I guess whether the ban is lifted too early or not can only be decided after the fact. Some things to keep in mind:
People are a lot more concious about the dangers now than before the lockdown. Generally people will wash their hands more often, keep a distance, avoid crowded places, wear masks, self-quarantine when ill, etc. This will certainly have an impact on the reproductive number.
There are a lot more tests available than before the lockdown. It is easier to track the virus and to selectively quarantine people who get ill, as well as the people that have been in contact with ill people.
Hospitals have increased their capacity since the start of the lockdown. More patients can be treated currently than was possible before.
Lifting a lockdown is not permanent. As long as the reproductive number stays below 1, lifting the lockdown is the fastest way to end the crisis. The danger is the number getting above 1, at which point the government will most likely take new actions to lower it. This doesn’t have to be a complete lockdown if they’re fast enough, it could also mean partial lockdowns, closing down certain areas or stuff like compulsory masks.
The second wave will only come if we allow it to do so (or if people start mass-ignoring government directives).
You know what, I read everywhere that today that the shops are back in business hundreds of people were on the streets. I expected to see the worst. I don’t think it was as bad as they want to make it seem, but I have three examples:
Fight between churchgoers and protesters
People rushing to shop at Bershka
People rushing to the Power Company (a clusterfuck happened with bills during the lockdown, so I’m a bit sympathetic about this)
On one hand, people are soaring to the beaches (Greek Summer ), on the other hand I don’t see big differences in the ratio of people being careful before and after. I’m cautiously optimistic that the amount of people going out and about after the lifting of the lockdown will not make much of a difference.
However, if tourism happens, all the hard work may go out the window. That’s the thing with a virus, it’s not about how cautious I am, is about everyone else.
I think the fact that we got through pretty lightly compared to Italy (for now) gives people a false sense of security, which may end up much worse.
Not necessarily. It’s important not to look too much to individual cases, but to look at the whole population. The reproductive number measures the average number of people a contagious person will infect. This average includes both hermits and virus-deniers. As long as the average number stays below 1, the virus is disappearing.
It is also sensible to measure the reproductive number locally instead of nationally. Closing one province down where it is too high can keep the rest of the country running.
Asian Boss interviews Dr. Jerome Kim, the Director General of the International Vaccine Institute (IVI).
For anyone who still thinks COVID is not much of a threat, agencies have green-lit certain vaccine tests directly to humans, skipping animal testing, because “this is an emergency”.
I am absolutely no expert on this topic by any means (I don’t think anyone really is) but here are my two cents. I don’t know how much of this has really already been discussed because I have not had the time to read through this entire thread.
Firstly, I do want to say that I take this as seriously as I can and am concerned for the elderly and others with underlying health conditions. However, I don’t think this quarantine project here in the US (and in other countries for that matter) is accomplishing much of anything. This virus is clearly very contagious and I think by quarantining we are simply delaying the full amount of problems that will likely come along. Additional waves seen inevitable at this point as the virus has spread entirely out of control. I think at this point only herd immunity or possibly (although I have my doubts) the development of a reliable vaccine will bring it to an end. We need to get the economy moving again otherwise there will be much large problems in the near future than what we see from this virus. People still need to be prudent and I would still advise people at a higher risk of death or serious problems to stay at home as much as possible. I feel like this is just a sad and unfortunate time that is out of our control but it will come to an end eventually in one way or another. Our world has a tendency to think that we can control everything and overcome all obstacles. We are trying this now and with the current method it is not working out. People need to understand that somethings are out of our hands and I hate to admit it, but nature is probably just going to have to take its course.
I am also not going to let a virus with a death rate of somewhere between 1 - 5 percent ruin horrify me. This is a horrific fatality rate, but it could be much worse. I also think it is much lower than what the statistics suggest. Particularity here is the US, an early shortage of test kits had a tremendous effect on the accuracy of these statistics. It could have been circulating around in our country for weeks without anyone knowing. I can say with some confidence this this is probably a lot less serious than the what the world wants everyone to believe. People are scared right now and I don’t blame them. But we need to maintain a level head and think outside the box.
Ultimately, whether I am right or not, this quarantine is not working or going to work unless it gets a lot more aggressive, which I am not in favor of. We need to take the precautions that we can but it is time to proceed with life and realize that at some level this is out of our control.
Nah, I can tell from likes and replies lots of newcomers read most of it, or at least skim the most important parts.
Also, I was referring to their own admission.
People are a lot more concious about the dangers now than before the lockdown.
This will probably balance out with the number of people that are thinking along the lines “I do not know anyone that got sick in the first place”, “nothing serious happened, it was just a flu, I lost money over this”, “this was all a big mistake/overreaction”, “this was a scam”, “this was a premediated plan to harm this or that group that I belong or care about or to sabotage a particular country” and so forth…
The initial shock value of the pandemic will be lost in the second wave and that was mostly what kept people in line. I am afraid that in countries that fared well in the first wave, people will be very unwilling to return into any sort of strict measures (until, of course, it is too late)
No, but these are my thoughts on the subject from what I have gathered outside of the opinions and thoughts of the weiqi community.
I would not limit my thoughts on any subject to the data. The data could be somewhat wrong (it probably is). From that perspective, it is helping. But what will happen after the quarantine? Are we going to go through the cycle of “lets put everyone on and off of quarantine” until this ends? Or just force everyone to be quarantined for a really long time? The whole economy thing might sound like the greed of various competing countries with each other, but it is not. In this case, it could be the difference of many more people starving to death and going into deep poverty than those dying from the virus. Don’t get me wrong, I am very upset about the loss of the many lives due to this virus, but I also think long in the long term. I am especially upset for all of those people who have lost their jobs and are worried sick about their family over a quarantine that probably isn’t going to pan out in the long run. Moreover, I don’t want people suffering many years out because of something that is history at that point.
I am especially upset for all of those people who have lost their jobs and are worried sick about their family over a quarantine that probably isn’t going to pan out in the long run.
This is a very valid issue, but I think that you will agree that it has been very poorly represented by behaviours along the line “let us return to work, there are more important things than living” (there was an actual quote going like that by a Lt. governor iirc ?). The fact of the matter is that quarantines or not, if people are afraid for their health, they will not shop and spend and behave in the same way as they used to for various reasons (the most obvious one being the reasonable desire to create a small savings account in case things get worse - people rarely spend money when there is a crisis).
Even if every office and mall and shop and restaurant and tourist resort was open for business, quite a lot of people would still not go and shop and spend and visit some other place in order to protect themselves or their loved ones. This means that there would still have been a severe economic recession AND also a lot more people would have been infected.
Imho, a good compromise should have been communicated in a fast and efficient way and it would need to be followed by the populace ( e.g. Sweden that managed to have shops open and give the option for people that wanted to protect themselves) and that way the citizens would have not been so divided and there wouldn’t have been protests in the extend that we have seen in the states.
Offices, beaches, restaurants, parks all of those could have still been open (some countries managed it), as long as there was a serious response from the government and the populace. The bottom line is that there was a serious failure in establishing a practical, safe and homogenous response in some countries and that, in turn, led to the unfortunate polarization of the topic.
P.S.
Our mayor is trying to make a tourist campaign on the slogan “come to our city we are Covid-19 free” as if he can certify that in any imaginable miraculous way /facepalm
we are going to tank soooooo hard this year even if we are out of the quarantine
This would only be balanced out by people who now go out of their way to be more contagious than they were before the lockdown. If 50% of the people takes more care, the other 50% has to work harder to infect others to balance it out. Every little bit helps.
What I see, is that everywhere in the world where a lockdown is issued, the week immediately afterwards the number of new admissions to the hospital start to drop. That means it’s working and accomplishing a lot.
What pains me, is that this is a huge concern to the US. Many people have to choose between two evils: no money or risk of virus. In a country where the social safety net actually functions properly this is a much weaker concern.
It is also a misconception that the economy will not be impacted by an uncontrolled pandemic. Opening the country will inevitably mean that hospitals become overencumbered, that international travel will be restricted (of course including business travel), that a significant part of the work force will be unable to work due to illness. It’s not automatic that the economy is better off without a lockdown.
I wish to make this very clear:
This is much, much worse than any other event in the history of our modern world.
To compare it, during the American civil war only 0.2% of the population died. Don’t underestimate what 1 to 5 percent means: assuming you have about 20 people you talk to on a weekly basis and 200 you occasionally speak with, there will be probably 1 of your weekly friends dying, and 2 to 10 of the occasional ones.
Unless you’re part of an ethnic minority that has seen a genocide, you can’t really say 1-5% is few.
Apart from that, the only more devastating things I can think of, are other virus outbreaks, such as when the Europeans brought the flu to the Americas.
I appreciate these well-formed and nicely argued responses. Indeed I am just as aware as all of you with how difficult this topic is. I love seeing a community that wants to work hard in putting their point through. You all have given me much more to think about, and I appreciate that. This is not going to be good in the long term one way or another.
I especially like this comment. Indeed I most certainly understand that this would probably be much worse than anything else in history if it infects everyone in the entire world. I just hope it won’t. I hope I haven’t stirred this up too much for you all and I apologize for starting a little dispute here. I can’t say that I absolutely agree with you all on this subject yet, but I have learned a lot just in these last few minutes!
), on the other hand I don’t see big differences in the ratio of people being careful before and after. I’m cautiously optimistic that the amount of people going out and about after the lifting of the lockdown will not make much of a difference.
