Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
The only number the virus cares about is zero cases. If there are zero cases, then that's that. The virus can't grow because 0 multiplied by any behavior is zero. If there is 1 case, maybe you get lucky and that person behaves well, and 1 becomes 0 and then screw you stupid virus. But, if you have 10 cases? Then no way you get lucky every time, and suddenly you have 25 cases. Then 125 and then your super low numbers are super high numbers.
If you have cases you can do three things
Social modification at high levels till cases reach zero or forever (social modification can include massive levels of testing and contact tracing, doesn't have to be just locked inside, test 3 times a week and you can have a kissing party and still be below 1) (South Korea, Taiwan)
Social modification at low levels until herd immunity, maintaining hospital capacity but trying to get through it as soon as possible (Sweden)
Say fuck it.
Sounds like America is doing option 3.
FTFY. I’m just biding my time waiting for the show to drop now.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
yep parachute has slowed the fall, better take that mother fucker off halfway down what's the worst that can happen?
Oh the fed won't be there for the second wave because they are denying there will be a second wave. Awesome.
Feds. The Fed itself is likely going to do everything it can, and maybe a couple things it actually can't to try and help save us from ourselves economically.
Eh if you pray for rain you got to deal with the mud too. Sweden rolled the dice on not shutting down and it obviously killed people that could have been protected. Just like the US not shutting down earlier killed around 30k people according to Columbia we can critique countries for fucking up its called being held accountable.
Definitely agree on the holding accountable part.
It's just, you never hear of the long term plan. Everyone is screaming about numbers, now!! Then there's no follow-up or discussion on what to do for the next couple of years.
Every country will probably end up in some semi-open state anyway.
I often think of New Zealand, which is a country I love. It's obviously great that they have stopped the spread. But what's the next step? They heavily rely on tourism for survival. A 14 day quarantine for arrivals is impossible when dealing with tourists.
Sweden was boasting of being a success story, which has been picked up and turned into a right wing meme. It's not surprising people pointed out that they aren't.
I have absolutely no idea who in Sweden was boasting this, I haven't heard from any Swedish source that the people in charge consider this a success.
Sweden is in no way a success story, neither is it a disaster. It's a country doing a what most northern European countries do with some minor variation. The two big things that come to mind was that schools age 6-15 were not closed and restaurants were allowed to serve sitting customers at 50% capacity. Which many other countries now also allow.
It's a country sitting with 4x the death rate per capita. That was bragging about "Yes, we'll have herd immunity soon".
No, the official line which have been stated in all daily press conferences has been that they do not count on herd immunity as a strategy. Officials have also been criticizing themselves that they did not protect the elderly better.
There's a few groups doing modelling at universities who talks about herd immunity, and apparently the US ambassador also mentioned it which I saw in this thread just now.
These are not the people in charge of anything.
Sweden sanctioned a geriatric mass killing and has been spinning excuses for having the highest death rate in Europe. It was a catastrophic failure and will be remembered as such for the rest of history. An entire country had the guts to test the herd immunity hypothesis and it was super de duper wrong.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
The only number the virus cares about is zero cases. If there are zero cases, then that's that. The virus can't grow because 0 multiplied by any behavior is zero. If there is 1 case, maybe you get lucky and that person behaves well, and 1 becomes 0 and then screw you stupid virus. But, if you have 10 cases? Then no way you get lucky every time, and suddenly you have 25 cases. Then 125 and then your super low numbers are super high numbers.
If you have cases you can do three things
Social modification at high levels till cases reach zero or forever (social modification can include massive levels of testing and contact tracing, doesn't have to be just locked inside, test 3 times a week and you can have a kissing party and still be below 1) (South Korea, Taiwan)
Social modification at low levels until herd immunity, maintaining hospital capacity but trying to get through it as soon as possible (Sweden)
Say fuck it.
Sounds like America is doing option 3.
FTFY. I’m just biding my time waiting for the show to drop now.
I would say that some states in America are heading for #2, but anywhere where you dont have contact tracer numbers building AND cases falling AND test positivity ratio falling and you are allowing like, bars to open is absolutely doing option 3. Clearly, I'd prefer to be in Europe and choosing between option 1 and 2 (because, well implemented option 1 actually gives you almost all the 'I can live my life again' of option 3 without all the dying, and well implemented #2 is easily transitioned to option #1 if needed), but, thats not what we're going to get. We'll at best get a state like california holding the virus Rt at like, 1.6, while Florida just says "screw it" and sees an Rt of 3.
Eh if you pray for rain you got to deal with the mud too. Sweden rolled the dice on not shutting down and it obviously killed people that could have been protected. Just like the US not shutting down earlier killed around 30k people according to Columbia we can critique countries for fucking up its called being held accountable.
Definitely agree on the holding accountable part.
It's just, you never hear of the long term plan. Everyone is screaming about numbers, now!! Then there's no follow-up or discussion on what to do for the next couple of years.
Every country will probably end up in some semi-open state anyway.
I often think of New Zealand, which is a country I love. It's obviously great that they have stopped the spread. But what's the next step? They heavily rely on tourism for survival. A 14 day quarantine for arrivals is impossible when dealing with tourists.
Sweden was boasting of being a success story, which has been picked up and turned into a right wing meme. It's not surprising people pointed out that they aren't.
I have absolutely no idea who in Sweden was boasting this, I haven't heard from any Swedish source that the people in charge consider this a success.
Sweden is in no way a success story, neither is it a disaster. It's a country doing a what most northern European countries do with some minor variation. The two big things that come to mind was that schools age 6-15 were not closed and restaurants were allowed to serve sitting customers at 50% capacity. Which many other countries now also allow.
It's a country sitting with 4x the death rate per capita. That was bragging about "Yes, we'll have herd immunity soon".
No, the official line which have been stated in all daily press conferences has been that they do not count on herd immunity as a strategy. Officials have also been criticizing themselves that they did not protect the elderly better.
There's a few groups doing modelling at universities who talks about herd immunity, and apparently the US ambassador also mentioned it which I saw in this thread just now.
These are not the people in charge of anything.
Sweden sanctioned a geriatric mass killing and has been spinning excuses for having the highest death rate in Europe. It was a catastrophic failure and will be remembered as such for the rest of history. An entire country had the guts to test the herd immunity hypothesis and it was super de duper wrong.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
Sweden is only proved wrong when someone else makes it to the line with a vaccine or treatment. Until then, you are judging the race half run. Just because we've held the line in some places so far, doesn't mean we can KEEP doing it. It is perfectly possible that we look back on this from a historical perspective and talk about the 'wisdom of the moderate approach' in Sweden because they tried to hold viral Rt at 1.4 or something and everyone ELSE tried to hold it at 0.8 and eventually their citizens rioted, their governments collapsed and Rt went back to 3.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
+2
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
So I live in California, and I work at a Grocery Store. I do the ordering for the wine. Throughout Shelter in place, the order has been down at least 15% of what is normal. Today, the order was heavy for a regular weekend.(not heavy for a holiday, but still) I have a feeling a lot of people are going to be enjoying their memorial day weekend, and I am not exactly thrilled.
So I live in California, and I work at a Grocery Store. I do the ordering for the wine. Throughout Shelter in place, the order has been down at least 15% of what is normal. Today, the order was heavy for a regular weekend.(not heavy for a holiday, but still) I have a feeling a lot of people are going to be enjoying their memorial day weekend, and I am not exactly thrilled.
That's possible, but it could also just be that people ran out of what they had stocked. I just got a dozen bottles of wine and some gin yesterday, but it should hopefully last a month or so. Depending on the news.
+3
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
This is the brief summation, which wasn't unknown to us previously, but is now published and peer-reviewed.
RESULTS
A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%).
These preliminary findings support the use of remdesivir for patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19 and require supplemental oxygen therapy. However, given high mortality despite the use of remdesivir, it is clear that treatment with an antiviral drug alone is not likely to be sufficient. Future strategies should evaluate antiviral agents in combination with other therapeutic approaches or combinations of antiviral agents to continue to improve patient outcomes in Covid-19.
TetraNitroCubane on
+3
WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
This is the brief summation, which wasn't unknown to us previously, but is now published and peer-reviewed.
RESULTS
A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%).
These preliminary findings support the use of remdesivir for patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19 and require supplemental oxygen therapy. However, given high mortality despite the use of remdesivir, it is clear that treatment with an antiviral drug alone is not likely to be sufficient. Future strategies should evaluate antiviral agents in combination with other therapeutic approaches or combinations of antiviral agents to continue to improve patient outcomes in Covid-19.
This is the kind of thing that makes me feel less despair as my country decides to just Leeroy Jenkins out of social distancing. It is still a terrible, horrible, no good very bad idea...but this time wasn't completely wasted. We know things now that we didn't know 2 months ago.
To be sure, we have also squandered this time in many, many ways. But there have been good people doing good work during that time, as well.
Eh if you pray for rain you got to deal with the mud too. Sweden rolled the dice on not shutting down and it obviously killed people that could have been protected. Just like the US not shutting down earlier killed around 30k people according to Columbia we can critique countries for fucking up its called being held accountable.
Definitely agree on the holding accountable part.
It's just, you never hear of the long term plan. Everyone is screaming about numbers, now!! Then there's no follow-up or discussion on what to do for the next couple of years.
Every country will probably end up in some semi-open state anyway.
I often think of New Zealand, which is a country I love. It's obviously great that they have stopped the spread. But what's the next step? They heavily rely on tourism for survival. A 14 day quarantine for arrivals is impossible when dealing with tourists.
Sweden was boasting of being a success story, which has been picked up and turned into a right wing meme. It's not surprising people pointed out that they aren't.
I have absolutely no idea who in Sweden was boasting this, I haven't heard from any Swedish source that the people in charge consider this a success.
Sweden is in no way a success story, neither is it a disaster. It's a country doing a what most northern European countries do with some minor variation. The two big things that come to mind was that schools age 6-15 were not closed and restaurants were allowed to serve sitting customers at 50% capacity. Which many other countries now also allow.
It's a country sitting with 4x the death rate per capita. That was bragging about "Yes, we'll have herd immunity soon".
No, the official line which have been stated in all daily press conferences has been that they do not count on herd immunity as a strategy. Officials have also been criticizing themselves that they did not protect the elderly better.
There's a few groups doing modelling at universities who talks about herd immunity, and apparently the US ambassador also mentioned it which I saw in this thread just now.
These are not the people in charge of anything.
Sweden sanctioned a geriatric mass killing and has been spinning excuses for having the highest death rate in Europe. It was a catastrophic failure and will be remembered as such for the rest of history. An entire country had the guts to test the herd immunity hypothesis and it was super de duper wrong.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
Which stats are you referring to? Because according to Worldometers Sweden's Deaths/1M Pop is 8th in Europe (6th when you take out tiny population outliers like San Marino and Andorra), and 6th in Europe for Total Deaths/Total Cases.
I'm not saying Sweden isn't a disaster, for some of the reasons that you outline in that it had the time, resources, and logistics to take action and chose not to, but it doesn't appear to have the highest death rate compared with other European countries who did lock down.
Now if you compare it with its Scandinavian partners Denmark and Norway, that's another story...
Eh if you pray for rain you got to deal with the mud too. Sweden rolled the dice on not shutting down and it obviously killed people that could have been protected. Just like the US not shutting down earlier killed around 30k people according to Columbia we can critique countries for fucking up its called being held accountable.
Definitely agree on the holding accountable part.
It's just, you never hear of the long term plan. Everyone is screaming about numbers, now!! Then there's no follow-up or discussion on what to do for the next couple of years.
Every country will probably end up in some semi-open state anyway.
I often think of New Zealand, which is a country I love. It's obviously great that they have stopped the spread. But what's the next step? They heavily rely on tourism for survival. A 14 day quarantine for arrivals is impossible when dealing with tourists.
Sweden was boasting of being a success story, which has been picked up and turned into a right wing meme. It's not surprising people pointed out that they aren't.
I have absolutely no idea who in Sweden was boasting this, I haven't heard from any Swedish source that the people in charge consider this a success.
Sweden is in no way a success story, neither is it a disaster. It's a country doing a what most northern European countries do with some minor variation. The two big things that come to mind was that schools age 6-15 were not closed and restaurants were allowed to serve sitting customers at 50% capacity. Which many other countries now also allow.
It's a country sitting with 4x the death rate per capita. That was bragging about "Yes, we'll have herd immunity soon".
No, the official line which have been stated in all daily press conferences has been that they do not count on herd immunity as a strategy. Officials have also been criticizing themselves that they did not protect the elderly better.
There's a few groups doing modelling at universities who talks about herd immunity, and apparently the US ambassador also mentioned it which I saw in this thread just now.
These are not the people in charge of anything.
Sweden sanctioned a geriatric mass killing and has been spinning excuses for having the highest death rate in Europe. It was a catastrophic failure and will be remembered as such for the rest of history. An entire country had the guts to test the herd immunity hypothesis and it was super de duper wrong.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
Is there some info on this?
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
So I live in California, and I work at a Grocery Store. I do the ordering for the wine. Throughout Shelter in place, the order has been down at least 15% of what is normal. Today, the order was heavy for a regular weekend.(not heavy for a holiday, but still) I have a feeling a lot of people are going to be enjoying their memorial day weekend, and I am not exactly thrilled.
That's possible, but it could also just be that people ran out of what they had stocked. I just got a dozen bottles of wine and some gin yesterday, but it should hopefully last a month or so. Depending on the news.
It evens out, though. It's literally half again as much as I have been usually ordering every day for the last... 5 weeks? 7 weeks? Time doesn't mean anything.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Maybe I'm just over-dramatizing but I don't think I am.
Nobody is good to open.
Sure, case counts in Alaska are low. But as Docshifty mentioned, we're headed into tourist season. If Alaska is open then folks are going to be visiting from places where case counts aren't low. And with exponential growth it takes very little for things to go from 'good' to 'really fucking bad'.
Right now the US is mostly in the 'several weeks' range for doubling time in terms of number of cases. Exponential growth puts that back to '2 or 3 days' really quickly.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Nope, cause 400 confirmed cases means there's a bunch of people with it that haven't been tested, and it's kindof impossible to know how all of them have been behaving. That's the real fuck of it all. So long as you've got incoming cases and new cases hasn't dropped to 0 for multiple weeks you've got community spread going on. If you've got community spread going on, and then you open shit up, you very quickly get exponential spread, and then a body count. Especially if you just throw the doors open with reckless abandon.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Nope, cause 400 confirmed cases means there's a bunch of people with it that haven't been tested, and it's kindof impossible to know how all of them have been behaving. That's the real fuck of it all. So long as you've got incoming cases and new cases hasn't dropped to 0 for multiple weeks you've got community spread going on. If you've got community spread going on, and then you open shit up, you very quickly get exponential spread, and then a body count. Especially if you just throw the doors open with reckless abandon.
I think Alaska has a special obligation here similar to other states with high tribal populations. Alaska has tribes that are substantially more isolated. It's going to wipe out communities in the fall/winter that can't actually get to a real hospital by anything other than plane or boat.
Edit: Some of the isolated communities aren't actually tribal as well.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
This is the brief summation, which wasn't unknown to us previously, but is now published and peer-reviewed.
RESULTS
A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%).
These preliminary findings support the use of remdesivir for patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19 and require supplemental oxygen therapy. However, given high mortality despite the use of remdesivir, it is clear that treatment with an antiviral drug alone is not likely to be sufficient. Future strategies should evaluate antiviral agents in combination with other therapeutic approaches or combinations of antiviral agents to continue to improve patient outcomes in Covid-19.
I mean, thats a pretty solid slam dunk for remdesivir works to reduce hospital stays and probably reduces the death rate too. But, since reducing hospital stay reduces the population death rate by lowering bed needs, it means that even if remdesivir doesn't lower death rates, it still lowers death rates.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
Their per capita case and death level is also extremely low.
The question is whether there is a low enough point for people to say, "yes, we can re-open now." A point that is not zero. It's certainly low enough now to contact trace every active case.
I also can't say I understand the line of reasoning that an area with isolated populations are somehow even more at risk and should face even more stringent rules about when they can reopen, as compared to lets say, a big city with mass transit. Isolated populations are comparatively safer, easier to control travel to, and will spread a virus much more slowly.
People wonder why so much of the country is giving up on their lockdowns. It's because there's no end game. There is no number that will satisfy people. Only a vaccine will. Which may or may not ever happen.
It's pretty common for people I talk to, to complain about the goal posts constantly being shifted. If a state in as a good shape as Alaska can't reopen, then there's pretty much zero hope for anywhere else.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Maybe I'm just over-dramatizing but I don't think I am.
Nobody is good to open.
Sure, case counts in Alaska are low. But as Docshifty mentioned, we're headed into tourist season. If Alaska is open then folks are going to be visiting from places where case counts aren't low. And with exponential growth it takes very little for things to go from 'good' to 'really fucking bad'.
Right now the US is mostly in the 'several weeks' range for doubling time in terms of number of cases. Exponential growth puts that back to '2 or 3 days' really quickly.
This is essentially it. 400 total cases, I think like 40something active. If that were nation wide I wouldn't be so upset. But it isnt. But there is still gonna be people traveling there. Hell, my brother is arriving next month from Iowa and when I asked my mom about the required quarantine time from him, she just laughed and said they dont check.
AK has good numbers, but they are going to be inundated from places that dont.
As far as rural communities, there are hundreds of settlements that dont crack triple digit pops, their airstrip is the only way in to town, and that doubles as the only road in town. Luckily they dont get much travel but it would be devastating if it hit those places.
+3
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Also, remember that is number tested that have it, not the number that have it.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
Their per capita case and death level is also extremely low.
The question is whether there is a low enough point for people to say, "yes, we can re-open now." A point that is not zero. It's certainly low enough now to contact trace every active case.
I also can't say I understand the line of reasoning that an area with isolated populations are somehow even more at risk and should face even more stringent rules about when they can reopen, as compared to lets say, a big city with mass transit. Isolated populations are comparatively safer, easier to control travel to, and will spread a virus much more slowly.
People wonder why so much of the country is giving up on their lockdowns. It's because there's no end game. There is no number that will satisfy people. Only a vaccine will. Which may or may not ever happen.
It's pretty common for people I talk to, to complain about the goal posts constantly being shifted. If a state in as a good shape as Alaska can't reopen, then there's pretty much zero hope for anywhere else.
If Alaska believes they can contact trace every case, and have the testing capacity to support contact tracing then they should absolutely re-open gradually starting now. I didn't realize that Alaska had good contact tracing in place.
edit - I suppose I would say, "Contact trace 90% of cases and find at least 2 chain members within 48 hours for each traced case"
I expected that they were just opening because their numbers were low, and low numbers are NOT enough. Low numbers + contact tracing may be enough.
And you are right, isolated communities combined with contact tracing are stronger, provided the contact tracers have the ability to close transport links between communities immediately on suspiscion of a infection path.
tbloxham on
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Wouldn’t immunity be a thing for later waves rather than now? Like come fall if there substantially lower death rate and spread here, was Sweden still wrong?
The obvious exception being homes for the elderly which should have been isolated. They account for most of the death rate. That’s not unique for Sweden though.
Eh if you pray for rain you got to deal with the mud too. Sweden rolled the dice on not shutting down and it obviously killed people that could have been protected. Just like the US not shutting down earlier killed around 30k people according to Columbia we can critique countries for fucking up its called being held accountable.
Definitely agree on the holding accountable part.
It's just, you never hear of the long term plan. Everyone is screaming about numbers, now!! Then there's no follow-up or discussion on what to do for the next couple of years.
Every country will probably end up in some semi-open state anyway.
I often think of New Zealand, which is a country I love. It's obviously great that they have stopped the spread. But what's the next step? They heavily rely on tourism for survival. A 14 day quarantine for arrivals is impossible when dealing with tourists.
Sweden was boasting of being a success story, which has been picked up and turned into a right wing meme. It's not surprising people pointed out that they aren't.
I have absolutely no idea who in Sweden was boasting this, I haven't heard from any Swedish source that the people in charge consider this a success.
Sweden is in no way a success story, neither is it a disaster. It's a country doing a what most northern European countries do with some minor variation. The two big things that come to mind was that schools age 6-15 were not closed and restaurants were allowed to serve sitting customers at 50% capacity. Which many other countries now also allow.
It's a country sitting with 4x the death rate per capita. That was bragging about "Yes, we'll have herd immunity soon".
No, the official line which have been stated in all daily press conferences has been that they do not count on herd immunity as a strategy. Officials have also been criticizing themselves that they did not protect the elderly better.
There's a few groups doing modelling at universities who talks about herd immunity, and apparently the US ambassador also mentioned it which I saw in this thread just now.
These are not the people in charge of anything.
Sweden sanctioned a geriatric mass killing and has been spinning excuses for having the highest death rate in Europe . It was a catastrophic failure and will be remembered as such for the rest of history. An entire country had the guts to test the herd immunity hypothesis and it was super de duper wrong.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
This is both an absurd statement and incorrect data as pointed out by others.
Where are you getting your information from. What news outlet pushes this narrative? Honest question.
Edit: Messed up the quote tree.
Movitz on
0
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
What's the recommendation for quarantine after a positive covid test? Wife's positive test was last Tuesday.
According to the Johns Hopkins contact tracing course it'd be isolation until 3 days after no fever with lessening symptoms, quarantine for you for 14 days after that point assuming you're still living together.
0
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
That's the opposite of what the video you linked says:
"with increased outside air exchange through the open window, particles deposit more quickly, and then also [are] exhausted from the airstream more quickly."
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
+4
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
You still have it getting pulled across the room and hitting people it wouldn't have without airflow.
+1
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I've noticed a couple resturaunts near me have hastily converted about half thier parking spaces to outdoor patio space. But then a lot of the same resturaunts are also openning the indoor dining room. IDK how the push to outdoor dining is going to fare in the summer in the South with 100 degree weather and bugs.
Sweden has a right wing crank who is going against the international expert advice and trying to make it a point of national pride. Science and medicine hasn’t confirmed that population-level sustained immunity exists, because some viruses either don’t or offer limited immunity. Hell, some piggback on antibodies and cause a stronger infection next time.
It’s Mengele-level mad science. I really don’t give a fuck for the “I’m Swedish and I think” nationalism, becuase science and nature don’t care that one band of apes drew a line on a map and declared themselves different from the neighboring apes.
Being “ultimately right” doesn’t matter. It is about how we behave while we collect hard data and develop treatments, not which nation made a lucky bet.
+1
Giggles_FunsworthBlight on DiscourseBay Area SprawlRegistered Userregular
I think the best thing to do would be to keep the windows closed and the AC aimed at the ceiling so it gently falls to the floor and cools the space. Would probably still create turbulence in places with low ceilings though.
Basically any HVAC method that depends on air stirring is gonna be faulty in these circumstances, but changing the HVAC to tightly controlled displacement ventilation is expensive and time consuming.
+7
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
I think the best thing to do would be to keep the windows closed and the AC aimed at the ceiling so it gently falls to the floor and cools the space. Would probably still create turbulence in places with low ceilings though.
What? No. You’re drawing the wrong conclusion from the AC/restaurant study, which is not the impact of air currents per se but the impact of AC in enclosed windowless spaces where people gather for extended periods of time.
The reason for open windows is to provide gently circulating air that scatter droplets and lessen the chance that large enough infectious material makes it from one person’s holes to another persons holes. Fresh air currents are not comparable to AC currents. AC currents, as in the restaurant example, are consistent, direct, and focused. That directs particles in a particular direction for a sustained time period for the individuals seated—again over TIME—in its path. Whereas fresh air circulating through a window is neither forceful nor consistent. And even if it were—let’s say you’re dining out in a hurricane idk—it would not have the same effect as AC, which is fixed and literally designed to fill the room with air.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
Their per capita case and death level is also extremely low.
The question is whether there is a low enough point for people to say, "yes, we can re-open now." A point that is not zero. It's certainly low enough now to contact trace every active case.
I also can't say I understand the line of reasoning that an area with isolated populations are somehow even more at risk and should face even more stringent rules about when they can reopen, as compared to lets say, a big city with mass transit. Isolated populations are comparatively safer, easier to control travel to, and will spread a virus much more slowly.
People wonder why so much of the country is giving up on their lockdowns. It's because there's no end game. There is no number that will satisfy people. Only a vaccine will. Which may or may not ever happen.
It's pretty common for people I talk to, to complain about the goal posts constantly being shifted. If a state in as a good shape as Alaska can't reopen, then there's pretty much zero hope for anywhere else.
Alaska is in a great place to reopen, provided they do extensive contact tracing and quarantine and completely ban all incoming travel from the rest of the US.
The problem is that 2 is illegal and 1 probably isn’t going to happen.
Also trendlines in deaths and new cases were going down pretty consistently until a week or two ago. If we had kept march and early april levels of lockdown it is very possible the entire country would have been in Alaska’s position by the first couple of weeks in June.
I think the best thing to do would be to keep the windows closed and the AC aimed at the ceiling so it gently falls to the floor and cools the space. Would probably still create turbulence in places with low ceilings though.
What? No. You’re drawing the wrong conclusion from the AC/restaurant study, which is not the impact of air currents per se but the impact of AC in enclosed windowless spaces where people gather for extended periods of time.
The reason for open windows is to provide gently circulating air that scatter droplets and lessen the chance that large enough infectious material makes it from one person’s holes to another persons holes. Fresh air currents are not comparable to AC currents. AC currents, as in the restaurant example, are consistent, direct, and focused. That directs particles in a particular direction for a sustained time period for the individuals seated—again over TIME—in its path. Whereas fresh air circulating through a window is neither forceful nor consistent. And even if it were—let’s say you’re dining out in a hurricane idk—it would not have the same effect as AC, which is fixed and literally designed to fill the room with air.
Also, in a room where the AC is running the air inside is, in order to keep it cool, exchanged only very rarely. Perhaps once an hour. Whereas, if you open a window, the air inside is exchanged probably at least 10x that at least. This means that any virus circulating in small airborne droplets doesn’t build up to high levels, and is instead blown out the window.
I would imagine that what places which require people to be inside with closed windows will need to do is install plenty of HEPA filter floor fan units around the space, so that the air is scrubbed regularly and flows towards the scrubbing units as much as possible.
Buddy of mine that works at a Red Robin in Alaska was told they would be opening up without capacity restrictions and cease using gloves and masks within a week.
I get that the numbers are super low for my home state, but man, we are on the cusp of tourist season. If there's one way to explode this in Alaska, it is throw caution to the wind in June
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
Their per capita case and death level is also extremely low.
The question is whether there is a low enough point for people to say, "yes, we can re-open now." A point that is not zero. It's certainly low enough now to contact trace every active case.
I also can't say I understand the line of reasoning that an area with isolated populations are somehow even more at risk and should face even more stringent rules about when they can reopen, as compared to lets say, a big city with mass transit. Isolated populations are comparatively safer, easier to control travel to, and will spread a virus much more slowly.
People wonder why so much of the country is giving up on their lockdowns. It's because there's no end game. There is no number that will satisfy people. Only a vaccine will. Which may or may not ever happen.
It's pretty common for people I talk to, to complain about the goal posts constantly being shifted. If a state in as a good shape as Alaska can't reopen, then there's pretty much zero hope for anywhere else.
Alaska is in a great place to reopen, provided they do extensive contact tracing and quarantine and completely ban all incoming travel from the rest of the US.
The problem is that 2 is illegal and 1 probably isn’t going to happen.
Also trendlines in deaths and new cases were going down pretty consistently until a week or two ago. If we had kept march and early april levels of lockdown it is very possible the entire country would have been in Alaska’s position by the first couple of weeks in June.
I do think that lack of leadership, poor communication, and lack of regular conversation about what positive things are being done is a big part of that though. And honestly, I don’t think the country had more than 2.5 months of compliance in it. This is super hard, and the federal government keeps wasting all the time they get and responding anemically once they do makes it harder.
It is illegal to ban travel but it is not illegal to place quarantine and testing requirements. Alaska should require everyone traveling between states to either be tested twice with a negative result in both and a 4 day separation, quarantining between the tests, or quarantine for 14 days. Quarantine should be done under monitoring. It should probably do the same for travel between local communities which do not have road links between them.
Posts
FTFY. I’m just biding my time waiting for the show to drop now.
Feds. The Fed itself is likely going to do everything it can, and maybe a couple things it actually can't to try and help save us from ourselves economically.
Sweden is a disaster story because unlike other countries who were caught unawares or had low resources or were geographically next in line for spread, Sweden chose to willfully pick a highly discouraged approach.
I would say that some states in America are heading for #2, but anywhere where you dont have contact tracer numbers building AND cases falling AND test positivity ratio falling and you are allowing like, bars to open is absolutely doing option 3. Clearly, I'd prefer to be in Europe and choosing between option 1 and 2 (because, well implemented option 1 actually gives you almost all the 'I can live my life again' of option 3 without all the dying, and well implemented #2 is easily transitioned to option #1 if needed), but, thats not what we're going to get. We'll at best get a state like california holding the virus Rt at like, 1.6, while Florida just says "screw it" and sees an Rt of 3.
Sweden is only proved wrong when someone else makes it to the line with a vaccine or treatment. Until then, you are judging the race half run. Just because we've held the line in some places so far, doesn't mean we can KEEP doing it. It is perfectly possible that we look back on this from a historical perspective and talk about the 'wisdom of the moderate approach' in Sweden because they tried to hold viral Rt at 1.4 or something and everyone ELSE tried to hold it at 0.8 and eventually their citizens rioted, their governments collapsed and Rt went back to 3.
That's possible, but it could also just be that people ran out of what they had stocked. I just got a dozen bottles of wine and some gin yesterday, but it should hopefully last a month or so. Depending on the news.
This is the brief summation, which wasn't unknown to us previously, but is now published and peer-reviewed.
This is the kind of thing that makes me feel less despair as my country decides to just Leeroy Jenkins out of social distancing. It is still a terrible, horrible, no good very bad idea...but this time wasn't completely wasted. We know things now that we didn't know 2 months ago.
To be sure, we have also squandered this time in many, many ways. But there have been good people doing good work during that time, as well.
I'm not saying Sweden isn't a disaster, for some of the reasons that you outline in that it had the time, resources, and logistics to take action and chose not to, but it doesn't appear to have the highest death rate compared with other European countries who did lock down.
Now if you compare it with its Scandinavian partners Denmark and Norway, that's another story...
It's a fairly common verbal glitch when you're trying to say "seem to want to see." The brain wants to group the "see" sounds together.
edit: left out a word
Is there some info on this?
It evens out, though. It's literally half again as much as I have been usually ordering every day for the last... 5 weeks? 7 weeks? Time doesn't mean anything.
I like this poster for folks informing risk.
But numbers ARE really low. 400 total cases recorded over the entire thing. If we're supposed to open based numbers and facts, then shouldn't Alaska at the very least be good to open?
Maybe I'm just over-dramatizing but I don't think I am.
Nobody is good to open.
Sure, case counts in Alaska are low. But as Docshifty mentioned, we're headed into tourist season. If Alaska is open then folks are going to be visiting from places where case counts aren't low. And with exponential growth it takes very little for things to go from 'good' to 'really fucking bad'.
Right now the US is mostly in the 'several weeks' range for doubling time in terms of number of cases. Exponential growth puts that back to '2 or 3 days' really quickly.
Nope, cause 400 confirmed cases means there's a bunch of people with it that haven't been tested, and it's kindof impossible to know how all of them have been behaving. That's the real fuck of it all. So long as you've got incoming cases and new cases hasn't dropped to 0 for multiple weeks you've got community spread going on. If you've got community spread going on, and then you open shit up, you very quickly get exponential spread, and then a body count. Especially if you just throw the doors open with reckless abandon.
I think Alaska has a special obligation here similar to other states with high tribal populations. Alaska has tribes that are substantially more isolated. It's going to wipe out communities in the fall/winter that can't actually get to a real hospital by anything other than plane or boat.
Edit: Some of the isolated communities aren't actually tribal as well.
Its not to do with the absolute numbers. Its to do with the numbers per capita, your hospital usage and how fast both are falling. If you have 10000 cases a day, but you have 50% hospital capaicity left and are falling 50% per week then you have a lot of leeway to try new solutions. If numbers are flat, no matter how low they are, then they are going to go up (herd immunity effects aside)
Alaska has highly limited hospital capacity, and an isolated population. It should leverage the later to drive for regional extinction of the virus.
I mean, thats a pretty solid slam dunk for remdesivir works to reduce hospital stays and probably reduces the death rate too. But, since reducing hospital stay reduces the population death rate by lowering bed needs, it means that even if remdesivir doesn't lower death rates, it still lowers death rates.
Their per capita case and death level is also extremely low.
The question is whether there is a low enough point for people to say, "yes, we can re-open now." A point that is not zero. It's certainly low enough now to contact trace every active case.
I also can't say I understand the line of reasoning that an area with isolated populations are somehow even more at risk and should face even more stringent rules about when they can reopen, as compared to lets say, a big city with mass transit. Isolated populations are comparatively safer, easier to control travel to, and will spread a virus much more slowly.
People wonder why so much of the country is giving up on their lockdowns. It's because there's no end game. There is no number that will satisfy people. Only a vaccine will. Which may or may not ever happen.
It's pretty common for people I talk to, to complain about the goal posts constantly being shifted. If a state in as a good shape as Alaska can't reopen, then there's pretty much zero hope for anywhere else.
This is essentially it. 400 total cases, I think like 40something active. If that were nation wide I wouldn't be so upset. But it isnt. But there is still gonna be people traveling there. Hell, my brother is arriving next month from Iowa and when I asked my mom about the required quarantine time from him, she just laughed and said they dont check.
AK has good numbers, but they are going to be inundated from places that dont.
As far as rural communities, there are hundreds of settlements that dont crack triple digit pops, their airstrip is the only way in to town, and that doubles as the only road in town. Luckily they dont get much travel but it would be devastating if it hit those places.
If Alaska believes they can contact trace every case, and have the testing capacity to support contact tracing then they should absolutely re-open gradually starting now. I didn't realize that Alaska had good contact tracing in place.
edit - I suppose I would say, "Contact trace 90% of cases and find at least 2 chain members within 48 hours for each traced case"
I expected that they were just opening because their numbers were low, and low numbers are NOT enough. Low numbers + contact tracing may be enough.
And you are right, isolated communities combined with contact tracing are stronger, provided the contact tracers have the ability to close transport links between communities immediately on suspiscion of a infection path.
The obvious exception being homes for the elderly which should have been isolated. They account for most of the death rate. That’s not unique for Sweden though.
This is both an absurd statement and incorrect data as pointed out by others.
Where are you getting your information from. What news outlet pushes this narrative? Honest question.
Edit: Messed up the quote tree.
According to the Johns Hopkins contact tracing course it'd be isolation until 3 days after no fever with lessening symptoms, quarantine for you for 14 days after that point assuming you're still living together.
This chart is bad. Better ventilation by opening windows creates air currents that spread the virus further.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/video/4548309-study-looks-at-impact-of-airflow-in-restaurants-on-transmission-of-covid-19/
That's the opposite of what the video you linked says:
"with increased outside air exchange through the open window, particles deposit more quickly, and then also [are] exhausted from the airstream more quickly."
It’s Mengele-level mad science. I really don’t give a fuck for the “I’m Swedish and I think” nationalism, becuase science and nature don’t care that one band of apes drew a line on a map and declared themselves different from the neighboring apes.
Being “ultimately right” doesn’t matter. It is about how we behave while we collect hard data and develop treatments, not which nation made a lucky bet.
I think the best thing to do would be to keep the windows closed and the AC aimed at the ceiling so it gently falls to the floor and cools the space. Would probably still create turbulence in places with low ceilings though.
The reason for open windows is to provide gently circulating air that scatter droplets and lessen the chance that large enough infectious material makes it from one person’s holes to another persons holes. Fresh air currents are not comparable to AC currents. AC currents, as in the restaurant example, are consistent, direct, and focused. That directs particles in a particular direction for a sustained time period for the individuals seated—again over TIME—in its path. Whereas fresh air circulating through a window is neither forceful nor consistent. And even if it were—let’s say you’re dining out in a hurricane idk—it would not have the same effect as AC, which is fixed and literally designed to fill the room with air.
NNID: Hakkekage
Alaska is in a great place to reopen, provided they do extensive contact tracing and quarantine and completely ban all incoming travel from the rest of the US.
The problem is that 2 is illegal and 1 probably isn’t going to happen.
Also trendlines in deaths and new cases were going down pretty consistently until a week or two ago. If we had kept march and early april levels of lockdown it is very possible the entire country would have been in Alaska’s position by the first couple of weeks in June.
Also, in a room where the AC is running the air inside is, in order to keep it cool, exchanged only very rarely. Perhaps once an hour. Whereas, if you open a window, the air inside is exchanged probably at least 10x that at least. This means that any virus circulating in small airborne droplets doesn’t build up to high levels, and is instead blown out the window.
I would imagine that what places which require people to be inside with closed windows will need to do is install plenty of HEPA filter floor fan units around the space, so that the air is scrubbed regularly and flows towards the scrubbing units as much as possible.
I do think that lack of leadership, poor communication, and lack of regular conversation about what positive things are being done is a big part of that though. And honestly, I don’t think the country had more than 2.5 months of compliance in it. This is super hard, and the federal government keeps wasting all the time they get and responding anemically once they do makes it harder.
It is illegal to ban travel but it is not illegal to place quarantine and testing requirements. Alaska should require everyone traveling between states to either be tested twice with a negative result in both and a 4 day separation, quarantining between the tests, or quarantine for 14 days. Quarantine should be done under monitoring. It should probably do the same for travel between local communities which do not have road links between them.