Cal88 said:

---

This FT page is really good for tracking the epidemic across the world:

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

Here is the current snapshot, it shows that the progress in Spain, the latest country to be hit, has been faster than in countries hit earlier:



I think the lower path in the US is a reflection of the lack of testing, we're probably closer to the path in Spain or Italy. Iran and possibly Japan might have been reporting lower numbers than the actual count.

This chart uses n=100 as the reference point:

---

This is probably a stupid question, but you seem so well informed I thought I'd go ahead and ask. Why are the data presented absolute numbers and not percentages of the total population? If two countries level off (if that's the right term) at the same absolute number of cases doesn't that mean that the country with the larger population experienced a less severe penetration?

Anyway, thanks for posting all this.

Coming soon to a theater near you-- an announcement at 1:00 of a near complete shutdown to be ordered by Bay Area counties https://www.sfchronicle.com/local-politics/article/Bay-Area-must-shelter-in-place-Only-15135014.php?t=ebc54dc680

MSaviolives said:

---

Coming soon to a theater near you-- an announcement at 1:00 of a near complete shutdown to be ordered by Bay Area counties https://www.sfchronicle.com/local-politics/article/Bay-Area-must-shelter-in-place-Only-15135014.php?t=ebc54dc680

---

"The order falls just short of a full lockdown, which would forbid people from leaving their homes without explicit permission, and it wasn't immediately clear how, or to what degree, it would be enforced. The order calls for the sheriff or chief of police to "ensure compliance." In Italy and other places that have instituted lockdowns, travel outside the home has been restricted without permission and police have been ordering people back home if they don't have a reason to be in public."

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Edit: Estimates are that 4M Americans will be infected by May. If about 1% of them die (10 times the regular rate of the common flu, which seems reasonable as mortality rates will decrease as testing increases) that means 40,000 deaths. That is about the same as a bad "regular" flu season and yet people don't go batshizznit crazy every flu season. The press likes to repeat things like: "Every hospital bed will be filled by May" or "There won't be enough ventilators" (which are both probably true and what the ER doctor quoted was alluding to) but those sorts of statements are meant to garner headlines. All they do is illicit panic. People are hyperaware. People are taking precautions. That's good. Scaring people for ratings isn't.

---

Well, let me ask you this: once all major sports leagues were basically shuttered because of this disease, how exactly was that not going to set off some level of panic? Do you disagree with decisions like that? Or decisions made by cities and states to cancel all events over a certain size?

Sure, "the press" might run some sensationalized stories here and there, but it seems to me that some of this panic is just a natural byproduct of necessary steps that have been taken to slow the spread of disease.

---

I think it should be up to the leagues and their employees. If they decide to do so then I support that. Professional athletes travel more and are exposed to more people than the average person. In addition, their health is an extremely important facet of their career and their value to their employers. If they are sick then the product will suffer. However, I will be extremely surprised if a single professional athlete dies as a result of this virus. We should not compare ourselves to major sports leagues.

Do I agree with the decisions to cancel all events over a certain size...? Hmmm. Let me put it this way. I wouldn't be going to Coachella right now, but I am not exactly quaking in my boots about visiting to my local brewpub let alone a winery. However, I am under 50 and have a decent immune system. I always use hand sanitizer religiously - so much so that I my biggest fear is that I won't be able to buy more when I finally run out because of all of the idiots out there who are hoarding it thanks to the media. At least I happen to have enough toilet paper for now.

At the moment I am genuinely more concerned about running out of food than I am about the coronavirus. I am the type that shops frequently for fresh food (I don't eat a lot of frozen or canned food) and grocery stores are starting to run out of staples like (as mentioned) chicken and even rice (!). Only the expensive foods like steak are still on the shelves. I joke frequently with my significant other than if this keeps up we will be forced (luckily we are blessed with the income) to be eating lobster or swordfish every day until the pandemic ends. Perhaps it will bankrupt us in the process. I am, however, enjoying the traffic. All of the freeways in LA are wide open for the first time since the 1984 Olympics. It's great to be able to go 80 again!

---

God it's refreshing to read a sensible post on this topic.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

Professor Harry Edwards said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Professor Harry Edwards said:

---

LOL at people talking about flattening the curve. Really, just LOL at every last one of them. It's already too late. This virus was active and spreading long before everybody decided to panic about it.

You are just going to have to ride it out. It's going to get worse and even if every single person stayed home and never left the house once (wholly unrealistic), it's still going to get a lot worse. Accept it as the new reality and find ways to deal with it the best that you can.

---

So is your suggestion that these isolation measures are pointless and would have no effect, despite what virtually every expert says? I'm confused as to your point.

---

Isolate to your heart's content. The number of infected is going to grow exponentially anyway. The time for slowing the disease was after the first positive test in the country. It's already much too late for that now.

---

Your original post that sycasey had questions about was a lot better. Yes, the time may have been earlier but I cannot agree that isolation is too late now. That alternative will lead to Italy like results. Late or not, do as much as possible to minimize.

---

God how I wish people like you would just STFU. You can't even read plain English. I'm not advocating that people don't isolate.

LudwigsFountain said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

This FT page is really good for tracking the epidemic across the world:

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

Here is the current snapshot, it shows that the progress in Spain, the latest country to be hit, has been faster than in countries hit earlier:



I think the lower path in the US is a reflection of the lack of testing, we're probably closer to the path in Spain or Italy. Iran and possibly Japan might have been reporting lower numbers than the actual count.

This chart uses n=100 as the reference point:

---

This is probably a stupid question, but you seem so well informed I thought I'd go ahead and ask. Why are the data presented absolute numbers and not percentages of the total population? If two countries level off (if that's the right term) at the same absolute number of cases doesn't that mean that the country with the larger population experienced a less severe penetration?

Anyway, thanks for posting all this.

---

It's actually a good question but not that easy to explain the answer, here's my stab:

Early on, the epidemic spreads regionally/locally, so only absolute numbers will give you the real picture of infection dynamics in each country.

Also given the geometric/exponential nature of the epidemic, the size of the country doesn't matter much, the growth patterns will tend to look similar when viewed on the logarithmic scale, so it's useful to look at absolute numbers across different countries as opposed to scaling them up or down according to their relative population size.

https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1239626809865416704?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Cal88 said:

---

LudwigsFountain said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

This FT page is really good for tracking the epidemic across the world:

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

Here is the current snapshot, it shows that the progress in Spain, the latest country to be hit, has been faster than in countries hit earlier:



I think the lower path in the US is a reflection of the lack of testing, we're probably closer to the path in Spain or Italy. Iran and possibly Japan might have been reporting lower numbers than the actual count.

This chart uses n=100 as the reference point:

---

This is probably a stupid question, but you seem so well informed I thought I'd go ahead and ask. Why are the data presented absolute numbers and not percentages of the total population? If two countries level off (if that's the right term) at the same absolute number of cases doesn't that mean that the country with the larger population experienced a less severe penetration?

Anyway, thanks for posting all this.

---

It's actually a good question but not that easy to explain the answer, here's my stab:

Early on, the epidemic spreads regionally/locally, so only absolute numbers will give you the real picture of infection dynamics in each country.

Also given the geometric/exponential nature of the epidemic, the size of the country doesn't matter much, the growth patterns will tend to look similar when viewed on the logarithmic scale, so it's useful to look at absolute numbers across different countries as opposed to scaling them up or down according to their relative population size.

---

Thanks. Now that I think about it that makes perfect sense. Although I'd think the most useful comparison would be tracking the percentage change in cases each day. That is, 1100 cases today vs 1000 yesterday gives us 1.1 for today. That would eliminate the need for a log scale. (I think; been a long time since my last math class)

Good freaking lord, UK.

Sorry. I couldn't find the "Official BI apolitical tacos COVID-19 Thread"

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Good freaking lord, UK.

---

Good to know that our government has at least avoided last place in the competence games.

Cal88 said:

---

This FT page is really good for tracking the epidemic across the world:

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

Here is the current snapshot, it shows that the progress in Spain, the latest country to be hit, has been faster than in countries hit earlier:



I think the lower path in the US is a reflection of the lack of testing, we're probably closer to the path in Spain or Italy. Iran and possibly Japan might have been reporting lower numbers than the actual count.

This chart uses n=100 as the reference point:

---

I don't know if Singapore and Hong Kong really belong on that chart. They are both cities-states, and its far easier to implement new policy on a city-state than an entire country. Basically, I don't think its an apples to apples comparison.

I think the charts for HK and Singapore mirror those from most Chinese regions outside of Hubei, megacities like Shanghai, Guangdong, Beijing etc, cities and regions with populations bigger than CA's or NY's.

It's also much more of a challenge to clamp down on an epidemic in large, incredibly dense cities like HK or Shanghai that really heavily on crowded public transit than in rural areas and small towns, or even sprawly big cities like Houston or Atlanta. I think you have to give them tons of credit for having done that very well so far.

It's a combination of good policy, social cohesion, civic duty, and in mainland China where that sense of civic duty isn't as honed as in HK or Singapore, a good measure of authoritarianism.

sycasey said:

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Good freaking lord, UK.

---

Good to know that our government has at least avoided last place in the competence games.

---

Johnson is guilty of criminal neglect. It's not all on him, but also on his advisors whose philosophy boils down to "you have to burn the village to save it".

Watch this stunning debate between one of these NHS expert advisors and Tomas Pueyo, the French Silicone Valley author of that great Medium article on flattening the curve:

Cal88 said:

---

---

Starting at 12:15, if you play without the sound you can imagine that the guy in the studio is arguing that Holmoe should get a new five-year contract and the guy on the monitor is saying dude, do you realize how overwhelmed Bay Area hospitals would be?!

It's really sad that people are winging it with decisions that impact hundreds of thousands of lives. It's senseless and shameful and I hope that the world learns a lesson from this pandemic.

Findings by researchers at Columbia University.

"Stealth Transmission' Fuels Fast Spread of Coronavirus Outbreak."

"Undetected cases, many of which were likely not severely symptomatic, were largely responsible for the rapid spread of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, according to new research by scientists at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. The findings based on a computer model of the outbreak are published online in the journal Science."

https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/stealth-transmission-fuels-fast-spread-coronavirus-outbreak

bearister said:

---

---

It wasn't him, it was one of his fake Twitter accounts

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

---

Once they get to a certain age where they can comprehend the demand (2-3 years old), it is healthy for them to know they can't just force the world around them to stop and acknowledge their every desire. For instance, we all know that parent who will let their kid interrupt them for ANY reason. This just terrible behavior-setting.

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

---

Once they get to a certain age where they can comprehend the demand (2-3 years old), it is healthy for them to know they can't just force the world around them to stop and acknowledge their every desire. For instance, we all know that parent who will let their kid interrupt them for ANY reason. This just terrible behavior-setting.

---

How old are your kids now?

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

---

Once they get to a certain age where they can comprehend the demand (2-3 years old), it is healthy for them to know they can't just force the world around them to stop and acknowledge their every desire. For instance, we all know that parent who will let their kid interrupt them for ANY reason. This just terrible behavior-setting.

---

How old are your kids now?

---

Do you disagree? Are you the parent who lets their children run the household?

I think this is heading to a monstrous generational gap. Can we move it to Off Topic? Whoops, we are there.

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

---

Once they get to a certain age where they can comprehend the demand (2-3 years old), it is healthy for them to know they can't just force the world around them to stop and acknowledge their every desire. For instance, we all know that parent who will let their kid interrupt them for ANY reason. This just terrible behavior-setting.

---

How old are your kids now?

---

Do you disagree? Are you the parent who lets their children run the household?

---

I think this kind of approach wouldn't work on my 4 year old autistic son, but I'm curious as to your experience.

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

What a coward. Parents -- grow a pair and tell your kids to leave you alone. They're not the center of the universe. If you tell them that for the next few hours they need to act like you don't exist, tell will understand and learn to accept it. They will be better, well-adjusted kids, adolescents, adults and so on....

---

Is that what you did with your kids?

---

Once they get to a certain age where they can comprehend the demand (2-3 years old), it is healthy for them to know they can't just force the world around them to stop and acknowledge their every desire. For instance, we all know that parent who will let their kid interrupt them for ANY reason. This just terrible behavior-setting.

---

How old are your kids now?

---

Do you disagree? Are you the parent who lets their children run the household?

---

I think this kind of approach wouldn't work on my 4 year old autistic son, but I'm curious as to your experience.

---

My experience is it works. Kids that age want to listen and heed their parents direction (assuming a trust and bond has occurred). Obviously autism is a variable that can shift this priority. But I also find parents use it as a crutch because, understandably, it breaks their heart.

CA schools likely out until fall.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/education/article/California-governor-Most-schools-likely-out-15138882.php

Yikes, I know Newsom is just being realistic. I mean, what are the chances we would be able to reopen the schools again after three weeks, but good God, what are working parents going to do?!?

I really enjoyed this article by a Cal author:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/coronavirus-crowds-dumb-not-brave.html

golden sloth said:

---

Big C said:

---

Yikes, I know Newsom is just being realistic. I mean, what are the chances we would be able to reopen the schools again after three weeks, but good God, what are working parents going to do?!?

---

I have heard that social distancing requirements may need to be in place for over a year (I acknowledge that is an extreme case), and I dont know if that means we just dont shake hands or if everyone works from home. If it entails a lockdown like the one we are under now, we have to ask ourselves if the side effects are worth it. Is preventing the spread of the disease worth having 20% unemployment, is it worth not educating our kids, and is it worth everyone not having a social life or enjoying life? I think everyone understands it's worth it for a few weeks, but if it starts getting up around a year, we have some tough questions to ask as a society.

---

This is the article that talks about this going on for a year or more:

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2020/3/17/21181694/coronavirus-covid-19-lockdowns-end-how-long-months-years

These articles lay out what I think is coming.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-16/coronavirus-foreshadow-s-bigger-disruptions-in-future
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-17/coronavirus-will-revive-an-all-powerful-state

Basically, with so many aspects of our lives falling apart, the government will have to step up and take care of its citizens. In the US, if Trump and the GOP are not willing to do that, they will swiftly be replaced by leaders who are. As is noted in those articles, this has certainly happened before. It can go well (New Deal) or badly (European Fascism). But we're entering a new era of heavy state intervention.