41 ms·

Confused by this: > Shutting down completely in order to decrease the total number of deaths only makes sense if you are willing to stay shut down until a vacc

Confused by this: > Shutting down completely in order to decrease the total number of deaths only makes sense if you are willing to stay shut down until a vaccine is available. Wouldn’t shutting down completely for a month or two effectively end covid ?

unexaminedlife 6y ago
Granted most countries are probably far more well-behaved than the US, but I don't know if you read any of the articles that clearly showed people weren't even happy with the kinds of restrictions they were asked to practice. Let alone locking down fully for an entire month all at once?
lsllc 6y ago
The UK, France, Spain, India and Australia who all shutdown (to varying degrees) are now experiencing significant upticks in cases. Even Vietnam is now fighting hard to tamp down a resurgence of C19 despite impressive initial measures to try to stop it. You'd have to be completely sure that during your lockdown, the virus burned itself out inside each household. You'd have to have a really strict lockdown (e.g. troops on the streets, imprisonment for violation) to do that; I think maybe only Italy & China did anything close to that. And of course it would only take a handful of exceptions to re-ignite the virus (see Australia).
- giantDinosaur 6y ago
  It's potentially the case in Melbourne, which is where the outbreak is essentially located, that the cases and potentially most of the outbreak are derived from extensive failures in the so called 'hotel quarantine' system. People have a misplaced belief that given a reasonably competent government you always get competence, which for a variety of reasons was not the case in this particular instance. I think a major planning failure is the result of optimism bias - i.e. that if we decide to do something we can actually do it well consistently.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  New Zealand apparently had police on the streets.
  - lsllc 6y ago
    I think given the circumstances, NZ did the right thing and they did it with the support & cooperation of their citizens. They had the distinct advantages of being a remote island with very few cases to begin with and relatively little international traffic compared to most of the rest of the world which was easily shutdown. They had a really good chance to beat it, they took it and they succeeded -- but I think it was a pretty unique situation.
    - beagle3 6y ago
      And if it takes a year or two to come under control in the rest of the world, they may have a fatigue and reintroduction. Too early in the game to label winners or losers.
      - lsllc 6y ago
        Yes, whilst normal life goes on now in NZ, they're stuck there and one of the main industries tourism is almost completely shuttered -- I think the fatigue will be economic.
- foogazi 6y ago
  Have not heard about India’s shut down I know the UK was going for herd immunity at first and then switched Spain did lockdown drastically once things got pretty bad My next question would be on Sweden’s case: is herd immunity real? Or as the virus spreads it reinfects ?
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    Is there a citation for herd immunity and the UK? It was bandied around by the left wing press when they were looking for blood but I never saw any concrete evidence beyond it apparently being mentioned in passing.
    - lsllc 6y ago
      https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/uk-backed-off-on-herd-immunity-to-beat-coronavirus-we-need-it/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/uk-backed...
  - lsllc 6y ago
    For India, it started back in March. It seems it was quite strict, there are youtube videos of violators getting beaten by the police (which may just have been isolated incidents). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_lockdown_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_lockdown_in_... However, since they opened back up, they've seen a fairly large resurgence in cases: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/08/07/900112972/indias-coronavirus-cases-top-2-million-more-than-62-000-reported-in-one-day https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0...
mensetmanusman 6y ago
Not necessarily. Lots of evidence now that aerosol covid is a major risk with prolonged exposure. Scientist have found the virus in ventilation systems of hospitals supporting this. This means the ‘aura’ of effect for an individual is quite large, especially in buildings with shared ventilation systems. This still requires much greater exposure time due to virion density decreases over distance from source, but that time would be available in a quarantine. Therefore, a steady trickle of infection is likely because not everyone lives in a house, and because there will never be enough N95 masks (we had to start prepping for this 10 years ago to make enough masks). That, and the fact that people move between borders means it will not go away on a meaningful month time scale because there is no way to coordinate an entire world response. As you can see, the easiest geography to protect is islands...
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > Lots of evidence now that aerosol covid is a major risk with prolonged exposure. I've been hearing people say "just wear a mask," but considering aerosol risk, they probably aren't effective enough for anything prolonged and indoors.
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
    Masks increase the amount of time you can spend indoors with someone emitting virion loaded aerosol, but I wouldn’t spend more than 5-10 minutes in that environment. Bathrooms appear to be a large risk of aerosol due to flushing induced formation.
refurb 6y ago
Theoretically yes, but practically? Anyone who is involved in healthcare is aware that compliance is a major problem. Even for diseases that are life threatening and have effective treatments you see compliance rates of 80-90%. All it would take is 1 out of 1M people to break the rules and you're dealing with another outbreak.
- nradov 6y ago
  Medication adherence for chronic conditions is actually only about 50%. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068890/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068890/
d1zzy 6y ago
Yes, if the entire world shuts down completely, or, if you shutdown completely a single country and after the virus is "dead" inside the country, then never allow any incoming travel (even returning citizens) until the virus is dead everywhere else. Obviously none of these are practically possible.

unexaminedlife 6y ago

Granted most countries are probably far more well-behaved than the US, but I don't know if you read any of the articles that clearly showed people weren't even happy with the kinds of restrictions they were asked to practice. Let alone locking down fully for an entire month all at once?

lsllc 6y ago

The UK, France, Spain, India and Australia who all shutdown (to varying degrees) are now experiencing significant upticks in cases. Even Vietnam is now fighting hard to tamp down a resurgence of C19 despite impressive initial measures to try to stop it. You'd have to be completely sure that during your lockdown, the virus burned itself out inside each household. You'd have to have a really strict lockdown (e.g. troops on the streets, imprisonment for violation) to do that; I think maybe only Italy & China did anything close to that. And of course it would only take a handful of exceptions to re-ignite the virus (see Australia).

giantDinosaur 6y ago
It's potentially the case in Melbourne, which is where the outbreak is essentially located, that the cases and potentially most of the outbreak are derived from extensive failures in the so called 'hotel quarantine' system. People have a misplaced belief that given a reasonably competent government you always get competence, which for a variety of reasons was not the case in this particular instance. I think a major planning failure is the result of optimism bias - i.e. that if we decide to do something we can actually do it well consistently.
PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
New Zealand apparently had police on the streets.
- lsllc 6y ago
  I think given the circumstances, NZ did the right thing and they did it with the support & cooperation of their citizens. They had the distinct advantages of being a remote island with very few cases to begin with and relatively little international traffic compared to most of the rest of the world which was easily shutdown. They had a really good chance to beat it, they took it and they succeeded -- but I think it was a pretty unique situation.
  - beagle3 6y ago
    And if it takes a year or two to come under control in the rest of the world, they may have a fatigue and reintroduction. Too early in the game to label winners or losers.
    - lsllc 6y ago
      Yes, whilst normal life goes on now in NZ, they're stuck there and one of the main industries tourism is almost completely shuttered -- I think the fatigue will be economic.
foogazi 6y ago
Have not heard about India’s shut down I know the UK was going for herd immunity at first and then switched Spain did lockdown drastically once things got pretty bad My next question would be on Sweden’s case: is herd immunity real? Or as the virus spreads it reinfects ?
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Is there a citation for herd immunity and the UK? It was bandied around by the left wing press when they were looking for blood but I never saw any concrete evidence beyond it apparently being mentioned in passing.
  - lsllc 6y ago
    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/uk-backed-off-on-herd-immunity-to-beat-coronavirus-we-need-it/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/uk-backed...
- lsllc 6y ago
  For India, it started back in March. It seems it was quite strict, there are youtube videos of violators getting beaten by the police (which may just have been isolated incidents). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_lockdown_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_lockdown_in_... However, since they opened back up, they've seen a fairly large resurgence in cases: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/08/07/900112972/indias-coronavirus-cases-top-2-million-more-than-62-000-reported-in-one-day https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0...

mensetmanusman 6y ago

Not necessarily. Lots of evidence now that aerosol covid is a major risk with prolonged exposure. Scientist have found the virus in ventilation systems of hospitals supporting this. This means the ‘aura’ of effect for an individual is quite large, especially in buildings with shared ventilation systems. This still requires much greater exposure time due to virion density decreases over distance from source, but that time would be available in a quarantine. Therefore, a steady trickle of infection is likely because not everyone lives in a house, and because there will never be enough N95 masks (we had to start prepping for this 10 years ago to make enough masks). That, and the fact that people move between borders means it will not go away on a meaningful month time scale because there is no way to coordinate an entire world response. As you can see, the easiest geography to protect is islands...

dehrmann 6y ago
> Lots of evidence now that aerosol covid is a major risk with prolonged exposure. I've been hearing people say "just wear a mask," but considering aerosol risk, they probably aren't effective enough for anything prolonged and indoors.
- mensetmanusman 6y ago
  Masks increase the amount of time you can spend indoors with someone emitting virion loaded aerosol, but I wouldn’t spend more than 5-10 minutes in that environment. Bathrooms appear to be a large risk of aerosol due to flushing induced formation.

refurb 6y ago

Theoretically yes, but practically? Anyone who is involved in healthcare is aware that compliance is a major problem. Even for diseases that are life threatening and have effective treatments you see compliance rates of 80-90%. All it would take is 1 out of 1M people to break the rules and you're dealing with another outbreak.

nradov 6y ago
Medication adherence for chronic conditions is actually only about 50%. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068890/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068890/

d1zzy 6y ago

Yes, if the entire world shuts down completely, or, if you shutdown completely a single country and after the virus is "dead" inside the country, then never allow any incoming travel (even returning citizens) until the virus is dead everywhere else. Obviously none of these are practically possible.