6 ms·

Did you see the Hope-Simpson figure? Texas is roughly 36N to 26N. That puts it close/within the tropical zone. That zone has a relatively diffuse outbreak curv

Did you see the Hope-Simpson figure? Texas is roughly 36N to 26N. That puts it close/within the tropical zone. That zone has a relatively diffuse outbreak curve, seems like there's some type of subtle signal though, whereas the higher latitudes get walloped in the winter months and there's not much going on the rest of the year. Surely you understand that seasons vary geographically? What's winter in Texas at best? 50F?

jasonlaramburu 6y ago
New York, California And Pacific Northwest also had summer spikes. Now they are experiencing winter spikes. Any seasonality that may exist naturally is made irrelevant by pandemic fatigue. People simply start ignoring the guidance after a few months. Cases go up until things get ‘scary bad’ and then people stay home again. That is why your suggestion that we all ‘self regulate’ is not a good one. It will just lead to endless, ‘weak’ lockdowns.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  I'm around NYC, was in the city, and haven't seen anything even remotely severe in the summer. Hence Cuomo acting like he conquered it with masks. Cases in my city were in the single digits, and then like clockwork started a steady rise in the fall to where they are now.
  - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
    Correlation, not causation. It’s also known that people simply congregated outside their homes more during the NYC summer. This is the problem with self-regulation. Not everyone is a doctor, so many people will incorrectly gauge their own risk of severe infection and/or transmission. Just think about it, self regulation is the easiest government intervention (basically no intervention required). If that strategy worked, we would have seen at least 1 success by now. Sweden and Brazil had few (if any) restrictions and some of the highest death rates in their regions. Developing countries with poor governance and zero public health infrastructure are also struggling.
    - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
      > If that strategy worked, we would have seen at least 1 success by now. No one “wins” against things like death, disease, etc. The world is full of unwinnable things that can used to justify authoritarianism and deprivation of individual rights.
      - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
        Yes, but look at the data. There are industrialized countries with less than 1/3 the per capita death rate of the US. Maybe you can’t ‘win’ but clearly you can do a better job than others. It’s a stretch and arguably fear-mongering to equate sensible policy to reduce death with authoritarianism.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > There are industrialized countries with less than 1/3 the per capita death rate of the US. Are we reducing a multivariate phenomenon to public policy? Clearly the US is horrifically unhealthy, could have different age demographics, etc. At the end of the day, no I don't think I have the right to tell someone who's possibly struggling already they cannot work. This is all a massive bet ignoring the massive costs that everyone else in society have to bear. And sadly none of the supposed smart people making these decisions will bear the cost (and we know they never make bad decisions /s).
        jasonlaramburu 6y ago
        Luckily you are not in a position to decide public health policy, and a majority of voters seem to disagree with you.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Poor people around the world have been devastated by the majority position in public health policy. A majority of people and the health establishment thought ventilators were a good idea; it turns out mortality dropped 30% during the time period that their use was stopped. The people deciding things have very little gauge of the disastrous costs that they themselves do not have to suffer. Their social class precludes it by nature! Are you an essential worker? Is that below you? The least advantaged are forced to risk their lives and are bearing the brunt of all these decisions. The Pajama Class is waging class war, convinced they're right - when in fact they've blundered their way through this - shaming everyone who disagrees with them. Make no mistake - the public policy decisions you're advocating favor the well-off.
  - ineedasername 6y ago
    NYC is a prime example of also having non-seasonal factors: Through the early Fall, there was significant opportunity for true outdoor dining. As the weather got colder, that "outdoor" dining often took on the form of fully-enclosed tents that are nearly indistinguishable from dining indoors. Even with similar social-distancing requirements handed down by the state, even assuming people did not relax their guard, following the guidelines would still result in a different models of social behavior, more in-door gatherings that still met distancing guidelines, etc.

jasonlaramburu 6y ago

New York, California And Pacific Northwest also had summer spikes. Now they are experiencing winter spikes. Any seasonality that may exist naturally is made irrelevant by pandemic fatigue. People simply start ignoring the guidance after a few months. Cases go up until things get ‘scary bad’ and then people stay home again. That is why your suggestion that we all ‘self regulate’ is not a good one. It will just lead to endless, ‘weak’ lockdowns.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
I'm around NYC, was in the city, and haven't seen anything even remotely severe in the summer. Hence Cuomo acting like he conquered it with masks. Cases in my city were in the single digits, and then like clockwork started a steady rise in the fall to where they are now.
- jasonlaramburu 6y ago
  Correlation, not causation. It’s also known that people simply congregated outside their homes more during the NYC summer. This is the problem with self-regulation. Not everyone is a doctor, so many people will incorrectly gauge their own risk of severe infection and/or transmission. Just think about it, self regulation is the easiest government intervention (basically no intervention required). If that strategy worked, we would have seen at least 1 success by now. Sweden and Brazil had few (if any) restrictions and some of the highest death rates in their regions. Developing countries with poor governance and zero public health infrastructure are also struggling.
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    > If that strategy worked, we would have seen at least 1 success by now. No one “wins” against things like death, disease, etc. The world is full of unwinnable things that can used to justify authoritarianism and deprivation of individual rights.
    - jasonlaramburu 6y ago
      Yes, but look at the data. There are industrialized countries with less than 1/3 the per capita death rate of the US. Maybe you can’t ‘win’ but clearly you can do a better job than others. It’s a stretch and arguably fear-mongering to equate sensible policy to reduce death with authoritarianism.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > There are industrialized countries with less than 1/3 the per capita death rate of the US. Are we reducing a multivariate phenomenon to public policy? Clearly the US is horrifically unhealthy, could have different age demographics, etc. At the end of the day, no I don't think I have the right to tell someone who's possibly struggling already they cannot work. This is all a massive bet ignoring the massive costs that everyone else in society have to bear. And sadly none of the supposed smart people making these decisions will bear the cost (and we know they never make bad decisions /s).
        jasonlaramburu 6y ago
        Luckily you are not in a position to decide public health policy, and a majority of voters seem to disagree with you.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Poor people around the world have been devastated by the majority position in public health policy. A majority of people and the health establishment thought ventilators were a good idea; it turns out mortality dropped 30% during the time period that their use was stopped. The people deciding things have very little gauge of the disastrous costs that they themselves do not have to suffer. Their social class precludes it by nature! Are you an essential worker? Is that below you? The least advantaged are forced to risk their lives and are bearing the brunt of all these decisions. The Pajama Class is waging class war, convinced they're right - when in fact they've blundered their way through this - shaming everyone who disagrees with them. Make no mistake - the public policy decisions you're advocating favor the well-off.
- ineedasername 6y ago
  NYC is a prime example of also having non-seasonal factors: Through the early Fall, there was significant opportunity for true outdoor dining. As the weather got colder, that "outdoor" dining often took on the form of fully-enclosed tents that are nearly indistinguishable from dining indoors. Even with similar social-distancing requirements handed down by the state, even assuming people did not relax their guard, following the guidelines would still result in a different models of social behavior, more in-door gatherings that still met distancing guidelines, etc.