Will this end up being the pandemic that cried wolf?

[pahoben]

We don't know for sure, but we have every reason to believe. The insistence on keeping the "what if" of no immunity in the conversation is little more than fear mongering, because waiting on proof of lasting immunity necessarily precludes any sort of steps toward normalcy for years. There's simply no way to address that other than to track people who have already recovered and do periodic serology testing on them. And if we prove that it doesn't, well, then there's really no path forward at all because diseases that don't produce lasting immunity are also difficult-to-impossible to create vaccines against.



Except that history shows that isn't necessarily the case. The trend of increasing urbanization obviously provides more opportunity for disease spread, but so far, it has been more than counter-balanced by improvements in sanitation, nutrition and medical care. We've only seen a few relatively minor and quickly contained novel diseases emerge in the last century, and in that same time we've conquered smallpox and polio and measles and a number of other illnesses that mankind has lived with for millennia. There's no reason to believe that this pandemic will inevitably be followed by others, or by any general reversal of the trend of technology enabling longer and healthier human lives.

Sorry but sanitation, nutrition, and health care have nothing to do with novel virus mutations arising. We had SARS and MERS within the last 15 years and were lucky their infectivities were lower although more deadly. This virus demonstrates exactly that novel mutations cause problems with the best sanitation, nutrition, and health care the world has ever seen. The fact is with more human hosts they have more chances to mutate and people closer together make it easier for transmission and to become widespread.

 

[monsterkitty]

If people choose to self isolate I am supportive. They can arrange circumstances that would provide essentially zero chance of having the virus transmitted to them. All of us every day make personal choices that balance risk with benefit. Should I take the car or walk? More fatality risk with taking the car but I prefer the benefit in any event. People make these personal decisions every day. I have looked at the risks for me and my family and believe the benefit outweighs the risk of not having quarantine but I 100% support anyone that believes otherwise and chooses to self isolate. My families choice does not impact anyone that chooses to effectively self isolate. We could stay in a bunker for a very very long time if we choose to do so but realize many can’t. When I was a child that was not the case-even tougher times would have been just around the corner.

Children have zero fatality risk from this virus and are forced to stay inside and it impacts their education for no good reason. My children and myself cannot impact anyone that chooses to effectively self isolate. In fact the sooner we are exposed and develop antibodies and can no longer be carriers the better it is for people that do self isolate. This idea of selfish self interest in this case really makes no sense.

About 7500 people die on a typical day in the US and there are terrible heartbreaking stories associated with many of those that are not highlighted in the media. I wish that we could make utopia on earth and banish death and disease but not possible nor will it ever be possible. We all face the risk of death each and every day and make choices that elevate that risk based on our personal evaluation of that risk and the benefit that elevated risk provides. I consider myself fortunate in that ordinarily I do have those individual choices.

Please, tell that to the parents who lost their 5 year old daughter in Detroit yesterday to the virus. Or the parents of the infant in Chicago in March who died of the virus. Or the 13 year old in Colorado. Yes, she had underlying medical issues, but COVID was present and brought her seizures back.

 

[CarolAnn856]

I can't understand all the people claiming that those who are concerned can just stay home while others go about their daily lives. That isn't in any way, shape, or form how the world works.

Let's take schools (since I'm a teacher and can imagine how this might play out) and say they reopen with some teachers and students coming in, and some staying home. Placing home students with remote teachers won't really work, logistically. What if the only art teacher stays home? How does she teach the students who come in as well as those who stay home? What if 50% of the teachers stay home but 90% of the kids come in? How about doctors' offices where some staff come in and some don't?

Even if some people choose to stay home, the fact that other around them are possibly passing around the virus leaves them even more susceptible to contacting it, especially if they have to go to the doctor or get groceries.

While I obviously don't think we can or should stay inside forever, until the curve is sufficiently flattened and there are tests made widely available, loosening restrictions must be a very slow, thoughtful, and well-planned process.

 

[dvcgirl67]

Sorry but sanitation, nutrition, and health care have nothing to do with novel virus mutations arising. We had SARS and MERS within the last 15 years and were lucky their infectivities were lower although more deadly. This virus demonstrates exactly that novel mutations cause problems with the best sanitation, nutrition, and health care the world has ever seen. The fact is with more human hosts they have more chances to mutate and people closer together make it easier for transmission and to become widespread.

Therein lies the problem. The long incubation period and asymptotic spread of this disease is what is going to make this such a deadly event for our world.

I do believe that we'll slowly come out of "lock down" only to have our cases spike and be ordered back in. We're just seeing the beginning of protests, and eventually that will get more and more out of control.

It's really a terrible thing, this virus. But from a pure scientific perspective, it's really something.

 

[pahoben]

Please, tell that to the parents who lost their 5 year old daughter in Detroit yesterday to the virus. Or the parents of the infant in Chicago in March who died of the virus. Or the 13 year old in Colorado. Yes, she had underlying medical issues, but COVID was present and brought her seizures back.

Children die under horrible circumstances every day and the risk of a child fatality from this virus is incredibly low compared to other causes of death.

 

[Jennasis]

Ahhh....that's better.

 

[pahoben]

I can't understand all the people claiming that those who are concerned can just stay home while others go about their daily lives. That isn't in any way, shape, or form how the world works.

Let's take schools (since I'm a teacher and can imagine how this might play out) and say they reopen with some teachers and students coming in, and some staying home. Placing home students with remote teachers won't really work, logistically. What if the only art teacher stays home? How does she teach the students who come in as well as those who stay home? What if 50% of the teachers stay home but 90% of the kids come in? How about doctors' offices where some staff come in and some don't?

Even if some people choose to stay home, the fact that other around them are possibly passing around the virus leaves them even more susceptible to contacting it, especially if they have to go to the doctor or get groceries.

While I obviously don't think we can or should stay inside forever, until the curve is sufficiently flattened and there are tests made widely available, loosening restrictions must be a very slow, thoughtful, and well-planned process.

In Sweden school continues without interruption for elementary and for kindergarten. Maybe there is some difference between Sweden and the US that makes it impossible in the US which is really kind of sad. It is more than even school though, they can’t even go to the playground for goodness sakes.

 

[CarolAnn856]

In Sweden school continues without interruption for elementary and for kindergarten. Maybe there is some difference between Sweden and the US that makes it impossible in the US which is really kind of sad. It is more than even school though, they can’t even go to the playground for goodness sakes.

My understanding is that Sweden only allowed those who were symptomatic or very high risk to stay home, whereas many here seem to be referring to the idea that anyone who is concerned about their health can stay home. Apples and oranges.

 

[xuxa777]

Please, tell that to the parents who lost their 5 year old daughter in Detroit yesterday to the virus. Or the parents of the infant in Chicago in March who died of the virus. Or the 13 year old in Colorado. Yes, she had underlying medical issues, but COVID was present and brought her seizures back.

as other stated children sadly die every day in the country. The big issue regarding children and the lockdown , stay at homes is

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-children-un-idUSKBN21Y2X7

 

[Colleen27]

Sorry but sanitation, nutrition, and health care have nothing to do with novel virus mutations arising. We had SARS and MERS within the last 15 years and were lucky their infectivities were lower although more deadly. This virus demonstrates exactly that novel mutations cause problems with the best sanitation, nutrition, and health care the world has ever seen. The fact is with more human hosts they have more chances to mutate and people closer together make it easier for transmission and to become widespread.

Not with them arising, but absolutely with their spread and particularly with their lethality. The fact is, it has been more than a half-century since we had significant outbreaks of potentially-fatal illnesses in this country, and a full century since the last widespread pandemic disease. That's despite the increasingly close quarters mankind lives in, and despite the ample opportunity for new viruses to emerge. This one, as bad as it is, might even do what SARS and MERS didn't and change the ways man and animals interact in live-market settings, therefore reducing the chances of another zoonotic virus emerging from the breeding ground that gave us SARS and COVID19.

A lot of the difficulty in our response right now is that we in the modern world are so accustomed to a disease burden of near-zero that we cannot wrap our minds around even a relatively mild contagion (and make no mistake, this is a relatively mild contagion - the CFR in the places with the best testing protocols is well below 1%; measles, by comparison, is estimated to have been around 15% before vaccination and modern treatments and remains that high in some outbreaks in the developing world). We're used to thinking of disease-death as coming from chronic lifestyle-related conditions like diabetes and heart disease, things where we can comfortably reassure ourselves that it won't happen to us or our children because we make better choices, not from a communicable pathogen that is beyond our control. So there is little support for a middle ground because we are horrified by even low numbers of virus death and can't wrap our collective minds around the idea that there might not be a way to prevent even more widespread disease death as we deal with this virus.

 

[Colleen27]

Please, tell that to the parents who lost their 5 year old daughter in Detroit yesterday to the virus. Or the parents of the infant in Chicago in March who died of the virus. Or the 13 year old in Colorado. Yes, she had underlying medical issues, but COVID was present and brought her seizures back.

Tragic exceptions don't change the rule. The fatality rate for patients under 18 is such a tiny fraction of a single percent as to be practically understood as zero. My state has about 2400 deaths, only one of them a patient under 18. Last I saw, NY had reported 3 fatalities of minors out of almost 14,000 deaths. We know from the South Korean data that minors are just as likely to contract COVID19 as any other age group, but are much more likely to experience asymptomatic or mild cases.

 

[Farro]

Please, tell that to the parents who lost their 5 year old daughter in Detroit yesterday to the virus. Or the parents of the infant in Chicago in March who died of the virus. Or the 13 year old in Colorado. Yes, she had underlying medical issues, but COVID was present and brought her seizures back.

Just a note- our top doctor came out the other day that they still don't know if Covid was the cause of infant death in Chicago.

 

[dvcgirl67]

Tragic exceptions don't change the rule. The fatality rate for patients under 18 is such a tiny fraction of a single percent as to be practically understood as zero. My state has about 2400 deaths, only one of them a patient under 18. Last I saw, NY had reported 3 fatalities of minors out of almost 14,000 deaths. We know from the South Korean data that minors are just as likely to contract COVID19 as any other age group, but are much more likely to experience asymptomatic or mild cases.

I mean, this is the only true silver lining of this disease. Children are almost entirely spared. A very, very small number children have died. Of course that's completely tragic to the families who lost them, but statistically, it's almost zero.

 

[Heather07438]

as other stated children sadly die every day in the country. The big issue regarding children and the lockdown , stay at homes is
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-children-un-idUSKBN21Y2X7

There's definitely a balance that needs to be taken to find the sweet spot between effective measures to control levels of spread and resuming economic activity.

Without effective measures the economy will suffer as sick people will impede functions of our society.

Without trying to resume some economic activity, there's more opportunity for health decline between collateral damage, increased vulnerability and supply chain disruption.

Is Bob Iger helping to craft a well thought plan with his new role in CA? Hope so

I hope the best minds are thinking this through together for the whole country and individual states/counties.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

In Sweden school continues without interruption for elementary and for kindergarten. Maybe there is some difference between Sweden and the US that makes it impossible in the US which is really kind of sad. It is more than even school though, they can’t even go to the playground for goodness sakes.

We have already covered Sweden. That is completely decided. Sweden is nothing to laud.
Deaths
Sweden 1,580
Denmark 364
Norway 181
Finland 92

With twice the population of each of the others and over 4 times the deaths of Denmark and nearly 6 times the deaths of Norway and Finland combined, Sweden's numbers aren't looking too good.


Darth Vader learns of these numbers.

My lord, the numbers from the Nordic countries are in sire.
Sweden didn't socially distance.
Sire they found it wiser...
They are as clumsy as they are stupid. Prepare your troops for social distancing general.
....
....
My lord, We have not socially....(choking)
You have failed me for the last time Sweden......


Sweden thought they were the exception. And in some ways they are. People naturally distance there. And if it was going to work anywhere, it was there. But it didn't. Their tendency to naturally distance was not enough. And sadly, they are paying the price.

 

[dvcgirl67]

I can't understand all the people claiming that those who are concerned can just stay home while others go about their daily lives. That isn't in any way, shape, or form how the world works.

Let's take schools (since I'm a teacher and can imagine how this might play out) and say they reopen with some teachers and students coming in, and some staying home. Placing home students with remote teachers won't really work, logistically. What if the only art teacher stays home? How does she teach the students who come in as well as those who stay home? What if 50% of the teachers stay home but 90% of the kids come in? How about doctors' offices where some staff come in and some don't?

Even if some people choose to stay home, the fact that other around them are possibly passing around the virus leaves them even more susceptible to contacting it, especially if they have to go to the doctor or get groceries.

While I obviously don't think we can or should stay inside forever, until the curve is sufficiently flattened and there are tests made widely available, loosening restrictions must be a very slow, thoughtful, and well-planned process.

This is really the whole deal. If the protesters get their way and governors of certain states fold, and "open everything up", well I wonder exactly what they think is going to happen. A lot of the decisions, thus far have been left to the states. But let's remember that corporations really started our "shut down", and then the states followed. The federal government is just putting out guidelines. Ultimately, we as individuals get to decide how we're going to behave.

And so even if say, the governor of Arizona opens it all up, so what? You can't reopen the country and expect it's all going to go back to normal when a sizable percentage of the population is going to continue to avoid the public, especially large gatherings. Whenever we're out of the red zone in NJ, and things ease up a bit, I'll be interested to see what it's going to look like.

Our plan hasn't changed. We'll do our best to avoid getting the virus for as long as possible. This not only keeps the stress off of our healthcare workers, it also gives providers time to improve how they treat the disease should we get a bad case. It allows for time for drugs and therapies currently under trial to be tested. It allows for time for new therapeutics to come online and also be tested. The virus will move through a large percentage of our society, up to 70% from what I've read. We'd prefer not to get it in the first few rounds of spikes in the death rate. We've just finished round one, there will be more.

 

[cabanafrau]

Yes, clearly this will be the pandemic that has cried wolf, because clearly the danger has passed, we know all there is to know, and there is virtually no danger to anyone who would have the right to expect to be considered worthwhile to continue living anyway. The folks of real importance can continue their work and earning in suitably safe surroundings with proper precautions, get access to testing and treatment if really needed, and contract out tasks that would expose them to unnecessary risk. Those who aren't of real importance should have planned better, known better and done more to position themselves better if they want to be considered worthy of continued existence.

Let's completely overlook we don't know yet if the worst is indeed over, if it's possible to have immunity or how long immunity lasts -- or if the immunity will provide protection from other mutations of the virus that someone doesn't have antibodies for. Let's not go looking too hard at some pesky unknowns about lingering significant side effects like lung damage, cognitive deficits and blood clots and how long those might last or whether they'll ever resolve, because hey, it's not counted in the death tally. And don't even bother considering for a minute that so many young people who really didn't show any signs or symptoms of having the virus have strange discolorations in their digits that are usually associated with poor circulation/lack of oxygen. That's so minor it barely bothers mentioning and couldn't possibly have any negative implications in the future. Even if there were to be a second wave of the virus in several months those of us lucky enough not to be sick with it this time are guaranteed to have nothing to worry about in the future, too.

 

[kdonnel]

We have already covered Sweden. That is completely decided. Sweden is nothing to laud.

Actually we have no idea yet!

Sweden has taken an entirely different approach and is therefore at an entirely different point in the process. Long after Sweden stops having deaths, the US will continue to have people die from Coronavirus because social distancing. Unless social distancing is taken all the way to a vaccine it is just delaying many deaths.

 

[CarolAnn856]

Actually we have no idea yet!

Sweden has taken an entirely different approach and is therefore at an entirely different point in the process. Long after Sweden stops having deaths, the US will continue to have people die from Coronavirus because social distancing. Unless social distancing is taken all the way to a vaccine is just delaying many deaths.

So, you can claim that Sweden's model is definitely the right way to go while, at the same time, admitting that we cannot know right now what works. Such a hypocrite.

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

Yes, clearly this will be the pandemic that has cried wolf, because clearly the danger has passed, we know all there is to know, and there is virtually no danger to anyone who would have the right to expect to be considered worthwhile to continue living anyway. The folks of real importance can continue their work and earning in suitably safe surroundings with proper precautions, get access to testing and treatment if really needed, and contract out tasks that would expose them to unnecessary risk. Those who aren't of real importance should have planned better, known better and done more to position themselves better if they want to be considered worthy of continued existence.

Let's completely overlook we don't know yet if the worst is indeed over, if it's possible to have immunity or how long immunity lasts -- or if the immunity will provide protection from other mutations of the virus that someone doesn't have antibodies for. Let's not go looking too hard at some pesky unknowns about lingering significant side effects like lung damage, cognitive deficits and blood clots and how long those might last or whether they'll ever resolve, because hey, it's not counted in the death tally. And don't even bother considering for a minute that so many young people who really didn't show any signs or symptoms of having the virus have strange discolorations in their digits that are usually associated with poor circulation/lack of oxygen. That's so minor it barely bothers mentioning and couldn't possibly have any negative implications in the future. Even if there were to be a second wave of the virus in several months those of us lucky enough not to be sick with it this time are guaranteed to have nothing to worry about in the future, too.

Bravo! Best post of the month