Jump to content
270soft Forum

As a long term approach, the response to coronavirus isn't sustainable and is almost certainly the wrong approach


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

People aren’t going to starve to death — that’s politically unpalatable.  If anything, nonprofits dedicated to helping those with nutrition instability challenges will become stronger — they won’t fade away during the time that they are most needed.  Blood donations didn’t decrease after 9/11, they increased dramatically.

Federal government is working through a plan to support those most deeply affected by this issue, with a price tag of up to one trillion dollars.

We are not headed for an easy time in the near future, but nor are we headed for a mass extinction event.  

 

Even Yassir Arafat made a big show of donating blood after 9/11, among other acts to publicly distance himself from any assumed tied to, or support of, al-Qaeda.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

That people are overreacting and businesses should stay open.

When Donald Trump and I both agree on the correct course of action, you can understand how dire this is.

Well, I agree with Trump on how toxic the modern media is to - well, everything (although I'm also convinced he would not have won the 2016 GOP Primaries, and certainly not the GE, if it were not for the free - albeit negative - publicity from the media).

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Where did I say that? Are you referring to me questioning people hoarding toilet paper?

I’m referring to the first page of this thread.

If I’m misinterpreting your stance, then I’d love some clarity.  What exactly are you saying?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Actinguy said:

I’m referring to the first page of this thread.

If I’m misinterpreting your stance, then I’d love some clarity.  What exactly are you saying?

As an initial response, it's fine, but to continue in lock down for months is unsustainable and will cause serious economic harm, which very well may be worse than a more targeted approach. So, after the initial phase, the more appropriate response is probably to do a more targeted approach. This depends on us getting a more accurate picture of lethality - if it's at the higher end of estimates, lock down might be justified, but if it's at the lower end a more targeted approach starts to seem more likely as the best approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

As an initial response, it's fine, but to continue in lock down for months is unsustainable and will cause serious economic harm, which very well may be worse than a more targeted approach. So, after the initial phase, the more appropriate response is probably to do a more targeted approach. This depends on us getting a more accurate picture of lethality - if it's at the higher end of estimates, lock down might be justified, but if it's at the lower end a more targeted approach starts to seem more likely as the best approach.

Okay, but what is a targeted response?

I am 36 years old and relatively healthy.  But I do work in a hospital, so it is feasible that I could be exposed to it at work.

It would take several days before I recognize that I’m sick at all.  In that time, I’m infecting my co-workers, my wife, my daughter.  I’m going shopping, I’m eating at restaurants, I’m hanging out with friends. These people in turn infect their families and friends as well.  
 

Im young and healthy, I will recover.  But how many elderly and immunocompromised people did I kill just going about my normal life, believing I was still healthy in those early days?

A targeted approach to a global pandemic does not exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Okay, but what is a targeted response?

That's the important question. The first step is to realize that the vast majority of fatalities are occurring among old people. The average age for Italy is 81 (average!).

But the basic answer almost certainly will include that you quarantine old people and anyone who works with them goes through high levels of precautions, until there's an effective vaccine. This is already happening in old age homes.

Again, depending on the lethality rate, it's probably better as a long term solution than quarantining *everyone*.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Actinguy said:

People aren’t going to starve to death — that’s politically unpalatable.  If anything, nonprofits dedicated to helping those with nutrition instability challenges will become stronger — they won’t fade away during the time that they are most needed.  Blood donations didn’t decrease after 9/11, they increased dramatically.

Federal government is working through a plan to support those most deeply affected by this issue, with a price tag of up to one trillion dollars.

We are not headed for an easy time in the near future, but nor are we headed for a mass extinction event.  

 

Where will these non-profits get supplies with nobody working to manufacture?  Where will they get workers to distribute if everyone is on lockdown?  You can't tell people to isolate themselves then also expect them to volunteer en masse.

What will likely happen is people will mostly ignore the self isolation suggestions within a couple of weeks, maybe a month at the outside.  Maybe a lot of people will die.  But the country isn't going to be shut down past mid-April at the latest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

That's the important question. The first step is to realize that the vast majority of fatalities are occurring among old people. The average age for Italy is 81 (average!).

But the basic answer almost certainly will include that you quarantine old people and anyone who works with them goes through high levels of precautions, until there's an effective vaccine. This is already happening in old age homes.

Again, depending on the lethality rate, it's probably better as a long term solution than quarantining *everyone*.

Sure, you’re absolutely right that it’s already happening.  
 

But my wife works in elder care — and then she comes home to me (and whatever I’ve brought home from my hospital work) and our six year old daughter (who brought home god knows what from school — kids are gross).

The real world is not a place for blasé solutions.

Republicans would not be shutting down private businesses for the foreseeable future if they did not have to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Sure, you’re absolutely right that it’s already happening.  
 

But my wife works in elder care — and then she comes home to me (and whatever I’ve brought home from my hospital work) and our six year old daughter (who brought home god knows what from school — kids are gross).

The real world is not a place for blasé solutions.

Republicans would not be shutting down private businesses for the foreseeable future if they did not have to.

I ALMOST get the feeling that he's partially treating this like a set of campaign issues in one of his election games, as not as FULL reality. ALMOST... :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Actinguy said:

The real world is not a place for blasé solutions

Absolutely - the solution might be live-in care takers who are also quarantined. There also might be tests developed to detect it early, before it's contagious. These sorts of solutions are potentially *much better* than quarantining the entire society indefinitely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, admin_270 said:

Absolutely - the solution might be live-in care takers who are also quarantined. There also might be tests developed to detect it early, before it's contagious. These sorts of solutions are potentially *much better* than quarantining the entire society indefinitely.

That’s not a solution, though.  Do I just never see my wife again?  Or does she (and many other nurses) have to quit her job, when there’s a nursing shortage and a global health pandemic?

And then there’s the people who are young but immunocompromised for other reasons.  I told a story here recently about my high school ex girlfriend.  She has a health condition in which she is still a fully functioning adult — you’d never know she had a problem unless she told you — but which renders her vulnerable to Coronavirus as well.  What happens to her (and the millions globally like her)?  Does she have to get checked into a nursing home for the rest of her life, even though she’s in her 30s and fully functioning?  Does she never see her husband or kids again too?  Bonus points:  she is also a nurse, so that’s bad news for the nursing shortage again...

Sure, there will some day be a vaccine and better tests.  And when that happens and becomes widely available, things will go back to normal — nobody is disagreeing with that.  

But that’s not reality yet, which is why everything is shutting down for the foreseeable future.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Actinguy said:

Do I just never see my wife again?  Or does she (and many other nurses) have to quit her job, when there’s a nursing shortage and a global health pandemic?

This is a minor problem when compared to an indefinite lock-down of the entire society. Yes, until there's a vaccine or a significant drop off in the disease, people working in old age homes might have to detach from the rest of society to a significant extent. Offer them much more in salary, and recruit and train people willing to do so if necessary. Military personnel routinely are separated from their families for months at a time. This is *way less expensive* than the sorts of spending proposals being talked about to respond to an indefinite lock-down.

2 hours ago, Actinguy said:

And then there’s the people who are young but immunocompromised for other reasons.

Yes, they have to quarantine themselves until there is a vaccine or the virus drops off the radar. It might be that special facilities for these sorts of people have to be created to protect them. Again, much less expensive than what's being done and talked about right now.

My hope is that the disease is gotten under control relatively quickly (and the trajectories of certain countries in Asia suggest it's possible), but if it isn't, these sorts of targeted actions are probably much better than indefinitely holding the course of society-wide lock-down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

This is a minor problem when compared to an indefinite lock-down of the entire society. Yes, until there's a vaccine or a significant drop off in the disease, people working in old age homes might have to detach from the rest of society to a significant extent. Offer them much more in salary, and recruit and train people willing to do so if necessary. Military personnel routinely are separated from their families for months at a time. This is *way less expensive* than the sorts of spending proposals being talked about to respond to an indefinite lock-down.

Yes, they have to quarantine themselves until there is a vaccine or the virus drops off the radar. It might be that special facilities for these sorts of people have to be created to protect them. Again, much less expensive than what's being done and talked about right now.

My hope is that the disease is gotten under control relatively quickly (and the trajectories of certain countries in Asia suggest it's possible), but if it isn't, these sorts of targeted actions are probably much better than indefinitely holding the course of society-wide lock-down.

Except, you cannot enforce that.  What do single parents do who work in healthcare?

If I have to choose between my job and my kid "for the foreseeable future", then I'm choosing my kid every time.  Sorry old folks, you are on your own.  

You cannot recruit and train nurses and doctors overnight.  It takes YEARS of education to become a nurse and years more to become a doctor.  Years more on top of that to become an experienced nurse or doctor -- you know, the kind you would to take care of you and your loved ones during a global pandemic.

We are also not just talking about nursing homes here.  The vast majority of people who are immunocompromised (or just old) do not live in nursing homes.

Military personnel understand what they are volunteering for when they sign up -- I know, I did it.  Nurses and doctors did not agree to those terms.  Military personnel are also jailed if they refuse a lawful order.  Are we arresting doctors and nurses, in your world?

This is ridiculous.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Actinguy said:

This is ridiculous

Much less ridiculous than an indefinite lock-down of the entire society.

Health care practitioners on the front lines in many places already have been separated from their families, because they are surrounded by people with coronavirus and can't re-enter general society. Either they quarantine on their own, or they quarantine with the rest of the family also being quarantined, as long as they are working.

2 hours ago, Actinguy said:

What do single parents do who work in healthcare?

What do single parents with kids do, when all schools are shut down? When day cares aren't operating? They have to quit their jobs.

My next-door neighbour just got laid off because of the lock-down. There are massive economic ramifications to the course we are on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, pilight said:

What will likely happen is people will mostly ignore the self isolation suggestions within a couple of weeks, maybe a month at the outside.

My guess is the only way to stop them would be martial law. So probably indefinite lock-down also means something tantamount to martial law being imposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, admin_270 said:

Much less ridiculous than an indefinite lock-down of the entire society.

Health care practitioners on the front lines in many places already have been separated from their families, because they are surrounded by people with coronavirus and can't re-enter general society. Either they quarantine on their own, or they quarantine with the rest of the family also being quarantined, as long as they are working.

What do single parents with kids do, when all schools are shut down? When day cares aren't operating? They have to quit their jobs.

My next-door neighbour just got laid off because of the lock-down. There are massive economic ramifications to the course we are on.

I can't keep arguing this because I'm very busy at work.  I would just encourage you take time to read more about what is happening from legitimate sources, such as the CDC website.

Single parents can figure something out for 8 hours a day -- never seeing your children again for the foreseeable future is an entirely different problem.

Economic ramifications will be fixed in the long run.  This is already in the works.

We can not un-kill people.  That is the only problem that can not be fixed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

never seeing your children again for the foreseeable future is an entirely different problem.

A small % of the society will have to choose between changing their current employment or receiving a big salary boost but being quarantined indefinitely, vs. indefinite lock-down of society where everyone self-quarantines indefinitely, perhaps with measures approximating to martial law. 

It doesn't even seem close. Either way, I'm hoping it is brought under control fairly quickly and in a few weeks we see a loosening of rules here. After the recent Science article claiming 86% of people are asymptomatic, I am now hopeful that the 0.5% mortality rate (or lower) is probably right if we can maintain adequate medical care.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The small percentage of society are the doctors and nurses that you need to keep you and your loved ones safe.  If that "small percentage" walk off the job, you are fucked and so am I.

Nobody woke up one day and said "Oh, you know what will be fun?  Let's fuck with the economy today."  

Nobody wanted that.

And yet almost everybody...all parties...in positions of leadership and accountability are doing so.

That should tell you something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

The small percentage of society are the doctors and nurses that you need to keep you and your loved ones safe.  If that "small percentage" walk off the job, you are fucked and so am I.

Right. So focus on health practitioners and care takers willing to be quarantined for awhile to work directly with old people, until this is under control or there is a vaccine.

Again, the quarantining of health practitioners is already happening in certain places, as is the quarantining of old people. My wife's grandma's old person's home is now quarantined. Nobody can visit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, admin_270 said:

Right. So focus on health practitioners and care takers willing to be quarantined for awhile to work directly with old people, until this is under control or there is a vaccine.

Again, the quarantining of health practitioners is already happening in certain places, as is the quarantining of old people. My wife's grandma's old person's home is now quarantined. Nobody can visit.

Not enough care takers to go around as is, certainly not if you force people to permanently walk off the job because you've eliminated their families from their lives.

Absolutely, nursing homes are quarantined -- I know, ours are too.  But the staff still go home to their families when their shift is done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...