Greg, we're still waiting in the UK for those baby steps. Unfortunately, three days go by steady w some promise on new cases numbers, and then we get a big spike on the fourth day which bumps up the average in the second half of the week.
Our particular baby falls over every few days. Once we get thru a whole week w no spiking we can start to risk feeling maybe more optimistic.
I knew you had other intentions in mind. The mistrust of expertise and science is the downfall of society.
Sure, experts make mistakes and/or cannot at a given time take all parameters into account, which in full are often only known in hindsight. But to start with the assumption that we don't have to listen to the experts -- sometimes with the undertone that they have ulterior motives --is what has gotten us into this mess in the first place.
Yes, and it all works only if we keep up the social distancing. Sure, at some point the economy has to open up again, but that's not going to be end of April.
And when it opens up again, it has to be stepwise. The idea that we can fully open up the economy by "fiat", and that you can have a fully functioning economy while people remain scared of dying while participating in it, is a sick pipedream.
Our company is planning for opening up at some point, but to do so with employee shifts, so that social distancing can continue to be done until this ceases to be necessary, which will not be anytime soon. Is this the most efficient way of working? Of course not, but it is the only rational option under the circumstances. I am fully in favor of it.
Oh , yup, I know its been done. We're trying to make it as simple as possible; with as little electrical work as necessary . We can get respiratory rate and extrinsic PEEP sorted . Most modern ventilators have ( or should do) the capacity to alter ratio between inspiration and expiration. We're trying to nut that out. We don't see this experiment as a front line option at all but if the ....really hits the fan, it may be of some use somewhere. If all else fails, its been interesting playing around.
I knew you had other intentions in mind. The mistrust of expertise and science is the downfall of society.
Sure, experts make mistakes and/or cannot at a given time take all parameters into account, which in full are often only known in hindsight. But to start with the assumption that we don't have to listen to the experts -- sometimes with the undertone that they have ulterior motives --is what has gotten us into this mess in the first place.
I have no mistrust of expertise and science. I do question mass hysteria tactics. Although, if you’re that far off I may question the “expert” title. My guess is these are the same modelers who predicted the (vastly wrong) 2016 results.
Reports here in the UK on the Covid 19 positon are concentrating on the huge problems in New York city with the occasional report to the effect that Detroit and New Orleans are being badly affected, but no real overview of how it is affecting other parts of the USA.
Could somebody find the time to give the members in other countries an overall picture of what is happening elsewhere in the USA?
I have no mistrust of expertise and science. I do question mass hysteria tactics. Although, if you’re that far off I may question the “expert” title. My guess is these are the same modelers who predicted the (vastly wrong) 2016 results.
Now you conflate political polling with epidemiological and medical science? What a joke.
And your complaint about being "that far off" just shows your ignorance of how science works.
And your accusation of promoting mass hysteria tactics is precisely what falls under ascribing ulterior motives, as I mentioned. So yes, you do have mistrust of expertise and science.
Sure, some healthy skepticism can be a good thing, but not wholesale, facile dismissal of relevant expertise.
Sadly we don't have a national policy. We have no idea where the next hot spot will be. Those states that elected not to follow the protocol may well be in the incubation period. They could be the first to break rank. That could lead ro a spike in infections. I hope not.
Sadly we don't have a national policy. We have no idea where the next hot spot will be. Those states that elected not to follow the protocol may well be in the incubation period. They could be the first to break rank. That could lead ro a spike in infections. I hope not.
Yes. But if they don’t spike we will be scrambling for an explanation as to why not. Could there be a benefit to the understanding of this virus by looking at the data from different states that handled it differently?
I think there is an argument for different states behaving differently because they have different population densities and different travel patterns. I’m not advocating it but I’m questioning if there might be a benefit to not having a national policy covering all 50 states.
Sadly we don't have a national policy. We have no idea where the next hot spot will be. Those states that elected not to follow the protocol may well be in the incubation period. They could be the first to break rank. That could lead ro a spike in infections. I hope not.
That is exactly the reason the US will have the highest number of cases & the highest number of deaths - a country wide coordinated approach is essential for achieve the best possible outcome. Letting each state "do their own thing" is the recipe that real deliver the most unwanted of all outcomes.
It will probably end up more like 99% recovered (although perhaps up to 10% with long-term or possibly permanent organ damage); so what's your point? Only 2-3 million dead in the US (5-8x as many as died in WWII) if we let it run its course?
The only places where the infection rate has followed a bell curve are where severe restrictions have been put in place, exactly what you are complaining about. And when the restrictions have been eased even a little, the infection (and death) rate starts to rise again.
My point is obvious from the thread's title! The "Models" as of today have proven to be way off even multiple adjustments for isolation and I'll add to that the "Experts" pushing to shut everything down. Things may change in the future but that's where we are today. There are tens of millions who can't afford their rent, utilities, or even to feed their families because of the blanket shut down. There are already food lines starting all over the country, this is wrong IMO. Shut down the hotspots like NY but we can't destroy the country and millions of lives based on the say so of uninformed "Experts" in this way, there has to be a happy medium.
You can believe what you want about the future but the Bell Curve stands today and it hasn't changed in places like Korea, Singapore and even China, countries where they have opened up somewhat.
We differ in our outlook and there's no point arguing about it, I see no good reason that NY should be the model for the rest of the country and I'm grateful that POTUS is letting these "Experts" put out their guidelines but allows the States and their governors who set policy. There's already thousands of deaths and thousands more are will die no matter what, I just don't see the point of ruining millions of lives who have immunity making them poor while decimating the country's economy for at least two generations based theories and faulty models. Different it may be but we've had deadly pandemics in the past and survived without these "Experts" and "Models" taking over our lives.
Yes. But if they don’t spike we will be scrambling for an explanation as to why not. Could there be a benefit to the understanding of this virus by looking at the data from different states that handled it differently?
I think there is an argument for different states behaving differently because they have different population densities and different travel patterns. I’m not advocating it but I’m questioning if there might be a benefit to not having a national policy covering all 50 states.
I'm with you Peter, don't see a unified policy as a good thing on so many different levels. I'm not advocating carelessness but there's got be a better compromise that total shutdown. There's no reason that it has to be all or nothing, I'm hopeful we'll have the tests and see where we really are around the country instead of this crazy dooms day scenario that they're playing out in the media daily.
As one of the only young people around, I have to say I'm very concerned about the economy. While I don't mind protecting previous generations, mine is going through a second shit storm. We were already collectively pretty poor, very poor compared to previous generations, so hopefully something good instead of just bad will come out of it all.
Now you conflate political polling with epidemiological and medical science? What a joke.
And your complaint about being "that far off" just shows your ignorance of how science works.
And your accusation of promoting mass hysteria tactics is precisely what falls under ascribing ulterior motives, as I mentioned. So yes, you do have mistrust of expertise and science.
Sure, some healthy skepticism can be a good thing, but not wholesale, facile dismissal of relevant expertise.
I don't understand the basis for this assertion. It is not obvious to me why states with radically different population densities should all follow the exact same rules on the exact same timelines.
Reports here in the UK on the Covid 19 positon are concentrating on the huge problems in New York city with the occasional report to the effect that Detroit and New Orleans are being badly affected, but no real overview of how it is affecting other parts of the USA.
Could somebody find the time to give the members in other countries an overall picture of what is happening elsewhere in the USA?
We should all follow the same rules because we travel and the virus travels with us. There may be no state that is without major metropolitan areas. Are we going to wait for them one by one to become hot spots? Maybe NY would not be a hot spot if we acted promptly.
I for one would love to adopt the Korean model.
