I'd be very cautious about opening up the US economy too quickly. The US is still experiencing about 30,000 new cases per day, and clearly hasn't passed the peak (according to the Johns Hopkins website).

In Australia we have got new daily infections down to less than 20 per day, and we have good testing and contact tracing so we can be fairly confident that we can keep it contained as we go back to school and work. However, it is only now that nationally agreed restrictions are being slightly relaxed. States are taking slightly different approaches to opening up, but it is still fairly well co-ordinated and careful.

In the US, the numbers are still way too high and will certainly increase if the move to open up is too quick. The first wave needs to be properly under control before restrictions are relaxed. Having said that, rural areas are much more likely to achieve control, and thus reopen, if they can severely restrict access to/from cities. Hard to do.

We joined the covid tracing app yesterday, oldpobot. Now we need to remember to take our phones out with us..we often forget !!

I watched a BBC report on the app in Australia a short while ago..they didn't mention we will still have teams of contact tracing people working as well as the app.

I haven't done that yet Lindy, not sure if it will be useful unless a high percentage of the population does it.

This would never be proposed in the US, as the invasion of privacy would be significant. It's essentially an app that lets the Federal government follow exactly where you go, and whenever you go close to someone who also has the app on their phone, a record is kept.

It makes it easier to trace your contacts if you or they get sick in the next few days after that contact is recorded.

We are a rather LARGE country in comparison to many others. We have little countries inside of a big country.

Our state as of yesterday or this morning had 41 deaths. We passed a sign on the highway that said 134 people have been killed in traffic accidents since the beginning of the year.

So what do we do as a state? Stay shut down? The area I live in in Utah has had zero deaths. We've had 53 cases (maybe higher by now, I hear there was a new one on Saturday). I don't know how the state of Utah compares to the size of Australia and your population, but I am more than ready for them to open the economy in Utah.

And my daughter is in Alaska. Last time, I checked, they had 6 or 9 deaths. Can't remember. They lifted the quarantine in Alaska. Alaska is going to take a huge hit. Their whole economy is tourism.

I do believe that every state has the right to decide.

And, Wyoming. Last I heard, they had 2 deaths. I guess we should keep that WHOLE state under quarantine??? It is a rather LARGE state with big wide open empty spaces. Mostly trucker towns.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2020 12:34AM by cl2.

Yes I agree, it depends where you live.

Australia has 26 million people, so about 8 times the Utah population. I would guess that Utah should be able to contain its pandemic, if it can introduce contact monitoring. If anyone gets sick or tests positive, their close contacts are tracked down and put into self-isolation at home for 14 days. This has worked very well in Australia. It means a few people get put to inconvenience, but the bug dies out and we can all go back to work sooner.

Thinly populated states in the US would also benefit from state border closures, and even regional border closures, with exemptions for various essential workers etc. That might not be possible in the US. We have been able to do that to various degrees across our states.

For the larger, more populous US states, it's much harder. I think the best approach may be for the state governors to form regional blocs which implement common policies, differentiating their urban and rural areas if necessary, rather than each trying to go their own way.

You're a fool if you do.

is that because the gov is trying to get our personal info for nefarious purposes? I'd be reluctant to log in to their virus site and report my health conditions, for fear of the secret police coming by and kidnapping me, this is another reason I have never got my dna results. WW2 was only 70 years ago, people haven't changed that much in those years.

I hate to be the conspiracy guy (but I am one). There are too many unanswered questions of what the intellectual establishment and feds will do with the info.

It doesn't take a conspiracy theory to think it dangerous to give too much personal data to anyone, particularly someone who makes money from it or someone who might at some point use it to gain more power.

Prudence is different from conspiracy theory.

As long as areas and states meet the federal guidelines, I don't have an issue with it. I just ask that whatever decisions are made are based on science, and not for short-term economic or political reasons.

cl2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We are a rather LARGE country in comparison to
> many others. We have little countries inside of a
> big country.
>
> Our state as of yesterday or this morning had 41
> deaths. We passed a sign on the highway that said
> 134 people have been killed in traffic accidents
> since the beginning of the year.
>
> So what do we do as a state? Stay shut down? The
> area I live in in Utah has had zero deaths. We've
> had 53 cases (maybe higher by now, I hear there
> was a new one on Saturday). I don't know how the
> state of Utah compares to the size of Australia
> and your population, but I am more than ready for
> them to open the economy in Utah.
>
> And my daughter is in Alaska. Last time, I
> checked, they had 6 or 9 deaths. Can't remember.
> They lifted the quarantine in Alaska. Alaska is
> going to take a huge hit. Their whole economy is
> tourism.
>
> I do believe that every state has the right to
> decide.
>
> And, Wyoming. Last I heard, they had 2 deaths. I
> guess we should keep that WHOLE state under
> quarantine??? It is a rather LARGE state with big
> wide open empty spaces. Mostly trucker towns.

As oldpobot said Australia has a population of 26 million but the size of the country is not much smaller than mainland USA. We do have few people per square mile but most of the population live in the large cities.
Australia's total number of covid cases currently stands at 6,700, 5,500 people have recovered and there have been 83 deaths.

Oldpobot and I live in Western Australia which is a very large state ( actually larger than Alaska and Texas put together) but the population is only 2.6 million with 2.1 million living in Perth and its surrounding areas. We currently have had around 550 cases of coronavirus with , I think, 8 deaths.
As from today we have some slight restrictions lifted. Hopefully this will go well and we can lift even more. I so want to be able to eat in a restaurant again.

My friends in AU/TAS think we have lost our collective minds.

It is hard to disagree with them.

In fairness to the US, I think it would have been very hard to stop the spread under any circumstances, as it has been in most populous countries.

But it should still be possible to limit it in thinly populated states if some discipline and consistency can be shown by various levels of government.

The spread has been bad here in the UK too. 153,000 cases and getting on for 21,000 deaths. It’s not been handled well IMO but I suppose we are more crowded here? New Zealand seem to have got it under control, similar size country but less people, yet I think their response to it also contributes in large part to that (but no politics so I’ll leave it at that).

I don’t think any of us are coming out of this soon here. I’d rather hoped on at least one day on the beach this summer but I’m feeling doubtful.

We (i.e the world) are only four months into this.

A vaccine is still at least two years away. Production and vaccination will take additional months.

It takes considerable effort to keep someone alive while their body tries to fight off the disease and those who do recover have other problems to deal with — and are not immune from re-infection.

Until then, a few industries should be able to operate under limited conditions as long as they use thermal scanning and supply masks and other PPE to employees. Given the current shortage of medical gear and the lack of coordination and mismanagement, even that's not possible yet on a large scale.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2020 09:36AM by anybody.

say that. They say 12 to 18 months.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2020 01:00PM by cl2.

Those Utah tests are iffy. Don't do it.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/27/2020 01:08PM by cl2.

And the Rocky Mountain states / desert southwest have a much lower population density than other parts of the country.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/16/816707182/map-tracking-the-spread-of-the-coronavirus-in-the-u-s

Oxford University is already trailing a vaccine with some positive results coming today. I am sure other countries are also close

If that is true, large-scale deployment of the vaccine will be in about a year.

Yes, but that neglects the clinical trials and regulatory process, doesn't it? Those alone will add many months to the effort.

Yes it does.

From the story there are clinical trials already started
"Human testing is already underway, and scientists say they're hopeful a coronavirus vaccine will be widely available by September."

Also from the story
"Wasting no time, the largest drugmaker in the world, based in India, will start producing millions of the Oxford vaccines by next month, even before they've been proven to work."

IF the trials show effectiveness it may be available by this autumn.
The regulatory question is another matter entirely.

I think, but am not sure, it would require a special dispensation from the FDA.

Yes, the question will be if the FDA will accept the results of the UK study, or if they will require further studies in the US.

Most people won't get vaccinated until next year anyway. Another source quoted the company as estimating they would produce 60 million doses by the end of the year. Even if that were doubled 120 million is a drop in the bucket in a world with >7 billion people. The initial allotment to the US would likely be reserved for medical personnel,first responders, and then other high risk people. So most of the population won't get one for another year or more.

That's my sense, too. A year, minimum, to start getting the vaccinations done widely in the United States.

Which means the economy basically stays closed down for another year. There may be some successfully loosening of restrictions, but there will likely be the reimposition of significant constraints as well. We won't get out of this mess for at least another year--and full recovery won't come for some time after that.

So you want me to die for wall street ?

The Wall Street crowd can hunker down in the Hamptons, where out-of-season rents are going for hundreds of thousands per week It's small business people and blue collar workers who are agitating for opening up the economy, not the Mitt Romneys of the business world.

Wall Street wants to get back to "business as normal," meaning lucrative profits for cheap goods made in China. Hopefully, that's getting a major reassessment.

Speaking of Wall Street, the weekend edition of the Journal gave a compelling reason for opening up the economy: over $1B of beer is hitting is stale date, and will have to be dumped--or consumed. This is keg beer, craft beer especially, not consumed under "social distancing."

caffiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> over $1B of beer is hitting is
> stale date, and will have to be dumped--or
> consumed. This is keg beer, craft beer especially,
> not consumed under "social distancing."

Sounds like the plot of movie from Canada.

> It's small business
> people and blue collar workers who are agitating
> for opening up the economy, not the Mitt Romneys
> of the business world.

Oh, I can think of one billionaire--actually several--who are desperately agitating to open up the economy. They happen to work in a cluster of buildings around the White House.

Darn it.

I used to know which billionaire was insistent on opening the economy for Easter but then I injected Lysol and now I can't remember. . .

ALLEGED billionaire, please. I'm from Philadelphia and I need proof- we've yet to see the tax returns...

Okay, okay. I took a little poetic license.

Meanwhile the supremes look for a way to avoid adjudicating the issue. . .

I'm the alleged billionaire in the east wing part-time. The sooner the protesting goes away the better traffic will be.

We have a much larger population than European countries ,so our death toll is higher.

But of course we need to get back to work as a country.
If we all use the precautions we have learned by now, things should go reasonably smoothly.

Oh God.

Yep, oh God.

very true. the precautions that we've learned so far should help us in the future. I for one love that my business checks our temperature and if we are sick sends us home. We never use to do that, money was more important than spreading the flu. I hope we can keep this precaution for many years.

The USA has about 4.25 % of the world's population but close to 30 % of the world's coronavirus cases.

You have densely populated areas where opening up too soon will cause a huge spike in the spread. I can see where some of the states can open but it will need to be done gradually.

Here in Australia we are starting to see a slight lessening of the restrictions. More won't be lifted until the powers that be see how well the country has done.

Some countries, such as in South America, Africa, India and Russia haven't even reached their peaks yet.

We can't lock up the economy for too long and besides, people won't stand for it.

Elyse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some countries, such as in South America, Africa,
> India and Russia haven't even reached their peaks
> yet.

True. And since those countries will soon indicate the extent of the risk, your observation contradicts what you say next:

> We can't lock up the economy for too long and
> besides, people won't stand for it.

They won't stand for keeping the economy closed but a good many of them will lie down for weeks, perhaps forever, if the economy opens too early.

Do you think Americans will tolerate another serious wave of deaths now that COVID has already killed as many Americans as died in the Vietnam War? Because if the history books are correct, people felt it completely unacceptable to lose 58,000 lives OVER TEN YEARS let alone four months.

What I said was that those countries haven't reached their peak yet, so we can't compare them to our numbers.

At any rate, we will have to open up the economy slowly and cautiously - but we WILL have to open.

BTW, France announced today that they will ease restrictions. Germany is also going that route.

Yes, and the rate of infection has risen to about 1.0 again, which is the starting point for geometric increase. In two weeks we may conclude that Germany made a costly mistake.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-virus-spread-worsens-lockdown-eases-071030118.html

If you look at worldometers.info/Coronavirus/country/Germany
The graphic representation of cases by day indicates no new ‘spike’, and the curve appears to be flattening.

So many news articles these days are written with a message to frighten rather than enlighten.

A rate of infection approaching unity from below would, by definition, not produce a spike in the current data. R(o) is a leading indicator, demonstrating that if Germany continues in this direction there will be a spike in 2-4 weeks. And the source of the information is not the news media but researchers at a reputable medical institution in Germany.

Sometimes articles that are written to enlighten appear misleading if the audience does not understand what is being reported. R(o) is like the temperature: it's a fact, not a matter of spin.

Clearly Lot’s Wife has a much deeper knowledge than I.

What is R(o)?
Where in the article cited does it indicate a potential spike in 2-4 weeks?
“Researchers at a reputable medical institution”. Are you referring to Robert Koch Institute? Why not throw that name out there instead of speaking vaguely?

Not trying to dispute...I’m trying to learn.

Without getting too technical, R(o) can be considered as a measure of transmission of the virus. The easiest way to think of it is as the number of other people each infected person transmits the virus to.

So R(o) of 1 means that each infected person transmits the virus to one other person.
R(o) of 2 means they would tranmit it to 2 ohter people, and so on.

An R(o) of 1.0 would mean that the number of new cases will be approximately the same each day. An R(o) > 1.0 means that the number of new cases will increase each day. An R(o) < 1.0 means the number of new cases will decrease each day.

So if Germany (or any other country) has an R(o) that becomes greater than 1, then they will see an increase in the number of new cases. The larger the value of R(o), the faster the new cases will increase.

[|] is right.

Do you recall the little math clip I posted a week or two ago? It explained geometric and logistical growth in the context of a pandemic. I'll append it below since it is way clearer than what I can write.

That said, R is the rate of infection. R below one means every sufferer infects less than one other person; R=1 means every person infects one more; R above one means everyone infects more than one person. If R is less than one, total infections and deaths will fall over time. The effects won't be evident for a couple of weeks since that's how long it takes people to get sick and go to the hospital, so R is a leading indicator showing what the hospitals will see in 2-3 weeks.

In the early stages of the pandemic everywhere, R increased past 1 and stabilized at around 1.2 or 1.25. That is a really bad situation, meaning the disease is expanding exponentially. The goal for every country was/is to get R down below 1, meaning that the pandemic is shrinking although the ultimate goal is to get R to zero. R below one simply signals that cautious reopening may be possible.

What has happened in Germany is that R was rising (rate of infection accelerating), then they implemented controls and R decelerated to below one, indicating that the contagion was beginning to shrink and it might be safe to loosen things up.

The news I provided earlier today, however, indicates that R is rising again--meaning that the loosening of social controls was causing the rate of contagion to grow again. If R surpasses 1.0, Germany will see geometric increase resume. The number of infected, hospitalizations, and deaths won't rise until after a couple of weeks during which the infections become disease and make people sick. So we must all hope that R starts to decline again either naturally or due to the reimposition of controls.

Where your information and mine diverge is that yours depicts the situation today whereas my reliance on R describes what will happen in two weeks. The two data are NOT incompatible. Mine simply indicates that the variables you are following may worsen considerably over the next few weeks. More importantly, my data should tell Berlin that it has to act fast or the pandemic will take off again.

Here's the video. It presumes familiarity with high school math but is a good, simple primer on pandemics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kas0tIxDvrg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2020 11:36PM by Lot's Wife.

It is getting harder and harder to laugh off the conspiracy theories about the new world order, etc. I’ve been around a long time and have heard people put forth the evidence that they had about the ultra rich seeking to control everyone’s lives for a long time.

This event seems to be the last, big push to change people from independent thinking to obedience without question.

It is too hard to deny that something is happening that will forever alter how we live and relate to government control.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2020 01:03PM by csuprovograd.

That sounds like a conspiracy theory without a conspiracy. You may be right about the outcome--I agree in part--but that does not mean someone intentionally caused it.

Who do you reckon the conspirators are and how did they create this situation?

The ‘big picture’ that seems to be in play is to break strong country’s economies in favor of a world-wide trade situation that essentially will diminish the first-world economies to create a new lower standard of living in the first world countries and create a distribution supply chain that puts even more money in the pockets of the ultra-rich families.

If there is any truth to this concept, the next step will be more shortages of foodstuffs. Food shortages will be met by world trade that will replace the US food chain with much needed food, but of a lesser quality.

PS-I blame growing up in a fake church for being so skeptical of people who are supposedly acting in our best interests. Once burned...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2020 01:19PM by csuprovograd.

csuprovograd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The ‘big picture’ that seems to be in play is
> to break strong country’s economies in favor of
> a world-wide trade situation that essentially will
> diminish the first-world economies to create a new
> lower standard of living in the first world
> countries and create a distribution supply chain
> that puts even more money in the pockets of the
> ultra-rich families.

Again, some of this is correct--particularly about the distributional consequences. But you can't conclude from a set of facts an illuminati-style conspiracy unless you have evidence of that conspiracy.


---------------
> If there is any truth to this concept, the next
> step will be more shortages of foodstuffs. Food
> shortages will be met by world trade that will
> replace the US food chain with much needed food,
> but of a lesser quality.

That doesn't follow. Food shortages emerge naturally from pandemics and natural disasters. You cannot conclude from them that there was an underlying conspiracy rather than just the logistical problems that always ensue from a natural disaster.


---------------
> PS-I blame growing up in a fake church for being
> so skeptical of people who are supposedly acting
> in our best interests. Once burned...

I wholeheartedly agree that Mormons are trained to be gullible about leaders. They are also, however, indoctrinated with irrational fears of secret combinations, which are the definition of a conspiracy.

So I ask for evidence of the organization, of the membership, of the plans, of the concrete steps that inform your conspiracy. Without demonstrable evidence we are falling into the Mormon trap of seeing Gadianton bands behind every natural and social disaster.

The fun part for me has been to ask for absolute, smoking-gun evidence that something is happening to alter the world...

The reality is, if evidence were so easily presented, the plan would fail.

Like I said, I have been skeptical for years, but this time it just seems real to me.

This is my opinion only and I share it but do not advocate for allies or ask for anyone’s agreement.

I don't buy the conspiracy stuff but agree with some of the points you predict for how this plays out. The truth, sadly, is that wars and natural disasters increase reliance on central power and can lead to permanent changes in the distribution of influence. A good example would be the government's greater reliance on Google, Apple, Facebook, etc.

I worry about that such things.

I suspect that something is not as it appears to be with this pandemic. I am not saying it isn't real. But the responses to it seem off. In the absence of direct evidence, it's easy to at least say that everything doesn't add up to what one might expect, to arrive at the existing conditions.

Let's consider the overall political environment. The US just had a significant political revolution. It was a peaceful revolution. But good or bad (which is not the point here), we made a major political shift. Suddenly we start putting extreme pressure on our biggest global trading partner and they are forced to make unprecedented compromises in their trade deals with us. Our economy sky-rockets while theirs suddenly suffers immensely. At the same time, Russia and Saudi Arabia who sell oil to both sides, start in to a huge trade war with eachother. US shale oil producers suffer with no politically justifiable reason to ask for a bail out. When the pandemic breaks out, both the US and China point the finger at eachother.

In politics, they have what they call 'the nuclear option'. When I use those words here, I mean it in a similar sense, not literal nuclear war. I think that either the US or China probably released this virus intentionally as a so-called 'nuclear option'. I wouldn't put it past either side and wouldn't accuse either without proof. But both sides went in to an economic lockdown that their respective populations bought in to, despite the personal costs. The US gets to refill oil reserves at unprecedented low prices. Yet the US economy is still punished. China suffers even more now than they were suffering previously. Perhaps no one wins with the nuclear option. But it's probably more about who ends up getting hurt the worst, more than about winning or getting ahead. That's typically how a war goes. The US and China were playing a game of chicken and both decided that what the other side was doing was unacceptable. Both sides hunker-down and try to starve the other out without actually having a real war.

Dr. Fauci's models are now being reported to be flawed on the side that says we over-reacted. Oops, sorry folks. Just kidding. You really didn't need to stay at home at all (or not so much). Time to go back to work. Both sides (china and US) hope to have beaten the other in to submission. We all go back to work. One side gains the upper hand. The political spin that goes in to all of this can be off-the-charts unreal, or almost completely made-up. Whatever it was, we all bought in to it. Fewer people have died from Covid-19 than typically die of the flu each year. Then we hear that DR. Fauci's models are flawed. What's next?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2020 11:33PM by azsteve.