reopening. They are very secretive about it though.
- nxc18 6y ago
  It doesn’t have to be China-style brutal. It can also be strict and effective, like what was done in much of Europe. With a competent western-style government you can have great results. See New Zealand. What matters is not how authoritarian the country is, but how seriously the lockdown is taken.
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    I’m not sure that the auS population would tolerate the European model either. The police and Amy were posted in the street and checked every persons ID, place of residence, travel papers on sight.
Darmody 6y ago
Let's not forget the massive protests. No matter if you agree with them or not. Thousands of people together on the streets with no security distance between them makes things worse.
- delecti 6y ago
  The data shows that it hasn't in fact been making things worse. The protestors are largely all wearing masks, and that makes a pretty enormous difference.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Which data are you referring to? Last I heard, there wasn't really data available, since contact tracers aren't asking people whether they went to the protests.
    - gdulli 6y ago
      Cases in New York and Boston aren't spiking. States that rushed to reopen bars are the ones that are.

by nxc18 6y ago

commandlinefan 6y ago

> had a brutal lockdown early and thanks to that they are now largely back in business Wait, that doesn't make sense - are you saying that they locked down long enough that everybody who had the virus "lost it" (either by getting healthy or dying)? That doesn't sound very plausible given what we know about epidemiology. The lockdown was sold here as a way to "flatten the curve": everybody who would have gotten it will still get it, but not all at once, so the hospitals won't be overwhelmed. Is anybody claiming that China's lockdown actually eradicated the virus within its borders entirely?

Jtsummers 6y ago
> The lockdown was sold here as a way to "flatten the curve": everybody who would have gotten it will still get it, but not all at once, so the hospitals won't be overwhelmed. The lockdown was intended to do two things, not one: 1. What you say, reduce the rate of spread. The popular "flatten the curve" thing, which, when grossly simplified, suggests that if 1 million people were going to get it it was inevitable, but we could spread it out over months instead of weeks. 2. Reduce the total number of people exposed and thus reduce the total number who would eventually get it. The disease is not inevitable for anyone, it is not inevitable that 70% of the population (picking an arbitrary figure here) would get the disease. It is inevitable that it was going to spread, and with proper controls that spread could be changed both in rate and total number infected.
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
Entirely? No. Nobody (I think) is claiming that. But if you lock down so that each infected person, on average, infects less than one new person, and you do it long enough, then yes, you can completely eliminate the virus that way. And yes, that is perfectly consistent with what we know about epidemiology. The cure may literally be worse than the disease, but we could do that. But there comes a point where the number of cases is small enough that you use testing and contact tracing to do the rest.
fzeroracer 6y ago
The point of flattening the curve is keeping the curve flat. No one anywhere has eradicated the virus, but through the strict initial lockdown plus constant vigilance on part of both the government and the individuals they can keep the curve flat and stop it from going exponential. The problem is that once we flattened the curve, we decided to go hogwild, masks off, open up everything and now we get to pay the price for that. Texas is a great example of that where our state government behaved like absolute jackoffs and now we're seeing a massive amount of new cases and increased pressure on hospitals. But people assumed that 'we're far below capacity! the lockdown is pointless!' as if the lockdown wasn't the reason for that in the first place.

wolco 6y ago

I believe the reason is because it was in the US for much longer than thought. Somewhere summer last year on it started to spread undetected.

chrisco255 6y ago

Deaths are still on the way down in Georgia, one of the earliest states to re-open: https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ https://ga-covid19.ondemand.sas.com/ I would say, excessive lockdowns are not effective at fighting the virus. You win a short term victory at the cost of your long term future. You can kick the can down the road, but as soon as you re-open, if you haven't achieved herd immunity, the virus will spike again. That's going to happen to any country, anywhere. As for China, we have no real idea of how much death or cases they have there. And from what I witnessed in Wuhan, where residents were bolted into their apartment complexes and barred from leaving, and whisked away from their homes at the first sign of a fever...I do not wish that on any free person. That is what happens when you live in a Communist prison state. I'll take liberty with all the risks that implies over Chinese tyranny any day.

Jtsummers 6y ago
Deaths are down in GA, but cases are on the rise which means that deaths will probably start rising again over the next 2 weeks. They've had 3500 new cases just today.
- foogazi 6y ago
  Is there any data on what the 14 day trailing death rate looks like for the US?

starkd 6y ago

The lockdowns in China were indeed brutal, and involved a use of force that simply would not be acceptable in the U.S. But even there, there's evidence it was much more severe than the officials let on, and there was a rebound after reopening. They are very secretive about it though.

nxc18 6y ago
It doesn’t have to be China-style brutal. It can also be strict and effective, like what was done in much of Europe. With a competent western-style government you can have great results. See New Zealand. What matters is not how authoritarian the country is, but how seriously the lockdown is taken.
- s1artibartfast 6y ago
  I’m not sure that the auS population would tolerate the European model either. The police and Amy were posted in the street and checked every persons ID, place of residence, travel papers on sight.

Darmody 6y ago

Let's not forget the massive protests. No matter if you agree with them or not. Thousands of people together on the streets with no security distance between them makes things worse.

delecti 6y ago
The data shows that it hasn't in fact been making things worse. The protestors are largely all wearing masks, and that makes a pretty enormous difference.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Which data are you referring to? Last I heard, there wasn't really data available, since contact tracers aren't asking people whether they went to the protests.
  - gdulli 6y ago
    Cases in New York and Boston aren't spiking. States that rushed to reopen bars are the ones that are.