Harvard Study - Social Distancing until 2022

[lawboy2001]

I think the NY Governor's new regulation is where we will be going in the near term: if you can't socially distance, you must wear a mask. So under that type of scenario, at the appropriate time (in a couple of months), the theme parks open, but everyone is required to wear masks. And there will be sanitizing staff everywhere...

 

[lawboy2001]

It's amazing how quickly you get used to seeing people in masks. The staff at my drive thru this morning all were and it did not seem weird...

 

[Heather07438]

There are some studies in other countries testing people for antibodies for Covid19.
Yep. But we are still uncertain how strong the antibodies need to be and how long they last. It's only a start.

Early results are that way more people have been infected than once thought.
Yep. But even if 10 million people were already exposed in the US, that would be 20 times the actual confirmed positives (possible) and still only 3% of the population, and would mean 97% of the population is still vulnerable to the spread/severity/death rates we see in April which reflect the many measures taken.

The estimated death rate when more studies are finished will be much lower than what is reported today.
It can just as easily be higher, too. There are many variables on the road to outcome. Our choices will play a huge role.

It is predicted to be around the same death rate as the flu which is 0.2%.
Highly unlikely. Under what criteria? The full aftermath depends on may variables, one being the effect of sustainable measures going forward.

It just appears that Covid 19 spreads much quicker, which could over run hospitals.
Yep. It does spread much quicker, easier, more severe, etc. to a naive population.
Novel. Higher severity rates. Highly contagious.

Some studies report between 25-47% of people infected never show signs or symptoms.
Surely depends on demographics. A college campus may see 47%? I doubt the full population sees anything near that.

I agree that we cannot stay shutdown indefinitely but we'll need to temporarily adjust to a new way of doing things because it does matter and we have the power to change the outcome. Don't rely on newscasts, rely on the people on the front lines and the hit communities to share their perspective because eventually that can be any community where bad choices were made. Different regions will require different strategies and timelines depending on their demographics.

 

[Deb & Bill]

There are 80 different vaccines in trials right now.

 

[Heather07438]

I'm not sure if you're overthinking my comments or misreading. The comparison didn't involve reducing speed limits BY 10 MPH, rather reducing speed limits TO 10 MPH. If all motor vehicle traffic were moving at 10 miles per hour, very very few collisions (if any) would be severe cause fatalities. Mandating a 10 MPH speed limit would save almost 40,000 lives per year--and prevent many more injuries--but the negative impact on our society would be immeasurable.

We could draw similar risk/reward comparisons in many other areas: drug efficacy, swimming, sports, to name a few. Motorcycles are objectively dangerous to operate. But rather than banning them entirely, most communities look at helmet laws as an acceptable compromise.

We cannot save every Covid victim. There needs to be consideration for how lives are damaged or destroyed in the process.

It's important to consider economy and livelihoods, I just don't think people are fully grasping what that looks like without measures implemented. It ends up being a shpit show too.

Following is a very long read and a bit old news with how fast news changes currently but it's still is relevant. Take a look about half way through where it discusses economy. Even without relying on this source, try to imagine what is going on with economies in areas that don't have many measures in place but significant spread. That's part of what made leaders pay attention... the economy was going to suffer either way. Both the economy and spread need to be balanced to save the each other. The economy won't miraculously remain unaffected if measures were all removed.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-out-of-many-one-36b886af37e9

 

[CraigInPA]

It's amazing how quickly you get used to seeing people in masks. The staff at my drive thru this morning all were and it did not seem weird...

A month ago my wife and I went to the grocery store. She was decked out with gloves, mask, and protective gasketed glasses (which are more effective than a face shield). People literally got out of her way, probably because they thought she was infected. I only had gloves, and people pretty much ignored me and didn't even bother to social distance. On my last trip to the grocery store, the number of people without masks was very small, and virtually everyone had gloves.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

the number of people without masks was very small, and virtually everyone had gloves.

Of course, how many were using the gloves or masks even remotely correctly? I think that's one of the next hurdles. I have definitely seen people in gloves touching their masks non-stop at our grocery store, which is not a good sign for how they take off or dispose of the gloves.

 

[siren0119]

Oh the gloves...the gloves.

what I have seen in my area is that they are providing people with a false sense of security. Gloves aren't getting changed after something is touched, and few people are using sanitizer on the outside of the gloves when they do touch something. They are basically cross contaminating everything because they don't think about the fact that the virus can get picked up on the surface of the gloves and then transferred to something else.

Hand sanitizer and frequent handwashing are far more effective and prevent more cross contamination than the gloves do. The only viable reason to wear gloves is if they serve as a visual reminder for you not to touch your face...but then make sure you are using sanitizer on the outside of them every time you touch something so you don't spread the virus.

 

[CraigInPA]

The only viable reason to wear gloves is if they serve as a visual reminder for you not to touch your face...but then make sure you are using sanitizer on the outside of them every time you touch something so you don't spread the virus.

Gloves are also important if you have open cuts or sores on your hands. What I find incredible is that while people won't touch their face with gloves, they'll pop out their cell phone while wearing them, and then use the phone to make a call, touching it to their face.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The only viable reason to wear gloves is if they serve as a visual reminder for you not to touch your face...but then make sure you are using sanitizer on the outside of them every time you touch something so you don't spread the virus.

I would add, also, if you have eczema or open abrasion, gloves are good. I have friends who due to the hand washing have skin irritation that creates a more open environment for the spread of germs/virus/etc., so gloves for them are quite useful.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Gloves are also important if you have open cuts or sores on your hands. What I find incredible is that while people won't touch their face with gloves, they'll pop out their cell phone while wearing them, and then use the phone to make a call, touching it to their face.

Or they'll use their phone to text in gloves while touching stuff, then take off the gloves and TOUCH THE PHONE AGAIN.

 

[Donna M]

I agree that for some, the use of gloves will help because of their particular issue, but for all the rest who don't know the proper way to use them it is just giving them a false sense of security. I wear a mask when I go to the store and I saw most people with them on this week, but there too, from what I've read, they aren't going to prevent us from getting Covid-19 since most were the homemade variety. We have to dress like the nurses and doctors to keep ourselves safe, and that isn't going to happen. We're doing our little part, we're feeling united, we're doing our best.

 

[choirfarm]

nm

 

[The Jackal]

But it is just math games. If you let the virus rip through the US population and create hot spots, there will be millions dead.

Not likely, those numbers were based on certain models. The information in those models was not correct, just like a lot of climate change models are way off, for the past 80+ years they have been predicting the polar caps would be gone in a few years. Guess what they are still there and there was more ice this year in the arctic this year, than there has been in the last 10 years. I’m not sayin that the climate does not change, it does and has changed year to year for as long as this planet developed an atmosphere. There is a pretty good chance that as of right now, the vast majority of the US population has already been exposed to this highly contagious disease. We do not have a vaccine for H1N1 ( swine flu) or SARS. How many people died in the past few years from these Coronavirus diseases? I haven’t heard of one, have you?

 

[DougEMG]

It's important to consider economy and livelihoods, I just don't think people are fully grasping what that looks like without measures implemented. It ends up being a shpit show too.

Following is a very long read and a bit old news with how fast news changes currently but it's still is relevant. Take a look about half way through where it discusses economy. Even without relying on this source, try to imagine what is going on with economies in areas that don't have many measures in place but significant spread. That's part of what made leaders pay attention... the economy was going to suffer either way. Both the economy and spread need to be balanced to save the each other. The economy won't miraculously remain unaffected if measures were all removed.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-out-of-many-one-36b886af37e9

That was a very interesting read, thanks for posting.

 

[Ms.Minnie]

I live in NJ and our governor announced yesterday that we on lockdown for another month at which time he will revisit the issue. I live in the southern part of the state which is much less densely populated then the northern part of the state. If the governor decides to continue the lockdown he may want to consider only doing so in the more heavily populated areas that have the most cases rather then punish the whole state.

The northern part of this state have many of it's population that work in NYC which is the reason they have so many more cases then in the southern part of the state. NY is the same way, there are areas of NY state that have very low numbers of cases and mortality rates. The people in those areas should also be allowed to resume some semblance of normal life and not be held to the same standards as NYC and the immediate surrounding areas of NYC. I hope that the governors of these states take that into account when they are considering to continue with these lockdown orders.

 

[siren0119]

I agree that for some, the use of gloves will help because of their particular issue, but for all the rest who don't know the proper way to use them it is just giving them a false sense of security. I wear a mask when I go to the store and I saw most people with them on this week, but there too, from what I've read, they aren't going to prevent us from getting Covid-19 since most were the homemade variety. We have to dress like the nurses and doctors to keep ourselves safe, and that isn't going to happen. We're doing our little part, we're feeling united, we're doing our best.

Homemade masks aren't worn to prevent YOU from getting the virus. They are worn to keep your germs IN, and protect the people you are around.

MANY people are carriers and spreaders of the virus without ever showing a symptom. The masks help improve the chances that if you ARE a carrier (and likely don't even realize it since the only people being tested are the seriously ill and the front line workers) you won't spread it to someone else.

 

[tjkraz]

Homemade masks aren't worn to prevent YOU from getting the virus. They are worn to keep your germs IN, and protect the people you are around.

Exactly. If most people are wearing masks, washing hands, using sanitizer, honoring distance guidelines and making smart decisions about not going out when they are coughing, have a fever or otherwise potentially symptomatic, we should all pose minimal risk to one another.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

For examples of how many potential asymptomatic carriers there could be, look at the testing results in Boston homeless shelters, and on the TR CVN-71. The latter is especially interesting, since it involved a mostly closed environment, small spaces, and pretty healthy folks where stuff is kept clean by military order.

 

[tjkraz]

For examples of how many potential asymptomatic carriers there could be, look at the testing results in Boston homeless shelters, and on the TR CVN-71. The latter is especially interesting, since it involved a mostly closed environment, small spaces, and pretty healthy folks where stuff is kept clean by military order.

In the homeless shelter, 146 people tested positive despite being asymptomatic. By the time the test results were obtained a week and a half later, only one had required hospitalization and many never showed symptoms.

The idea that so many people were asymptomatic is undoubtedly of concern to officials. But at this point, aren't we all treating ourselves and others as if we might have the virus?

That may be typical of what we see in the wild, and it's encouraging if the goal is to eventually create herd immunity. A 1-in-146 chance of hospitalization (not fatality, just admission) is much better than some of the theoretical numbers circulating a month ago.