4 ms·

Combining that fact and the previous observation by hanniabu: "many of the people that are against shutdowns (that don't have an ulterior motive) are against t

by acqq 6y ago

Combining that fact and the previous observation by hanniabu: "many of the people that are against shutdowns (that don't have an ulterior motive) are against them because people are out of work and creates issues with poverty. They are not against it because it doesn't help. So rather than saying no shutdowns, how about we take the proper steps and have a moratorium on rent and mortgages so solve the root of the issue." inspires me to believe that the brutal and short shutdown, with the planned measures to prevent ordinary people getting penalized during it would in fact be the best treatment imaginable, with the least long term consequences. But I also imagine enough those who would never be ready to accept such an approach for having huge ideological objections. Thinking even more about it, some kind of such a response indeed happened in the world and gave the results. Knowing that result and proper planing can surely allow for even less negative effects than those observed.

hanniabu 6y ago
Correct, as history has shown (in the US), any help for anybody besides corporations is demonized as socialism.
fastball 6y ago
This is what China did and it seemed to work pretty well. Though given how hush hush China is about everything, it's also possible they've had a vaccine they've been using on their population for a while and just deigned not to tell or share.
- acqq 6y ago
  Italy had to do a quite hard lockdown in the Spring and then it had very low number of cases and deaths in the Summer. In the US, New York had also to respond hard to the first wave. Italy and US compared in deaths per million due to Covid-19: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-01-27..latest&country=ITA~USA&region=World&deathsMetric=true&interval=smoothed&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=total_cases&pickerSort=desc https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToS... China, having the hardest and the most restrictive lockdowns, managed something even better than both: binging the numbers to effectively zero, very early. They also managed to maintain the minimum of new cases by mass testing actions when there was a suspicion of the outbreak: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54504785 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54504785 "Covid-19: China's Qingdao to test nine million in five days" And they have still kept wearing the masks this year, whenever they aren't alone, if I understand it correctly. We also know that such kind of mass testing can be done in Europe too, if mandated, as in Slovakia: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/slovakia-offers-proof-that-testing-millions-for-coronavirus-can-work-lqm7c9xj5 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/slovakia-offers-proof-tha... So, no, it wasn't about the vaccines up to now. The measures simply work, proved in Europe, and even in the US, when they are consistently introduced. As simple as that.
throwaway201103 6y ago
You could never have a hard enough lockdown to eliminate the virus. As soon as you started to open back up, it would pop up somewhere and start spreading again. The idea that we could have locked down hard for two weeks in March or April and killed it off is fantasy.

by acqq 6y ago

hanniabu 6y ago

Correct, as history has shown (in the US), any help for anybody besides corporations is demonized as socialism.

fastball 6y ago

This is what China did and it seemed to work pretty well. Though given how hush hush China is about everything, it's also possible they've had a vaccine they've been using on their population for a while and just deigned not to tell or share.

acqq 6y ago
Italy had to do a quite hard lockdown in the Spring and then it had very low number of cases and deaths in the Summer. In the US, New York had also to respond hard to the first wave. Italy and US compared in deaths per million due to Covid-19: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-01-27..latest&country=ITA~USA&region=World&deathsMetric=true&interval=smoothed&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=total_cases&pickerSort=desc https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToS... China, having the hardest and the most restrictive lockdowns, managed something even better than both: binging the numbers to effectively zero, very early. They also managed to maintain the minimum of new cases by mass testing actions when there was a suspicion of the outbreak: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54504785 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54504785 "Covid-19: China's Qingdao to test nine million in five days" And they have still kept wearing the masks this year, whenever they aren't alone, if I understand it correctly. We also know that such kind of mass testing can be done in Europe too, if mandated, as in Slovakia: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/slovakia-offers-proof-that-testing-millions-for-coronavirus-can-work-lqm7c9xj5 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/slovakia-offers-proof-tha... So, no, it wasn't about the vaccines up to now. The measures simply work, proved in Europe, and even in the US, when they are consistently introduced. As simple as that.

throwaway201103 6y ago

You could never have a hard enough lockdown to eliminate the virus. As soon as you started to open back up, it would pop up somewhere and start spreading again. The idea that we could have locked down hard for two weeks in March or April and killed it off is fantasy.