Bowser: "We have flattened the curve in an amazing way"

[Anonymous]

The quicker the good news from DC, the quicker feds will get the green light to come back to their offices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure the right forum to post this.

I am an essential worker. I live in VA and commute to SE.

For weeks now traffic has been almost non-existent. For the past two days on my way home at 4:00 I noticed that about twice as many cars as had been usual were on the road. I had to stop at Giant and the parking lot was full. People in VA anyway seem to be back out now and doing things, going places and getting restless.

I am afraid that people are jumping the gun under the presumption that the curve has been flattened.

Interesting. I would say based on observation that the vehicle traffic in and near our NW Washington neighborhood has more than doubled this week versus last.

Yup, NW DC as well. The speeding MD cut through vehicles are back in force this week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With so much uncertainty, you’re almost certainly going to miss on hospital capacity one way or the other. You’re going to have too little or too much, by a lot because the uncertainty swings so far.

I’m glad we have too much. It’s because people have done much better on social distancing than we thought. I think that’s largely because we have so much technology. Enough people can work and stay in touch and entertain themselves that they have stayed home and that has limited the spread of the virus for the people who do have to be out.

I doubt we’ll build extra hospitals in a few months because we’ll know more. That’s how it goes.

I’m ok with planning for a field hospital but would be alarmed from a public health and fiscal standpoint if DC hired a connected, inexperienced firm to manage it. DC unfortunately is known for awarding contracts to politically connected yet essentially shell firms that hire temporary workers and are run out of the owner’s basement in Prince George’s County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 15 new deaths reported today, matching the highest day yet. That's not consistent with the curve being flattened.

Since it matched the highest day yes that could be a flat line.

It could be, and that would be great, but people need to understand that when the line becomes flat, that's only the beginning of the "flatten the curve" strategy. You have to maintain social distancing for an extended period to KEEP the line flat so that as people inevitably keep getting infected, they can have hospital beds and ventilators available.

There are only 3 possible endings to this:

We maintain social distancing until enough people have been infected and recovered that we gain herd immunity (which is estimated at 70% of the population for COVID-19)

We maintain social distancing until a vaccine is developed and widely distributed. (probably 18 months or so, if ever)

We stop social distancing before either of those things, at which point the virus will run rampant, infect up to 70% of the population all at once and millions will die, completely negating all of the social distancing we have worked so hard on these past couple months.

That's it, there are no other options. If we don't want to pick option 3, we're in for a penny, in for a pound with social distancing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 15 new deaths reported today, matching the highest day yet. That's not consistent with the curve being flattened.

Since it matched the highest day yes that could be a flat line.

It could be, and that would be great, but people need to understand that when the line becomes flat, that's only the beginning of the "flatten the curve" strategy. You have to maintain social distancing for an extended period to KEEP the line flat so that as people inevitably keep getting infected, they can have hospital beds and ventilators available.

There are only 3 possible endings to this:

We maintain social distancing until enough people have been infected and recovered that we gain herd immunity (which is estimated at 70% of the population for COVID-19)

We maintain social distancing until a vaccine is developed and widely distributed. (probably 18 months or so, if ever)

We stop social distancing before either of those things, at which point the virus will run rampant, infect up to 70% of the population all at once and millions will die, completely negating all of the social distancing we have worked so hard on these past couple months.

That's it, there are no other options. If we don't want to pick option 3, we're in for a penny, in for a pound with social distancing.

All three options assume it's possible to gain immunity. If immunity isn't possible the prospects get a lot darker.

Under option #1, if we keep the infection rate low enough to keep from overwhelming hospitals we're probably looking at 18 months to herd immunity.

Although the story in the NY Times today is encouraging, antibodies test find over 20% of New Yorkers have had COVID:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-new-york-update.html?type=styln-live-updates&label=new%20york%20&index=1&action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage#link-6bcc6a71

Herd immunity may be closer than we think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is a disgrace. All the models have been completely wrong. To call them "science" is laughable. They are nothing more than spitballs. To blow up families' livelihoods over these guesses is shameful. We need to get back to work.

Well the curve has flattened for right now but it will go back up as soon as we return to the office

and yes, the models are usually based on the worse case scenario minus some variable - that's where you start and then scale back as more info becomes available

we used info from Italy and Spain and China, groomed it for US populations, came up with the worst scenario and minus-ed some variable - maybe 5%

At the start of all this, there was an article posted on medium.com and on the link was elsewhere on dcum. There was a ton of uproar over it and how it was all wrong and based on nothing. The author basically said that the numbers were a guess, the models were a guess and based on flawed inputs and we should build models only on true data that we get from the US and make decisions on that. I started following the guy on twitter and looking back I think his article had a lot more merit than I first thought.

It is impossible to have accurate numbers from these models. Unless you are testing every single person in the country, basically, every single week, the numbers are meaningless. You could test negative this week, but positive next week. You could test 100 people, or 1000 people, or 10,000 people, and it would make a huge difference in the model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There were 15 new deaths reported today, matching the highest day yet. That's not consistent with the curve being flattened.

Since it matched the highest day yes that could be a flat line.

It could be, and that would be great, but people need to understand that when the line becomes flat, that's only the beginning of the "flatten the curve" strategy. You have to maintain social distancing for an extended period to KEEP the line flat so that as people inevitably keep getting infected, they can have hospital beds and ventilators available.

There are only 3 possible endings to this:

We maintain social distancing until enough people have been infected and recovered that we gain herd immunity (which is estimated at 70% of the population for COVID-19)

We maintain social distancing until a vaccine is developed and widely distributed. (probably 18 months or so, if ever)

We stop social distancing before either of those things, at which point the virus will run rampant, infect up to 70% of the population all at once and millions will die, completely negating all of the social distancing we have worked so hard on these past couple months.

That's it, there are no other options. If we don't want to pick option 3, we're in for a penny, in for a pound with social distancing.

Option 4, the whole entire point of social distancing/flattening the curve was to ensure that hospitals didn’t become overwhelmed with patients, leading to rationing of care, lack of ICU beds, etc. This goal has been fulfilled to the point that hospitals are laying off staff due to under-use. We very gradually open back up, avoiding large mass gatherings (live sports, performances, crowded bars, etc.) for quite awhile. There will be some cost-benefit analysis too, like people don’t need to go to bars, but kids do need to go to school. Yes, unfortunately, people get sick because there’s no putting the virus back where it came from, BUT hospitals have enough capacity and ventilators to deal with the sickest patients. The end.

[Anonymous]

I fear that Bowser’s victory lap may be premature.

This was in the Washington Post recently. So why exactly are large construction projects operating, when other states like NY have closed them. Bowser? Bowser?

“I work on a construction job site with 150 to 200 others in an environment that is impossible to protect from the coronavirus. Our “essential” work is constructing a new apartment building — not a bridge, not a road, not a hospital, but new, non-subsidized apartments..... Why is it “essential” that we continue to build apartments, hotels, houses or shopping centers? Construction lobbyists such as the District of Columbia Building Industry Association, along with officials in the District, Maryland and Virginia, think we should. But their economic goals shouldn’t come at the expense of our health or that of our families during a global pandemic.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/local-opinions/dc-maryland-and-virginia-should-not-allow-construction-work-to-continue/2020/04/16/b1f153f8-7f31-11ea-9040-68981f488eed_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thing is a disgrace. All the models have been completely wrong. To call them "science" is laughable. They are nothing more than spitballs. To blow up families' livelihoods over these guesses is shameful. We need to get back to work.

You can stomp your feet all you want. The virus doesn't care.

That poster must be a Fox viewer. Sad, really, for PP to be living in such a bubble of lies.
You think PP understands he’s just a pawn of the Murdochs agenda?

Calling everyone a Trumper who does not think we should quarantine for 18 months is just shameful. We should be coming together to find the best way forward. It is obviously not possible to shelter for years while we wait for a vaccine. We need to work together to find solutions, and your tone is anathema to any progress.

+1. Time to go back to work, DC

[Anonymous]

From the data I'm seeing, Mayor Bowser's pronouncement seems premature.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/23/upshot/five-ways-to-monitor-coronavirus-outbreak-us.html

[Anonymous]

People are restless. Anyone following the actual science here understands that it’s just not particularly scary for non-elderly healthy people, and the death rate is a little higher than a bad flu. Some should shelter, but all of society should not.

Meanwhile people are becoming depressed, stir crazy, and losing everything.

Time for a course correction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are restless. Anyone following the actual science here understands that it’s just not particularly scary for non-elderly healthy people, and the death rate is a little higher than a bad flu. Some should shelter, but all of society should not.

Meanwhile people are becoming depressed, stir crazy, and losing everything.

Time for a course correction.

Actually, the death numbers so far for this illness are quite high indeed. Much higher than the flu in an average year. Several times that level. In fact, this year it will be the highest number cause of death in the US. Get real. Opening up right now is a deadly, avoidable mistake.

See NYT numbers I listed above.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/23/upshot/five-ways-to-monitor-coronavirus-outbreak-us.html

If it's down to your opinion vs science, I'll go with science especially if it will save my mother's life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bowser's two weeks behind the rest of us.

Yup.

Now, better late than never.

Reopen public schools in May, Mayor Bowser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bowser's two weeks behind the rest of us.

Yup.

Now, better late than never.

Reopen public schools in May, Mayor Bowser.

You’re delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are restless. Anyone following the actual science here understands that it’s just not particularly scary for non-elderly healthy people, and the death rate is a little higher than a bad flu. Some should shelter, but all of society should not.

Meanwhile people are becoming depressed, stir crazy, and losing everything.

Time for a course correction.

Actually, the death numbers so far for this illness are quite high indeed. Much higher than the flu in an average year. Several times that level. In fact, this year it will be the highest number cause of death in the US. Get real. Opening up right now is a deadly, avoidable mistake.

See NYT numbers I listed above.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/23/upshot/five-ways-to-monitor-coronavirus-outbreak-us.html

If it's down to your opinion vs science, I'll go with science especially if it will save my mother's life.

Ok. There not that high indeed. Yes they are worse then the flu but I could do the same silly exercise you just did and say well they’re not close to Ebola so they’re not high.