• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Policy measures to solve the coronavirus pandemic

coronavirus policy regulation quarantine confinement

  • Please log in to reply
980 replies to this topic

#61 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 May 2020 - 02:55 AM

Sure it's stupid for authorities not to recommend masks, but that's not my point.
 
Are these civilian protests a worldwide thing?  Those ones that totally obey social distancing guidelines.  You're seeing more in US and Brazil than Korea—granted larger countries tend to be harder to govern, but I suspect the whole attitude of "sacrificing individual liberties for the perceived common good" is more common in the East.


Which is stupider—authorities not mandating mask-wearing due to civilian protests or authorities not mandating (or even recommending) mask-wearing even in the absence of protests?



#62 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 03:08 AM

Which is stupider—authorities not mandating mask-wearing due to civilian protests or authorities not mandating (or even recommending) mask-wearing even in the absence of protests?

 

Well the latter makes no attempt.  The former gives up after a fight.  I'm not really aware of any case where even a small minority of people protested the mask diplomacy.  It seems 90-95% agree it is a reasonable thing, the people with guns inside the capitol are extremist nuts.


  • Ill informed x 3
  • Good Point x 3

#63 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 04:37 AM

If you prefer a babbling narcissist loon (Trump) over a well-spoken woman of few words and a former nuclear scientist (Angela Merkel), then just vote for him.


You left out part of Merkel's career didn't you - former Communist Party apparatchik. For a government that kept their people in a country wide prison for almost forty years. But perhaps you are too young to know of the people that risked their lives and occasionally lost them trying to get off the DDR prison planet.
 

If you're watching his daily briefings without mounting horror frankly, vote for him in November.  But IIRC you conceded in an earlier post how he was "an ass"?  I'm frankly very concerned with the problem of getting competent, level-headed men and women into positions of power.


Of course Trump is an ass. Here's a hint .... they're all asses. Almost to a man and woman. Politicians of all stripes and colors on both sides of the aisle. Trump being such an obvious ass might actually be a feature rather than a bug. A stupid man that appears intelligent (Obama for instance) is arguably more dangerous than a man who's limitations are more obvious.
 

He's done nothing to fight the pandemic or help the middle class.  But deals have been signed behind closed doors.  Feds Injected $1.5 Trillion in March to the stock market (aka Billionaires), weeks before the CARES act was approved.  The CARES act was also a joke, if you look at how the money got divvied up, it may as well have been called the WHOCARES act with how the generous bailouts for big business were juxtaposed against local governments, volunteers, and small businesses being given the middle finger.  They're doing precisely what I hoped the poor would do, they're using the pandemic as an excuse to further their agenda and trample on the weak.  It is a uniquely Republican trait to be so averse to helping people, sometimes even when they are in legitimate need.  That's why small business will barely survive here.  That's why we refuse to pause mortgage payments.  It's greed coming down from the top.


Let me clue you in how money is spent in the US government. Spending bills start in the House of Representatives. A House controlled by Democrats I suspect you support. They wrote that $1.5T spending bill, not Donald Trump. And they threw an additional $400B(ish) on top of that a few weeks ago. And they are talking about adding another 1 or 2 trillion on top of that. All parties involved are spending like drunken sailors. How much history do you know? Are you familiar with Wiemar Germany, circa 1923?
 

Do you really think we here are going to come up with a vaccine?  Our job is more likely to provide commentary to scientific studies as they emerge, and lighten the mood somewhat.


No, we are certainly not going to come up with a vaccine here. But your constant berating of half the country hardly "lightens the mood". It might make you feel better. I suspect your motivation is to make yourself feel superior, whether you realize that or not. But this nonsense is tearing the country apart. How on earth do you think Trump got elected in the first place? Hint - it wasn't because so many people actually love Donald Trump. It was because of people like yourself constantly berating and hectoring the country.  That and politicians on the left and the right that had not a dime's worth of difference between them.
 

Are you talking about how they botched testing all of February with their "new and improved" test when Germany had an approved reagent out that China had been long using?  Otherwise, I don't understand what the FDA has to do with it?


Do you really imagine that Trump called down to the CDC and said "Listen guys, I know China and South Korea have a working virus test, but screw that, let's cook up our own"? I assure you he did not. That brilliant idea was nothing but a bureaucracy doing what bureaucracies do - protecting their turf and their funding. I used to design flight hardware for a well know NASA prime contractor. Waste and stupidity were the only constant in that organization and it was there through right wing and left wing governments. Bureaucracies really take a life of their own and as the famous saying goes, "No matter what the original purpose of a bureaucracy is, it's ultimate propose becomes the perpetuation and expansion of the bureaucracy". No truer words were ever spoken. Now, I blame Trump for not putting a guy in charge of the CDC with the balls and brains to have shut that nonsense down, but it's actually kind of rare that the transient political leadership of any bureaucracy, which comes and goes every 4 or 8 years, is very successful in changing it's course.

 

Part of the problem is it's "not" an emergency anymore.  I think I heard President Trump announce the pandemic was over?  Yeah, why worry about a vaccine people he was right this is just going away in April.  And totally. not. coming. back. in. the. Fall.

 

Maybe you heard that.  I don't recall it. But he says stupid things all the time.

 

But ..... if you look at what he's actually done in and ignore his stupid tweets - I doubt a Clinton government would have done materially better. Maybe her appointment to the CDC would have forced them to use South Korea's test, maybe not. I put that at 50 - 50 odds.  She certainly would not have shut down some of the travel with China, a move for which Trump was lambasted, notably by Nancy Pelosi on February 24th. Trump was supposed to know that covid was a threat apparently at the same time key Democrats and the media were downplaying what was going on in China because the travel ban was politically incorrect.  Only an ideolog would suggest that shutting down travel with a part of the world with a significant pandemic was a bad idea.

 

Oh I agree, the aesthetics of her press conferences would be far better.  The number of infected and dead? Probably going to be about the same.

 

See, that list I posted earlier - the point was almost all of Western Europe and the US are in the same boat.  In Europe you have mostly left wing governments, with an exception of the UK. In the US you have Trump (who actually blends aspects of left and right to the extent he has any political philosophy at all - because that what populists do).  You have entirely socialized heath care over there, a hybrid system over here (Medicare and Medicaide are together about 50% of our health care system).  And what do you have to show for it? Just about the same results.  Germany is the outlier, but what have they done that's so different than say what France has done? Not that much. Likely the different outcomes are due to societal differences.  Germans do behave different than Frenchmen because they have different cultures. Those items are actually upstream from government and nothing that Angela Merkel can claim credit for.

 

See, the thing is, this virus doesn't really give a damn about politics.  Left wing governments, right wing government, Trump government, they're all getting about the same result.  Sure, governments can nibble about the margins of what this virus is going to do, but I see no great evidence that they can make any dramatic changes once it reaches a pandemic level in any given country.  South Korea shut it down before that happened.  Good for them. But, that ship may have already sailed by the time anyone here realized the magnitude of the problem (which is btw why you have been so resistant to the idea that covid-19 was in the US before the current official date). Hell, even Fauci, whom everyone seems to love, was saying in February that he didn't think the new coronavirus would be a problem in the US (look it up).

 

Excepting of course China.  What do we say about China?  Can we believe their numbers?  I don't, but what do I know. I haven't been to China lately.  But from what we've heard, if they did shut the virus down, it was through some very draconia measures. One hears of people in Wuhan being forceably locked in their apartments without medical care, maybe without food, to live or die as the fates allowed.  Now, if Trump had done that here .... what do you think your reaction would have been to that?

 

Now ... isn't this lovely.  We've descended into a full blown political debate. Because god know we don't get enough of that on social media, television, the radio, walking the dog, talking to your neighbor, etc. etc.  In fact, I think we should just be full politics all the time. 24/7.  Use toothpicks to prop your eyes open and pour it in.  Because this has done so much good for the world we live in.

 

 

 

 


  • Well Written x 2
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#64 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 08 May 2020 - 05:02 AM

Well the latter makes no attempt.  The former gives up after a fight.  I'm not really aware of any case where even a small minority of people protested the mask diplomacy.  It seems 90-95% agree it is a reasonable thing, the people with guns inside the capitol are extremist nuts.

 

How can you be aware of something and not aware of that something at the same time?

 

The anti-mask nuts aren't just peacefully protesting, some of them have threatened or engaged in physical violence and even murder.

 

https://abcnews.go.c...ory?id=70494577


Edited by Florin, 08 May 2020 - 05:41 AM.

  • dislike x 1

#65 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 05:12 AM

You left out part of Merkel's career didn't you - former Communist Party apparatchik.


Oh I agree, the aesthetics of her press conferences would be far better.  The number of infected and dead? Probably going to be about the same.
 

One hears of people in Wuhan being forceably locked in their apartments without medical care, maybe without food, to live or die as the fates allowed.  Now, if Trump had done that here .... what do you think your reaction would have been to that?

If she was communist that just proves it has some credibility.  Trump hung out with Epstein, okay?

 

See that's just taking it to the extreme.  No reason we had to lock people in their houses, cancel voting or do anything that would be perceived as communist.  He could have ramped up testing capacity, PPE and masks, and issued earlier guidelines without coming off like a dictator.

 

It's not so much the number of infected or dead that distinguishes Merkel from Trump.  It's the fact that maybe those 10% fewer people who aren't dying in Germany, that 10% that is being swallowed as insignificant, they are at least dying with some dignity.  The hospitals aren't overwhelmed like NYC, New Orleans or Detroit.  Patients get better care.But ..... if you look at what he's actually done in and ignore his stupid tweets - I doubt a Clinton government would have done materially better.

 

A House controlled by Democrats I suspect you support. They wrote that $1.5T spending bill, not Donald Trump.

Guess I'm just in favor of more parties (green, independent) to try to break up control.  And yes i know about hyper inflation and recessions.

 

How on earth do you think Trump got elected in the first place? It was because of people like yourself constantly berating and hectoring the country.

:|?

 

Do you really imagine that Trump called down to the CDC and said "Listen guys, I know China and South Korea have a working virus test, but screw that, let's cook up our own"?

No but he has pretty much replaced all the liberal supreme court judges, all of the cabinet within his reach, numerous watchdogs.. it's a walking scandal, a cult.  Never have I seen this much damage done in 4 years.


  • Ill informed x 2
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Informative x 1

#66 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 11:31 AM

If she was communist that just proves it has some credibility.  Trump hung out with Epstein, okay?

 

 

You've got to be kidding.  You're worried about Trump's body count from what you believe to be a mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic but the body count from communism in the last century (about 100 million) gives a politician credibility?

 

So edgy.

 

 

 


 


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • Cheerful x 1

#67 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 11:46 AM

You've got to be kidding.  You're worried about Trump's body count from what you believe to be a mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic but the body count from communism in the last century (about 100 million) gives a politician credibility?

 

So edgy.

 

In what context did I bring up body count as a damning conviction?  From the start I believed the federal response was feeble, but I knew this long before the death count soared.

 

No, I'm not a student of modern history.  But history is just that.  1980s Berlin was ugly, everyone knows.  I'm most concerned with what's happening today, and as far as I'm concerned I'd rather live in Germany today.  If the first date you ask the girl about all the other guys she's slept with, that's fine, you do that.  If you want to stay here another 4 years with Trump, that's your choice.  Personally when things settle down a bit I'm going to heavily weigh my options of relocating abroad.

 

In fact the person who incriminated himself most directly was Trump, literally using his own words against himself on the daily,

TTtrT23IVHAUqQpD-n7GEo7uwjypaf6QcLxLaa_J


  • Good Point x 3
  • Ill informed x 3
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2

#68 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 01:22 PM

So what's your beef with Trump if it's not that more people have died during the pandemic?  You don't like his hair or his orange tan?  He writes stupid tweets? It seems as though you are moving the goal posts.

 

I've noticed that whenever I confront you with actual facts - rankings of country by covid death/million, the number of people killed by communists , you always retreat to an emotional purely subjective stance.

 

Perhaps your positions are not based on cool rational logic as you think they are. 

 

Seems as though we should wind this down. This doesn't seem very productive.

 

 


  • Good Point x 3
  • Ill informed x 2
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • Agree x 1

#69 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 01:53 PM

So what's your beef with Trump if it's not that more people have died during the pandemic?  You don't like his hair or his orange tan?  He writes stupid tweets? It seems as though you are moving the goal posts.

 

Yeah honestly let's go with stupid tweets, bad foreign policy, corruption of the courts.  He's blatantly lining us up for a totalitarian regime.  I hated him with a passion long before this crisis.  But the thing was his idiocy wasn't in the limelight like it is now.  Now it matters more.  He's had his four years, he only ever gets four more, and frankly he doesn't deserve them back-to-back.  Maybe if he comes crawling back, opens the Trump Hotel up to doctors in NYC, actually shows a level head I would give a second thought.  But the chances of that happening before November are exceedingly slim.

 


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Ill informed x 2
  • like x 2
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#70 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 02:33 PM

Let's talk about one of your issues - the idea that Trump is "lining up for a totalitarian regime.
 
Do you really think that a would be totalitarian would pass up an opportunity like a global pandemic? The best time for a tyrant to expand his power is when people are scared. You can do things in a crisis that you'd never get away with during normal times.  But, Trump hasn't done that.  In fact, he's been criticized for not declaring a national emergency and issuing a national stay at home order or nationalizing industry.  He hasn't expanded his power a bit and we're almost at the end of his term in office.  What's he waiting for?  Let me assure you that the real Hitler (as opposed to the "literally Hitler" I hear Trump called) did not wait to suppress his opposition and set himself up beyond any legal restraints once he became Chancellor,  In fact, his opponents were in camps within months of him taking power. And he used a much smaller crisis (the burning of the Reichstag) to justify his sweeping expansion of power. 
 
And let's talk for a moment about the man in that video - Noam Chomsky.  Are you aware that he's supported actual tyrants that killed millions of people? As opposed to imaginary tyrants like Trump.  I know you're not a student of modern history, but Chomsky supported a man called Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge (the "Red Khmer" if your French is rusty).  Go look up Pol Pot on Wikipedia.  He and his people killed up to one quarter of all the people in Cambodia in the 1970s.  In fact on a per capita basis, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge are the bloodiest tyrants the world has ever seen.  And Chomsky supported them while they were in power and refused to denounce them when the killing fields of Cambodia were laid bare.   Here, do a little reading - Khmer_Rouge. I don't think Chomsky has reversed his position on the Khmer Rouge to this day.

 

I really don't think you've thought your positions through very thoroughly and you lack the historical perspective to make these pronouncements from a position of knowledge.

 

 


  • Good Point x 4
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Informative x 1

#71 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 07:24 PM

I really don't think you've thought your positions through very thoroughly and you lack the historical perspective to make these pronouncements from a position of knowledge.

 

Again deflecting things to the past?  I said Trump handled the situation poorly in my opinion and I wasn't in any rush to vote him in again.  Whether or not Chomsky killed millions of people doesn't affect the truth of his position today.  It's what's called an ad hominem attack.  It's like saying Fox News is shit because Sean Hannity sounds like he has a dildo in his butt, no Fox News is shit because they're fundamentally biased and shallow.  Go chug your methylene blue for the day, you'll piece a logical argument for once I'm sure.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Good Point x 2
  • Disagree x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1

#72 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 07:32 PM

ad-hominem.jpg


  • Good Point x 4
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 3

#73 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 08 May 2020 - 08:19 PM

Right you suggested because Chomsky was involved in the Vietnam protests, we shouldn't listen to him for anything.. as if he can't critique government?  He's grown up a lot since then, I mean look at him.  A guy with intelligent ideas for economic policy, and just for kicks, a twitter account that also doesn't read like a seething lunatic's.

 

You'll just have to accept the fact I've long hated Trump.

 

Trump has pared back welfare, removed environmental restrictions, pushed for saltier school lunches, reshaped the tax code in a regressive manner, ran the Ohio steel industry into the ground, pissed off our neighbors, and generally ruined our reputation as a great leader and super power.

 

I could try to reach you with more facts.  I could try to appeal to some intelligent academic person.  But you'd just respond with logical fallacies :sleep:


  • Ill informed x 2
  • Good Point x 2
  • Disagree x 1

#74 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 May 2020 - 08:37 PM

I was just pointing out the irony to you of posting a video of a man that accuses Trump of killing thousands that has himself supported a regime that killed millions, and to my knowledge still upholds that position to this day.

 

Interesting aside - I attended a university lecture given by Noam Chomsky in 1989.  Most of the speech was an excoriation of Ronald Reagan who had recently left office.  After the speech there was a little banquet get together.  I walked up to Chomsky and asked him if he had changed his position on the Khmer Rouge in the intervening years.  He very angrily informed me that whatever had been done by the Khmer Rouge was the responsibility of the United States and briskly walked away. As far as I can tell that is still his position today.  The man's entire life has been completely driven by a deep and abiding hatred for the United State which has completely consumed him.  He has become nothing but a small mind attempting to tear down that which he could never create.  Which is a shame because his actual professional sphere is linguistics, a topic which he actually knows something about and in which he has demonstrated some brilliance. 

 

I really haven't heard about Trump paring back welfare. Tell me more.  That would be very interesting since it is Congress, not the President that sets the funding for those (and all) programs. But you knew that of course.  Ditto for the tax code.  It is Congress that sets the tax code, not the president.

 

BTW - you might want to read that definition of "ad hominem" as it is you that have engaged in it, not I.

 

 


Edited by Daniel Cooper, 08 May 2020 - 09:13 PM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • Well Written x 1
  • like x 1

#75 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 09 May 2020 - 10:23 PM

Strict mask wearing eliminates the need for lockdowns, social distancing, pills, and potions.

 

100% masking from day 0 = no pandemic

 

UK scenario:

 

80% masking = 60k deaths
Strict lockdown = 180k deaths
50% masking = 240k deaths
Social distancing = 1m deaths

 

Universal Masking is Urgent in the COVID-19 Pandemic: SEIR and Agent Based Models, Empirical Validation, Policy Recommendations
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13553.pdf

 

If 80% of Americans Wore Masks, COVID-19 Infections Would Plummet, New Study Says
https://www.vanityfa...-new-study-says


Edited by Florin, 09 May 2020 - 10:55 PM.

  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#76 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 10 May 2020 - 06:02 AM

Strict mask wearing eliminates the need for lockdowns, social distancing, pills, and potions.

 

100% masking from day 0 = no pandemic

 

UK scenario:

 

80% masking = 60k deaths
Strict lockdown = 180k deaths
50% masking = 240k deaths
Social distancing = 1m deaths

 

Universal Masking is Urgent in the COVID-19 Pandemic: SEIR and Agent Based Models, Empirical Validation, Policy Recommendations
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.13553.pdf

 

If 80% of Americans Wore Masks, COVID-19 Infections Would Plummet, New Study Says
https://www.vanityfa...-new-study-says

 

It's hard to dispute that mask wearing is a good idea in this situation.  However, the model makers haven't exactly covered themselves in glory so far.  I think the Oxford model said that Sweden would have 40k deaths if they did nothing by May 1st.  Sweden did nothing and here we are at May 10th and Sweden is at about 3,200 deaths.  I'd call that a miss.

 

These models are all over the place and at this point I'd take them with a grain of salt. But, wearing a mask is still a good idea.  Particularly if you're in a covid hot spot like New York or New Jersey.  But I see the media quoting them as if they are established fact and that's just not true.


  • Good Point x 1

#77 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 10 May 2020 - 07:39 AM

It's hard to dispute that mask wearing is a good idea in this situation.  However, the model makers haven't exactly covered themselves in glory so far.  I think the Oxford model said that Sweden would have 40k deaths if they did nothing by May 1st.  Sweden did nothing and here we are at May 10th and Sweden is at about 3,200 deaths.  I'd call that a miss.

 

These models are all over the place and at this point I'd take them with a grain of salt. But, wearing a mask is still a good idea.  Particularly if you're in a covid hot spot like New York or New Jersey.  But I see the media quoting them as if they are established fact and that's just not true.

 

Sweden does have a mild/partial form of lockdown and social distancing.

 

Using a pessimistic model was a good move, because it shows that mask wearing is effective even in a worst case scenario.


Edited by Florin, 10 May 2020 - 07:46 AM.

  • Agree x 1

#78 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,918 posts
  • 729
  • Location:Austria

Posted 10 May 2020 - 08:43 AM

Sweden does have a mild/partial form of lockdown and social distancing.

 

Using a pessimistic model was a good move, because it shows that mask wearing is effective even in a worst case scenario.

 

Sweden still allowed gatherings up to 49 people, didn't shut-down non-essential businesses and didn't prosecute its population for non-compliance in social-distancing. No talk about wearing masks in public.

 

If even a liberal approach like Sweden is taken as 'mild/partial' lockdown, then I don't know what would be not. :|?



#79 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 10 May 2020 - 06:05 PM

Sweden still allowed gatherings up to 49 people, didn't shut-down non-essential businesses and didn't prosecute its population for non-compliance in social-distancing. No talk about wearing masks in public.

 

If even a liberal approach like Sweden is taken as 'mild/partial' lockdown, then I don't know what would be not. :|?

 

What would you call shutting down or locking down nursing homes, high schools, universities, businesses that violate social distancing rules, and gatherings of more than 50 people? If a restaurant's business is cut by 50% due to social distancing rules, that sure seems like a partial lockdown to me. Even in places where social distancing could be enforced, I haven't seen lots of people being prosecuted for violations.

 

Anyway, Sweden did have an increase in deaths that could've been avoided by universal mask wearing.


Edited by Florin, 10 May 2020 - 06:15 PM.

  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#80 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 May 2020 - 03:50 AM

Sweden does have a mild/partial form of lockdown and social distancing.

 

Using a pessimistic model was a good move, because it shows that mask wearing is effective even in a worst case scenario.

 

Ok, I'll revise from saying that Sweden has done nothing to saying that they have done very little.  But the gulf between the Oxford model predictions (40k) and reality (~3k) is so wide that I have trouble explaining it by the minimal mitigation that Sweden implemented.  I think the model was just very bad.

 

This isn't an endorsement of Sweden's "do little" approach or saying don't wear masks (I wear a mask in public and think you probably should too) but is rather commentary about these models which just frankly haven't been very good. So, when a models tells us "wearing masks will result in an 80% reduction in covid deaths", my response is .... maybe.

 

I just see a lot of reporting in the popular media to the effect that "New model says X" and it being reported as if X were an established fact.  We've watched these models for several months now and I think we should be somewhat skeptical at this point. By all means keep modeling but just be aware that we haven't been that great getting high quality predictions out of these models so far.  Which isn't surprising - this is all a big closed loop feedback system with human behavior right in the middle of the loop.

 

 

 

 


  • Agree x 1

#81 Florin

  • Guest
  • 867 posts
  • 34
  • Location:Cannot be left blank

Posted 11 May 2020 - 05:38 AM

Ok, I'll revise from saying that Sweden has done nothing to saying that they have done very little.  But the gulf between the Oxford model predictions (40k) and reality (~3k) is so wide that I have trouble explaining it by the minimal mitigation that Sweden implemented.  I think the model was just very bad.

 

There are a few other things that might not be widely appreciated about Sweden's social distancing like:

  • Non-essential travel is discouraged
  • Non-essential social contact with people aged over 70 or belonging to another risk group is discouraged
  • Working from home is encouraged

Taking everything into account, I'd say that Sweden has done little mandatory lockdown but it has done at least a moderate amount of social distancing.

 

https://www.thelocal...cing-guidelines



#82 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,918 posts
  • 729
  • Location:Austria

Posted 11 May 2020 - 12:03 PM

Taking everything into account, I'd say that Sweden has done little mandatory lockdown but it has done at least a moderate amount of social distancing.

 

Exactly. I would want to differentiate brude-lockdowns from more sensible meassures taken, so in a year's time the former isn't justified with the later. And which might have brought much hunger, illness and death mainly to all the majority of poor countries for many decades as an aftermath of such activist brude-lockdown and its unneccessary economic downturn. And in most cases implemented too late anyway.
 



#83 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 May 2020 - 01:34 PM

There are a few other things that might not be widely appreciated about Sweden's social distancing like:

  • Non-essential travel is discouraged
  • Non-essential social contact with people aged over 70 or belonging to another risk group is discouraged
  • Working from home is encouraged

Taking everything into account, I'd say that Sweden has done little mandatory lockdown but it has done at least a moderate amount of social distancing.

 

https://www.thelocal...cing-guidelines

 

But still - 40k vs 3k.  I just have trouble believing those models were even close to correct and that Sweden's voluntary distancing explains the different.  I think it's far more likely that the models being wrong is most of the difference with some fairly minor contribution by what Sweden has done.


  • Disagree x 1

#84 Guest_iherbalHap_*

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 11 May 2020 - 05:25 PM

Интернет магазин аюрведических товаров из Индии с доставкой по всему миру

аюрведические препараты

#85 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 May 2020 - 05:49 PM

For what it's worth my corporate anti-malware software marks that site above as "Malicious/Phishing". It's an old .su (Soviet Union) domain which was supposed to have been phased out years ago after .ru got stood up but has since become a haven for cybercrime.

 

 

 

 


Edited by Daniel Cooper, 11 May 2020 - 06:35 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#86 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 12 May 2020 - 01:07 AM

I think the Oxford model said that Sweden would have 40k deaths if they did nothing by May 1st.  Sweden did nothing and here we are at May 10th

 

It was 65k deaths overall.  The pandemic is still young, Sweden was not seeded especially early; please be patient.

EXVAliGU4AI746t.jpg

 

 

And as for the idea they "did nothing"?

There are certainly restrictions: Sweden's authorities have curbed mass gatherings; they have asked people to work from home and to avoid non-essential travel; and they have threatened to shut restaurants and pubs that don't keep people at a distance from each other.

 

The crucial difference is that most measures are voluntary - which the Swedish government argues will encourage better and more long-lasting compliance - and the country's shops, schools, cafes and bars have remained open, at the behest of a contrarian government epidemiologist.


  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

#87 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 May 2020 - 01:33 PM

It was 65k deaths overall.  The pandemic is still young, Sweden was not seeded especially early; please be patient.

EXVAliGU4AI746t.jpg

 

 

And as for the idea they "did nothing"?

 

 

Well, let's revisit this projection at the end of May.  That's a bit over two weeks.  I think you're going to see a great disparity between the projection and the actual numbers unless 25,000 people die in Sweden in the next couple of weeks.  I certainly hope that doesn't happen and it seems rather unlikely.

 

And I think it's undeniable that compared to the rest of Europe and the US, Sweden has done very little in the way of mitigation.  I'm not advocating their approach, I'm just pointing out that these models have been poor predictors of the future. We're talking a likely about of delta of about 8x between the "moderate" forecast and the actual results when it's all said and done, and I don't think anyone really disputes that what Sweden has actually implemented would fall in the "moderate" classification if not somewhere between "moderate" and "do nothing".



#88 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 12 May 2020 - 02:17 PM

Well, let's revisit this projection at the end of May.  That's a bit over two weeks.  I think you're going to see a great disparity between the projection and the actual numbers unless 25,000 people die in Sweden in the next couple of weeks.  I certainly hope that doesn't happen and it seems rather unlikely.

 

I expect them to hover around 80-100 deaths daily for the summer.  So in 10 weeks, by July 28th, Sweden should be close to 10,000 deaths.  I don't see what's hard to accept about this.  Everyone knows the Imperial model (IHME v1) were 18th century, and people are now looking to the MIT model and the revised Imperial model for a better insight into how pandemics spread.  It's slower, and broader than previous assumed.  When these revised models post an estimate for Sweden I wouldn't be surprised if they were more accurate.

 

Projected deaths for USA based on revised University models.

post-13945-0-94391300-1588645907.png

 

And I think it's undeniable that compared to the rest of Europe and the US, Sweden has done very little in the way of mitigation.

Don't underestimate the citizen or civilian response either.  Just because no official restrictions are handed down, people may nevertheless be extremely cautious in their day to day activities and the simple acts can have a profound effect on flattening the curve.  The R0 value for Sweden has been gradually lessening.  There may be no true 'control' group in this pandemic.



#89 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,699 posts
  • 642
  • Location:USA

Posted 12 May 2020 - 02:46 PM

I expect them to hover around 80-100 deaths daily for the summer.  So in 10 weeks, by July 28th, Sweden should be close to 10,000 deaths.  I don't see what's hard to accept about this.  Everyone knows the Imperial model (IHME v1) were 18th century, and people are now looking to the MIT model and the revised Imperial model for a better insight into how pandemics spread.  It's slower, and broader than previous assumed.  When these revised models post an estimate for Sweden I wouldn't be surprised if they were more accurate.

 

 Why do you believe that daily deaths will remain at 80 - 100 for the summer when that is clearly not the trend?

sweden-daily-deaths-051220.jpg



#90 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,493 posts
  • 432
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 12 May 2020 - 03:31 PM

  Why do you believe that daily deaths will remain at 80 - 100 for the summer when that is clearly not the trend?

 

There is a lag time.  April 21st Sweden had very small number of deaths, but the greatest number of ICU admissions for several weeks.

 

I would like to see the moving 7-day average.  I would like to see a few more weeks before calling something a trend.  They already report 60 deaths for today, and are one of the few countries with R0 > 1.  I wouldn't expect it to fall to 10 deaths a day.  Even if it falls to 40, I would be curious what happens in the Fall.  Scientists don't understand why the cold and flu are seasonal—with only 5% of infections occurring between May and October—but I would be surprised if some degree of that doesn't apply here.

 

What is the argument now.. that if less than 8,000 Swedes die before October, herd immunity was a success?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus, policy, regulation, quarantine, confinement

22 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 22 guests, 0 anonymous users