"Opening up" means risking your life

[Anonymous]

I am old enough to remember when the right went ape-nuts over Terri Schiavo. And yet, here we are like 15 years later, and it's ho-hum on 50,000+ lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this sums it up

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

[Anonymous]

Over 900 cases in Georgia and...

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional/still-strapped-for-resources-rural-hospitals-wary-state-reopening/nl0BZR3foIoSwStdYJSyUL/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

The point is to avoid the spike or a double wave or multiple waves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this sums it up

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

Looks like it’ll stay positive for a real omg time. Best to stay home for around 18 months per Dr. Emanuel’s recommendation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this sums it up

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

Looks like it’ll stay positive for a real omg time. Best to stay home for around 18 months per Dr. Emanuel’s recommendation.

PP here. The point is, we don't know where the green line will flatline (at what rate of new cases and deaths) and for how long (until we get a cure or a vaccine). If we all get microchipped and tracked (not advocating for that), then the green line settles in at a lower steady rate until we find a cure. If people get lax about social distancing and hand washing, then the green line starts to rise again.

But it will not be zero, like this figure shows, until we get a cure or a vaccine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

The point is to avoid the spike or a double wave or multiple waves.

That figure is agnostic about a double wave, it doesn't try to incorporate it. It presumes there's a steady decline in new cases after we hit the first peak.

Hey, I can draw a steady slope down from a single peak.

Or hey, I can draw a decline followed by another spike/second wave due to early opening.

I can draw whatever I want.

See how that works?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

The point is to avoid the spike or a double wave or multiple waves.

That figure is agnostic about a double wave, it doesn't try to incorporate it. It presumes there's a steady decline in new cases after we hit the first peak.

Hey, I can draw a steady slope down from a single peak.

Or hey, I can draw a decline followed by another spike/second wave due to early opening.

I can draw whatever I want.

See how that works?

I do forecasting for a living.

A graph that doesn't specify time is useless. Of course COVID will go to zero at some point in the future. But you need to show whether that's in six months or six years in order to be able to say anything about whether deaths will exceed the 50,000 we've already seen.

A graph that's based on a potentially wrong assumption is equally useless. This graph simply asserts somebody's wishful thinking about how there will be no second wave. But many actual models incorporate and numerous variables (when do we reopen, do people respect social distancing, when do we find a cure) and project there could be a second wave under various circumstances.


Don't give us somebody's doodle. Give us a graph from an actual model that incorporates multiple scenarios (not somebody's wishful thinking) and an an actual timeline. Then we can talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this sums it up

So let’s look at the green curve for precautions (precautions are undefined, but let’s ignore that). The blue shaded area to the right is slightly larger than the white area to the left under the green curve. The area on the left represents new cases that resulted in 50,000 deaths in a month. So the blue area represents another 50,000 deaths as a cost of opening up before we get a cure (or whatever “0” means in that graph).

Frankly, that graph is bs. We have no cure. So the green line shouldn’t be going to zero. It should be flatlining at some death rate above zero. Meaning a constant level of additional deaths. Nobody, but nobody, knows how long that green line stays positive.

Looks like it’ll stay positive for a real omg time. Best to stay home for around 18 months per Dr. Emanuel’s recommendation.

PP here. The point is, we don't know where the green line will flatline (at what rate of new cases and deaths) and for how long (until we get a cure or a vaccine). If we all get microchipped and tracked (not advocating for that), then the green line settles in at a lower steady rate until we find a cure. If people get lax about social distancing and hand washing, then the green line starts to rise again.

But it will not be zero, like this figure shows, until we get a cure or a vaccine.

Doubt we’ll get either.

[Anonymous]

Colorado is doing the same thing Kemp is. Where's the outrage?

[Anonymous]

Trump is putting the entire graduating class at Westpoint at risk. WTF


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-west-point.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colorado is doing the same thing Kemp is. Where's the outrage?

What are Colorado's infection and death numbers? Do they have any outbreaks akin to SW GA?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Here are a few things that I think are readily apparent:

1) Without a vaccine, near universal testing, or sweeping use of PPE, "opening up" will spread the coronavirus. We don't have to guess about this. Just look at the Smithfield Foods meat processing plant in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Nearly 600 employees have tested positive for COVID-19. In addition, 135 others have caught it from those employees. The plant has now been forced to close.

2) Many of the loudest voices calling for "opening up" will not be putting themselves at risk. Higher income folks will continue to telework and socially distance themselves. Trump and Pence dispute the need for widespread testing, but require anyone coming into contact with them be tested beforehand. This sort of hypocrisy will extend throughout the ruling class. "Opening up" means telling working folks to risk their lives for the stock portfolios of those who will remain safely protected.

3) It is true that job losses and economic suffering are being caused by the shutdown. The impact of this can be reduced through government assistance. There is no cure for death.

4) Trump, by offering public support for those protesting shutdown polices, is willing to sacrifice even his own supporters. Similarly, with deaths heavily weighted toward the elderly, Trump willingly endangers the most dependable source of Republican votes.

5) The "original sin" of the US response to COVID-19 was the failure to introduce widespread testing. This, combined with a lost six weeks while Trump attempted to deny the reality of the epidemic, has caused a deep setback for the US response and led to countless unnecessary deaths. Trump is simultaneously pushing testing responsibility to governors and supporting protests against those same governors. He may well have calculated that renewed disease outbreaks in Democratic-led states would help him politically. He is desperate to place blame on everyone from mayors, governors, and members of Congress, to the WHO, or to the media, but will accept no responsibility himself. He is driven by political expediency and willing to sacrifice lives in the process.

The bottom line is that if someone wants to "open up", tell them to go first. Don't put yourself at risk for someone else's stock portfolio or Trump's political goals.

100% correct. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colorado is doing the same thing Kemp is. Where's the outrage?

It’s situational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colorado is doing the same thing Kemp is. Where's the outrage?

It hasn’t happened yet - due to expire tomorrow - and they’re considering extending it. And Denver wants to extend it until May 8 and the governor isn’t going to keep them from doing that like in Georgia. And their numbers are falling, unlike Georgia's. Totally different scenarios.
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/coronavirus/coronavirus-in-colorado-latest-covid-19-updates-from-april-23-2020