He is, however, not an epidemiologist AFAICT and has something of a history of making controversial statements which have subsequently needed to be retracted. He may be right, but I don’t consider him a trustworthy authority.
And don't get hit by someone driving a car. Which is still more common than getting this.
Fair point - but people hit by a car don't then get up and unknowingly knock down other people, which is the reason for a lot of care now.
For example, given an average reproductive rate of 3.28 (number of others each carrier infects) and a transmission generation period of 7.5 days (there are multiple estimates), without intervention measures to slow or prevent transmission then:
- The 77 cases in Canada today would multiply to just over 1 million in two months.
- The 754 cases in the US would multiply to around 10 million in two months.
Within 3 months, the entire population of both countries could have theoretically caught the disease.
It is good not to be alarmist, but there is a very real need for calm vigilance from everyone and strong government intervention.
If I'm doing the math(s) correctly (and someone please correct me if I'm not!), then if I get infected, I have about a 97.5% probability of surviving it (assuming a roughly 2.5% fatality rate on average). Similarly for each of the 3.28 people I directly pass the infection on to. Since 0.975 raised to an exponent of 4.28 is approximately 0.9, there is roughly a 90% probability of all four of us surviving, which is a 10% probability of at least one of the four of us dying.
So by taking measures to avoid getting infected, there is at least a 10% probability that I avoid someone's death (if I only succeed because of those measures), since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability.
If I get infected only because I don't take measures to avoid it, there is at least a 10% probability that I trigger someone's death (since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability).
If I get infected only because I don't take measures to avoid it, there is at least a 10% probability that I trigger someone's death (since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability).
As a non-trivial amount of people require ICU level treatment in order to recover, it also depends on whether our containment/delay strategies work well enough to avoid saturating the health services of the countries we are in.
I think it's at least three times now. If Randall doesn't change his subject matter until this is behind us, it could get old fast.
Arguably thelastfourstrips have all been COVID-19 related. (The hovertext on that first one is both funny and good advice.) I take it more like a cartoonist with a lot of great Watergate jokes back in the early 1970s. You can't store them up and use them one at a time over the next several years. Use 'em or lose 'em.
If I get infected only because I don't take measures to avoid it, there is at least a 10% probability that I trigger someone's death (since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability).
As a non-trivial amount of people require ICU level treatment in order to recover, it also depends on whether our containment/delay strategies work well enough to avoid saturating the health services of the countries we are in.
Right. Death rates from diseases aren't fixed constants like gravity or electromagnetic attraction. They depend a lot on human factors, like the amount of medical care available. Something with a 2.5% fatality rate when there are only a few cases may have a 4%-5% fatality rate if there are more patients requiring hospitalization than there are hospital beds to put them in.
In New York State, the Gov. has declared a one mile area of New Rochelle a containment zone, and is deploying the National Guard. That creeps me out more than the virus, truthfully.
In New York State, the Gov. has declared a one mile area of New Rochelle a containment zone, and is deploying the National Guard. That creeps me out more than the virus, truthfully.
It certainly contrasts with the president’s ‘nothing to see here’ attitude.
In New York State, the Gov. has declared a one mile area of New Rochelle a containment zone, and is deploying the National Guard. That creeps me out more than the virus, truthfully.
Containment - although not, so far as I know, militarily enforced as yet - has been the norm in some areas near me in France for a while now. At times like this I'm glad to live in a country with a strong executive presidency and a government full of dull technocrats.
There is a tradeoff between individual freedoms and public health and safety. Clearly not all cultures draw the line in the same place, and the outcomes in terms of epidemiology are likely to be markedly different as a result.
Harvard has said that it's going to transition to all remote classes following Spring Break. It has also asked students not to return from Spring Break, which will be problematic for those few Harvard students who have nowhere else to live.
Perhaps they shouldn't leave for Spring Break, then? Can they just stay in the dorms over the break, or are they obliged to leave for a week?
AIUI, the problem isn't Spring Break. It's that they want all students out of the dorms and completely off the campus. The students are supposed to go anywhere else, and take their classes online. Other colleges and unis are doing the same.
ISTM that's going to create huge problems for students and their families, especially those that are low income, from foster care, were/are homeless (some students live in cars, etc.), from other countries; those whose financial aid is already paid to the school, and won't be available for food and rent elsewhere; those who can't afford to travel back where they came from; those for whom college is an escape from bad situations, etc..
I doubt that a school's financial aid staff can do much to redirect funds, halfway through the term, especially at school's where lots of students are on financial aid.
AIUI, the problem isn't Spring Break. It's that they want all students out of the dorms and completely off the campus. The students are supposed to go anywhere else, and take their classes online. Other colleges and unis are doing the same.
OK - so it's not "don't bring your germs back from mingling with thousands of horny students from all over the country over break" - it's "get your inconvenient bodies out of our space so we don't have to deal with you."
Even if we assume that all students have somewhere to go (as you point out, by no means universally true), moving a student from a dorm to an apartment building doesn't actually do anything to reduce their potential exposure, or to reduce other people's exposure to them.
At least in the dorm room, they've probably got decent networking so that they can actually take classes online. Again, not everyone has good enough networking at home.
The state national guards are often called out for non militay purposes primarily because they can insert well trained/disciplined resources to an emergency. This is what New Rochelle is saying about the guard call up
{[The] National Guard will be assisting with logistical and operational challenges in our community, including cleaning and the distribution of meals to students who rely on school lunches and breakfasts at schools that are closed. The Guard will not be engaged in military or Policing functions. The City stands ready to coordinate with and support the Guard’s efforts in any constructive fashion, and has activated our emergency operations center in order to be fully prepared for any requests.
Sorry for the double post. Using the logic above about the spread of coronavirus, the whole of China should have been infected by now, I think. However, they report less than 81,000 cases. It seems this can be mitigated, if not contained.
Sorry for the double post. Using the logic above about the spread of coronavirus, the whole of China should have been infected by now, I think. However, they report less than 81,000 cases. It seems this can be mitigated, if not contained.
China can also impose draconian limits on travel that the US cannot.
Stanford is also strongly suggesting that undergraduate students don't return at least immediately to the university after spring break, but, do the online classes (classes will be online at least initially for both on and away students). However it recognizes that isn't possible for some students (e.g., many international students) so they can request permission to return (or stay). There main reason is probably to lower the density of students in campus housing (a secondary reason not explicitly mentioned is they cancelled all their overseas programs for spring quarter and don't have enough housing for those students).
Sorry for the double post. Using the logic above about the spread of coronavirus, the whole of China should have been infected by now, I think. However, they report less than 81,000 cases. It seems this can be mitigated, if not contained.
Chinas totalitarian society and 5G tech has a great deal to do with the efficiency with which they have handled the outbreak.
Because the government has access to data from every single cell phone in China, they have been able to pinpoint the location of affected individuals and then use gps and national alerts to send messages to users who have been within a radius of the affected person, and order those people to report to checkpoints for monitoring and isolation.
In the west we have privacy laws that interfere with the use of cell phone data in this manner.
I admit the American response to the Coronavirus has been in shambles. Trump got rid of the CDC Pandemic Czar in year two of his administration. He does not listen to his scientists (at a recent event he went on and on about how much he knows about the virus, while the one CDC expert to the left of him had such an aghast expression on his face.)
The Trump administration has been saying anyone who wants to can be tested, and they have shipped out over a million test kits. But hospitals are saying they never received any.
Still, I think the local governors are working hard to mitigate the spread in their states. I am just saying there will be a point where this thing will plateau and start to decrease. It might be when about 50 percent of the population has been infested through. I hope not.
Given some of the history of the National Guard, I'd be a little queasy about having them around. (E.g., Kent State shooting in the 70s(?)) Plus they've been used in overseas military activity (over the last few decades, IIRC), which they were never meant to do.
The ones who are helping out in NY state may very well be non-violent and non-threatening with the general public. They may be calm, sensible, and sensitive.
But, given how stressed and scared the public is...the shadows of the past may get in the way of seeing the NG clearly.
From what I'm seeing on the news, they will be basically cleaning, handling logistics (food, etc.) and so forth. Hard to imagine that being unwelcome. I don't think they are being used as guards or anything that is apt to bring them into conflict with the public. The "containment" aspect isn't a "don't go / leave here" zone, but rather a "no gatherings above x no. of people" zone. And I can't see people insisting violently on their right to gather in large groups in such a case.
AIUI, the problem isn't Spring Break. It's that they want all students out of the dorms and completely off the campus. The students are supposed to go anywhere else, and take their classes online. Other colleges and unis are doing the same.
OK - so it's not "don't bring your germs back from mingling with thousands of horny students from all over the country over break" - it's "get your inconvenient bodies out of our space so we don't have to deal with you."
Even if we assume that all students have somewhere to go (as you point out, by no means universally true), moving a student from a dorm to an apartment building doesn't actually do anything to reduce their potential exposure, or to reduce other people's exposure to them.
At least in the dorm room, they've probably got decent networking so that they can actually take classes online. Again, not everyone has good enough networking at home.
If you have three people in a dormitory built for 300, then you have to heat and provide other services (food? cleaning bathrooms?) that just aren't scaleable in that direction.
Sorry for the double post. Using the logic above about the spread of coronavirus, the whole of China should have been infected by now, I think. However, they report less than 81,000 cases. It seems this can be mitigated, if not contained.
China can also impose draconian limits on travel that the US cannot.
Yes, a reporter showed his QR code on his phone which he had to check in everywhere - even supermarkets - so that his movements can be tracked. He says it’s the same for everyone.
I suppose Italy now shows the way ahead. It's likely that measures are going to be stepped up, to "flatten out the curve". I wonder if my Easter holiday will survive, in England.
I suppose Italy now shows the way ahead. It's likely that measures are going to be stepped up, to "flatten out the curve". I wonder if my Easter holiday will survive, in England.
My local Co-Op corner shop was out of anti-bacterial handwash this morning, but everything else seemed present and correct. This probably means that peeps are taking sensible precautions.
Antibacterial handwash is not a sensible precaution, because we're not dealing with a bacterium.
Plain old soap will do at least as good a job if not better.
It appears that the UK government has decided not to follow the measures taken by other governments (presumably because they are not BRITISH measures), and has decided to rely on the Nudge Unit.
She was also feeling unwell, and still attended a function at No 10.
But this is a real dilemma for people in public-facing leadership positions. Do you keep on in your work and lead by example, or disappear from view to protect your office? Today's edition of French Catholic daily La Croix leads with "Being a Christian during Covid-19 - showing compassion or avoiding contamination at all costs?". I may even have to buy the paper to find out the answer.
To be fair, in normal times (if we can remember when times were not interesting), most handwash in supermarkets appeared to be labelled "anti-bacterial". Probably no different from normal soap and handwash as the very fact of washing hands will be an anti-bacterial activity.
It’s not terrible as a strategy, human behaviour is integral to how spread happens.
“The models rest heavily on what people will do,” Halpern said in an interview. “Will people comply with instructions, and to what extent? If kids don’t go to school, what will happen?”
An unintended outcome of closing schools, he said, could be children spending more time with grandparents -- potentially putting a group the government especially wants to protect from infection at more risk.
In the same way, banning people from attending sports events, where scientists regard an infectious person as unlikely to pass the disease to very many around them, could be counter-productive if people instead watch matches in pubs, where the disease is more likely to spread.
It’s not terrible as a strategy, human behaviour is integral to how spread happens.
I think some modesty about out ability to predict human behavior in the face of a once in a lifetime event may be in order (leaving aside that behavioral science is one of those fields hit heavily by p-hacking and large parts of it are probably misleading at best).
To be fair, in normal times (if we can remember when times were not interesting), most handwash in supermarkets appeared to be labelled "anti-bacterial". Probably no different from normal soap and handwash as the very fact of washing hands will be an anti-bacterial activity.
Yes. But they make you pay more by promising to be anti-bacterial, and when it comes to the current situation paying more, to buy something that you vaguely think is more bug-proof than the generic soap brand, is a waste of your money. Bacteria are not the problem.
People the world over also insist on getting antibiotics when they have a virus, which is even worse because it helps encourage antibiotic resistance.
I think there definitely is a link between how easily an outbreak can be got under control and how much government interference / control people are prepared to put up with.
AIUI, Singapore is doing a very good job at reducing infections, but Singaporeans are used to complying with what the government tells them to do. My colleagues in the Singapore office, for example, all have their temperature taken (and recorded) twice a day at work, in addition to every time they enter a public building. I don’t know how many people in other countries would be prepared to accept that.
On the other hand, the Italians are hardly noted for their discipline or obedience, and the lockdown there looks like it’s being observed for the most part.
It’s not terrible as a strategy, human behaviour is integral to how spread happens.
I think some modesty about out ability to predict human behavior in the face of a once in a lifetime event may be in order (leaving aside that behavioral science is one of those fields hit heavily by p-hacking and large parts of it are probably misleading at best).
They are working on probability of outcomes, not certainties - as is everybody else. But the central point is once containment fails, most people will get covid, There may well be more than one way to effectively slow spread - but also part of the timing of measures is to do with managing health service capacity and staffing.
The schools will shut at Easter anyway - and people will have already planned for that, shifts, work, childcare. So if you were going to lockdown - if it were possible to hang on till 2 April, whilst using other measures to slow spread enough, it would make sense to do so. People are talking as if lockdown would stop people getting covid, that’s not the case - government policy is managing health demand. Whatever the government does at this point, thousands will get the illness and there will be a significant increase in the death rate this year.
She was also feeling unwell, and still attended a function at No 10.
But this is a real dilemma for people in public-facing leadership positions. Do you keep on in your work and lead by example, or disappear from view to protect your office?
The phrase "lead by example" comes to mind. We're all being told to prepare to work from home if needed (when my computer at work was replaced my working files were moved from the hard drive of my old computer to OneDrive ... but we're now being told to copy any files we may need from local computers to the cloud so that if we have to work at home we can access them). Public-facing leaders will be able to do a lot from home with modern IT - a lot already do TV interviews without going into the same studio as the presenter; email, phone, Skype (or similar) to keep in contact with staff. If the Pope can lead mass through a TV screen/computer monitor then a government minister can stay home for a few days until the test results come through (and, longer if those results are positive).
It appears that the UK government has decided not to follow the measures taken by other governments (presumably because they are not BRITISH measures), and has decided to rely on the Nudge Unit.
I tend to agree with this. Look what happened in Italy. They said they would shut down one region so people quickly scattered to go home/to relatives/work etc - spreading it even further.
My local Metro Tesco seemed well stocked this morning, apart from the toilet paper/kitchen roll/tissue shelf which was more or less bare. Coincidentally there were three young Italians in the store, and though my Italian isn't all it should be they seemed to be deciding if they should stock up, since they may not be allowed home for some time
It appears that the UK government has decided not to follow the measures taken by other governments (presumably because they are not BRITISH measures), and has decided to rely on the Nudge Unit.
If it's British, shouldn't that be a nudge nudge unit?
Comments
The graphs of how case numbers from other countries have gone are not reassuring.
If I'm doing the math(s) correctly (and someone please correct me if I'm not!), then if I get infected, I have about a 97.5% probability of surviving it (assuming a roughly 2.5% fatality rate on average). Similarly for each of the 3.28 people I directly pass the infection on to. Since 0.975 raised to an exponent of 4.28 is approximately 0.9, there is roughly a 90% probability of all four of us surviving, which is a 10% probability of at least one of the four of us dying.
So by taking measures to avoid getting infected, there is at least a 10% probability that I avoid someone's death (if I only succeed because of those measures), since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability.
If I get infected only because I don't take measures to avoid it, there is at least a 10% probability that I trigger someone's death (since including the people I indirectly pass the infection on to only raises that probability).
Twice.
It is now official Church of England advice to
I think it's at least three times now. If Randall doesn't change his subject matter until this is behind us, it could get old fast.
As a non-trivial amount of people require ICU level treatment in order to recover, it also depends on whether our containment/delay strategies work well enough to avoid saturating the health services of the countries we are in.
Arguably the last four strips have all been COVID-19 related. (The hovertext on that first one is both funny and good advice.) I take it more like a cartoonist with a lot of great Watergate jokes back in the early 1970s. You can't store them up and use them one at a time over the next several years. Use 'em or lose 'em.
Right. Death rates from diseases aren't fixed constants like gravity or electromagnetic attraction. They depend a lot on human factors, like the amount of medical care available. Something with a 2.5% fatality rate when there are only a few cases may have a 4%-5% fatality rate if there are more patients requiring hospitalization than there are hospital beds to put them in.
It certainly contrasts with the president’s ‘nothing to see here’ attitude.
Containment - although not, so far as I know, militarily enforced as yet - has been the norm in some areas near me in France for a while now. At times like this I'm glad to live in a country with a strong executive presidency and a government full of dull technocrats.
There is a tradeoff between individual freedoms and public health and safety. Clearly not all cultures draw the line in the same place, and the outcomes in terms of epidemiology are likely to be markedly different as a result.
Leorning Cniht--
AIUI, the problem isn't Spring Break. It's that they want all students out of the dorms and completely off the campus. The students are supposed to go anywhere else, and take their classes online. Other colleges and unis are doing the same.
ISTM that's going to create huge problems for students and their families, especially those that are low income, from foster care, were/are homeless (some students live in cars, etc.), from other countries; those whose financial aid is already paid to the school, and won't be available for food and rent elsewhere; those who can't afford to travel back where they came from; those for whom college is an escape from bad situations, etc..
I doubt that a school's financial aid staff can do much to redirect funds, halfway through the term, especially at school's where lots of students are on financial aid.
So it's not an easy thing.
OK - so it's not "don't bring your germs back from mingling with thousands of horny students from all over the country over break" - it's "get your inconvenient bodies out of our space so we don't have to deal with you."
Even if we assume that all students have somewhere to go (as you point out, by no means universally true), moving a student from a dorm to an apartment building doesn't actually do anything to reduce their potential exposure, or to reduce other people's exposure to them.
At least in the dorm room, they've probably got decent networking so that they can actually take classes online. Again, not everyone has good enough networking at home.
{[The] National Guard will be assisting with logistical and operational challenges in our community, including cleaning and the distribution of meals to students who rely on school lunches and breakfasts at schools that are closed. The Guard will not be engaged in military or Policing functions. The City stands ready to coordinate with and support the Guard’s efforts in any constructive fashion, and has activated our emergency operations center in order to be fully prepared for any requests.
https://newrochelleny.com/coronavirus
China can also impose draconian limits on travel that the US cannot.
Chinas totalitarian society and 5G tech has a great deal to do with the efficiency with which they have handled the outbreak.
Because the government has access to data from every single cell phone in China, they have been able to pinpoint the location of affected individuals and then use gps and national alerts to send messages to users who have been within a radius of the affected person, and order those people to report to checkpoints for monitoring and isolation.
In the west we have privacy laws that interfere with the use of cell phone data in this manner.
AFF
The Trump administration has been saying anyone who wants to can be tested, and they have shipped out over a million test kits. But hospitals are saying they never received any.
Still, I think the local governors are working hard to mitigate the spread in their states. I am just saying there will be a point where this thing will plateau and start to decrease. It might be when about 50 percent of the population has been infested through. I hope not.
The ones who are helping out in NY state may very well be non-violent and non-threatening with the general public. They may be calm, sensible, and sensitive.
But, given how stressed and scared the public is...the shadows of the past may get in the way of seeing the NG clearly.
If you have three people in a dormitory built for 300, then you have to heat and provide other services (food? cleaning bathrooms?) that just aren't scaleable in that direction.
Yes, a reporter showed his QR code on his phone which he had to check in everywhere - even supermarkets - so that his movements can be tracked. He says it’s the same for everyone.
And she decided to self-isolate, *with her 82 year old mother* - who now has a cough. Why, was not specified in the bbc article.
Well, we can learn from their mistakes.
🤔
It's Nadine Dorries, a known moron. I'm amazed she hasn't come out and said people should avoid the virus by holding their breath.
To be fair, it’s *possible* that her mother lives with her / is cared for by her.
Antibacterial handwash is not a sensible precaution, because we're not dealing with a bacterium.
Plain old soap will do at least as good a job if not better.
But this is a real dilemma for people in public-facing leadership positions. Do you keep on in your work and lead by example, or disappear from view to protect your office? Today's edition of French Catholic daily La Croix leads with "Being a Christian during Covid-19 - showing compassion or avoiding contamination at all costs?". I may even have to buy the paper to find out the answer.
I think some modesty about out ability to predict human behavior in the face of a once in a lifetime event may be in order (leaving aside that behavioral science is one of those fields hit heavily by p-hacking and large parts of it are probably misleading at best).
Yes. But they make you pay more by promising to be anti-bacterial, and when it comes to the current situation paying more, to buy something that you vaguely think is more bug-proof than the generic soap brand, is a waste of your money. Bacteria are not the problem.
People the world over also insist on getting antibiotics when they have a virus, which is even worse because it helps encourage antibiotic resistance.
AIUI, Singapore is doing a very good job at reducing infections, but Singaporeans are used to complying with what the government tells them to do. My colleagues in the Singapore office, for example, all have their temperature taken (and recorded) twice a day at work, in addition to every time they enter a public building. I don’t know how many people in other countries would be prepared to accept that.
On the other hand, the Italians are hardly noted for their discipline or obedience, and the lockdown there looks like it’s being observed for the most part.
They are working on probability of outcomes, not certainties - as is everybody else. But the central point is once containment fails, most people will get covid, There may well be more than one way to effectively slow spread - but also part of the timing of measures is to do with managing health service capacity and staffing.
The schools will shut at Easter anyway - and people will have already planned for that, shifts, work, childcare. So if you were going to lockdown - if it were possible to hang on till 2 April, whilst using other measures to slow spread enough, it would make sense to do so. People are talking as if lockdown would stop people getting covid, that’s not the case - government policy is managing health demand. Whatever the government does at this point, thousands will get the illness and there will be a significant increase in the death rate this year.
I tend to agree with this. Look what happened in Italy. They said they would shut down one region so people quickly scattered to go home/to relatives/work etc - spreading it even further.
That's unfair: we must all hope that Nadine 'mad nad' Dorries makes a full recovery. Then falls off a cliff.
If it's British, shouldn't that be a nudge nudge unit?