You cannot, a partial lifting of restriction will increase infections, and we still don't know you cannot be reinfected, or that the virus cannot mutate into a second wave.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
You cannot, a partial lifting of restriction will increase infections, and we still don't know you cannot be reinfected, or that the virus cannot mutate into a second wave.
I mean, you can have a partial lifting after cases have died down, you'll probably have to shut down again eventually, but it would stretch things out and minimize deaths. Restarting exponential growth from 1 with restrictions making the spread rate slower is preferable to doing it when you have hundreds of thousands of active cases spreading things around.
Problem is some people seem to want to have a partial lifting while countries are still near/at peak.
There is no reason to believe that antibodies do not prevent reinfection, that is a myth. The WHO has absolutely been bungling their messaging that has led to misleading headlines, it's been embarrassing. Early studies are showing that reinfection rates are virtually nonexistent.
Revealing S. Korean studies show antibodies could thwart COVID-19 reinfection, spread
Results from two new South Korean studies shed light on whether antibodies will be a reliable form of protection against COVID-19 for those who have recovered.
abcnews.go.com
It also looks as though the mutation rate of the virus is significantly slower than the flu.
Coronavirus seems to mutate much slower than seasonal flu
That could be good news for a vaccine.
www.livescience.com
It's an almost impossible problem honesty given how different places are at different stages of the pandemic and have different legal jurisdictions. Edging to the limit of what you can handle in terms of sick people seems irreducibly complex.
There is no reason to believe that antibodies do not prevent reinfection, that is a myth. The WHO has absolutely been bungling their messaging that has led to misleading headlines, it's been embarrassing. Early studies are showing that reinfection rates are virtually nonexistent.
Revealing S. Korean studies show antibodies could thwart COVID-19 reinfection, spread
Results from two new South Korean studies shed light on whether antibodies will be a reliable form of protection against COVID-19 for those who have recovered.
It also looks as though the mutation rate of the virus is significantly slower than the flu.
Coronavirus seems to mutate much slower than seasonal flu
That could be good news for a vaccine.
Read your first source;
We only know short term immunity. Enough time hasn't passed to make judgments on medium to long term.
You didn't read the second source did you? While it's impossible to predict with 100% certainty, the mutation rate of the virus is an extremely strong indication that immunity will be longer than the flu, as that's the most important factor in long-term immunity.
The theory it only mutates half as fast as the flu doesn't alleviate the issue that we don't know if we will have a vaccine before a second wave.
two weeks are up for Easter Sunday people so if it's been in incubation they'll experience it this week
or was the incubation period changed to 2-3 weeks before you experience Covid-19?
In stores people have masks but outside its half with masks and half no masks, the runners and bikers especially
that's the worse thing
That doesn't speak to length of immunity, it speaks to whether or not a vaccine will be the end of it. Length of immunity is how long the memory cells which have the blueprint for antibodies last, which is predicated more on how many memory cells are produced in reaction to the virus, which can vary massively from virus to virus.
Probably a minimum of a year, though.
U.S. had its worse day ever in terms of cases and deaths on friday and second worst on saturday, so that'd be the easter effect. We'll also have several more effects built up. Sunday was a huge downturn in deaths, but pretty average in cases.
17k people dying in 6 weeks and mass graves of unidentified bodies and refrigerated semi trailers for bodies and massive lines at hospitals is a healthcare system holding up?
It feels like we have a pretty decent blueprint for how we can tackle the virus and how we may have to live and adjust until a vaccine is available (social distancing + test/trace/quarantine + potential future lockdowns if additional waves stress healthcare capacity), but I've heard barely any political leaders talk about this. It's maddening.
There should hopefully, be good treatments for the virus long before we get a vaccine so frankly, I find the "lockdowns are unsustainable, we can't wait until there's a vaccine" to not hold very much water. Georgia and Florida style re-openings will destroy the U.S. healthcare system, and frankly re-opening prematurely isn't going to really save the economy.
People need to accept the reality that we are going to probably be in an economic depression, regardless of if we stay locked down or not. The question is, do we want to play with people's lives and force the gears of the economy to start moving again, only to make our worst case scenario a reality, and in doing so make everything worse in the process or not. Unfortunately it appears that some red states have gone with the former.
Talks of re-openings, partial or otherwise, are dangerous right now, and assumes we're past the worst case scenario when the worst case scenario is still alive and well.
People need to accept the reality that we are going to probably be in an economic depression, regardless of if we stay locked down or not. The question is, do we want to play with people's lives and force the gears of the economy to start moving again, only to make our worst case scenario a reality, and in doing so make everything worse in the process or not. Unfortunately it appears that some red states have gone with the former.
Talks of re-openings, partial or otherwise, are dangerous right now, and assumes we're past the worst case scenario when the worst case scenario is still alive and well.
This isn't a total lockdown anywhere and the end game is
1) much more expansive testing
2) continued social distancing and not just ripping the band-aid off the current measures in place but slow adjustments that allow non-essential businesses to reopen
3) as new cases drop towards zero implementhing thorough contact tracing of confirmed cases
4) required mask use in public and the mask production to meet that requirement
5) large scale screening operations at airports/other transit centers, office buildings, manufacturing plants, etc
The end game is not having hundreds of thousands of people needlessly die by taking the necessary precautions to properly reopen economic sectors that are currently limited/shut down.
All of the above isn't unrealistic.
User Banned (1 Day): Inflammatory Generalizations
I may be convinced that some people in Era love this shit because they are miserable introverts that love it when regular people are stuck in their house without human contact. They keep perpetuating this doom and gloom so they can feel better about themselves being shut in hermits
I think it's just that people are rightfully concerned about the prospect of lifting the restrictions currently in place too soon which will just end up being worse for everyone, extroverts included. It's ok for people to have concerns about how and when the restrictions in place will be lifted.
I'm also not aware of any restrictions in even one state that bar you from leaving your house or having human contact (unless you literally mean physically touching non-household members by human contact). Even then there aren't any actual restrictions on that that I'm aware of. The main concern is larger amounts of people in public places, office buildings, restaurants, etc. That's where the big spread vector is.
Feel the same. My mental health has gone to shit during quarantine.
I do apologize for the generalization
I just set up a zoom bday party for my wife and I just felt like fuck is this what we have to look forward to for the near future??! Fuck me
I just set up a zoom bday party for my wife and I just felt like fuck is this what we have to look forward to for the near future??! Fuck me
User Banned (3 Days): Inflammatory Generalizations; Accumulated Infractions
When the circle jerks about southerns possibly getting it worse or a terrible second wave start in this thread, I'm reminded of a post that I once read about how Era naturally attracts lonely and pessimistic people without much socializing, and to consider that their lens skews this forum's perception of things.
it is important in these trying times to consider that people have mental health needs and many are isolated from their support systems
not everyone is privileged enough to be able to ride out a several month lockdown, and while this obviously does not mean we can drop every single precaution, there is a sustainable way forward that both minimizes risk of the virus without requiring total isolation and an ensuing economic crash, which would disproportionately effect marginalized people
a nice first step would probably be for people to stop saying "nothing will ever be the same again" as if this was the first pandemic in history - you're free to think that if you'd like, but maybe practice empathy before posting it where others can see it
not everyone is privileged enough to be able to ride out a several month lockdown, and while this obviously does not mean we can drop every single precaution, there is a sustainable way forward that both minimizes risk of the virus without requiring total isolation and an ensuing economic crash, which would disproportionately effect marginalized people
a nice first step would probably be for people to stop saying "nothing will ever be the same again" as if this was the first pandemic in history - you're free to think that if you'd like, but maybe practice empathy before posting it where others can see it
I definitely agree that we need to start looking forward to how we're going ease restrictions and minimize the impact on society whilst we wait for a vaccine. It's also important that we have a good discussion about when the time is right to do that. In some places it makes sense to start easing restrictions but in others IMO it's way too early and not enough thought seems to have been put into the right way to move forward. Time will tell i guess. Hopefully we don't see another new wave of deaths as a result.
What exactly does this mean? If you count beds lining corridors filled with ventilated patients, overflowing morgues leading to mass graves and refrigerated trucks storing dead bodies and scores of healthcare workers getting sick and struggling to cope with the hordes of critical patients as holding up then sure. As a health care worker this part of your post is laughable, hospitals in NYC were crushed under the weight of covid patients as has been the case with many other health care systems around the world. Attempting to downplay that impact does your argument no favours.
What exactly does this mean? If you count beds lining corridors filled with ventilated patients, overflowing morgues leading to mass graves and refrigerated trucks storing dead bodies and scores of healthcare workers getting sick and struggling to cope with the hordes of critical patients as holding up then sure. As a health care worker this part of your post is laughable, hospitals in NYC were crushed under the weight of covid patients as has been the case with many other health care systems around the world. Attempting to downplay that impact does your argument no favours.
The health system only "held up" because we shut the entire fucking city down. If we had gone another 2 weeks without shutting down, hospitals would have absolutely been over run.
And while yes, it held up in the sense that people weren't dying in the streets, we didn't have enough PPE for doctors and nurses, and couldn't handle the influx of bodies to point where we needed refrigerated morgues outside of some hospitals.
Obviously the exact definition of "holding up" is up to interpretation, but yes I'd say so. There was a massive concern that we'd run out of ventilators and ICU beds which has not happened. The health care system in NYC has been massively stressed, there's no doubt, but it has not collapsed.
Yes but the virus potentially infected over 20% of the entire city in a matter of a month or so with zero restrictions. There is no way in hell that we're going to allow that level of spread with a measured and limited opening up of society.
Last edited:
I think it's unrealistic to expect that we're not going to see new waves of infection. I agree that opening up with limitations in place will ensure that we don't see an unsustainable, rapid spread of the virus, but unless we stay completely locked up we're going to keep seeing wave after wave of new infections.
My position is that the goal shouldn't be containment (i.e. near zero infections/deaths for 2+ years), but a measured exposure of the virus to the healthy/young portion of our population that will ensure that our healthcare resources aren't over strained while still allowing some herd immunity to build up. It's just unrealistic to expect containment without a full-scale lockdown.
Well both play a role for sure, but yes most virologists that I've seen interviewed say that a year should be expected at minimum. What they have said though is that generally the harsher the disease, the more lasting the effect on the immune system's memory, so there's definitely reason to believe that we'll probably see a longer immunity period than the flu's one year period.
Sorry if this is a dumb or insensitive question, but I have been basically quarantined since March 13 in the US after my company said work from home (I haven't gone anywhere besides Walmart grocery pickup). My parents age 65+ also stopped going anywhere since that date, and have gotten Walmart grocery pickup a couple times since then. Would it be safe for me to visit them just in their backyard for an hour or so, if we still have social distancing? I am worried about them, not me. I just want to be as safe as possible, but at the same time, it used to be 6 feet of social distancing, and now all of a sudden it's 30 feet or whatever.
I'm in Southern California, Anaheim to be exact.
I see people mingling and without masks every single day. I saw it in my hotel this morning, 3 people in a row, *one of whom was custodial staff going into renters' rooms with no mask on*.
The longer this goes on with people downplaying the danger, the more people will die.
Most estimates are the vaccine is 12-18 months away though. You see the problem here right?
They did run out of Ventilators and ICU beds. Or did you just ignore Coumo asking for help all the time? They got some ventilators from the feds, and got loan some from other states. If they had more, the death toll would have been less. This whole revisionist view is why the US is doing so fucking poorly. The same fucking thing with the masks. Oh no we didn't need it, when all the countries that did well in Asia has a common practice of wearing masks in outside.
Its not about being pessimistic, it's about being proactive and careful. People seeing 55K death and almost 1M cases as somehow it's not so bad haven't been paying attention all this time. Yes we should have plan to start getting the economy back, but only when things are under control.
In VA, it's Stay At Home till June 10th. Phase 1 only start when the state see a reduction in percentage over 14 days. Unlike GA where numbers still going up and down. It's not about having a lockdown for a year. The whole point of all the lockdown is to minimize deaths and allow the medical system to be prepare for the next waves. Without the supplies and whatnot, opening early will only cause things to spike up again.
As long as you keep about 6 feet away you should be fine
The keyword in his statement should be "at minimum" in regards to their estimates. We don't know exactly how long the vaccine will take, that 12-18 month estimate is for mass production of vaccines. Mass production earlier would of course be better, but producing enough to help out the frontline and essential people, and then dispersing it down from there to high risk, medium risk, then low risk, is all it will take. In the meantime, we still have plasma treatments that so far have been very successful, that if people consistently donate, which I intend to twice a week should I get the virus, there will be mass amount of plasma to be used to be able to get by and help the ones who desperately need it most.
Sure, a 12-18 month timeframe when we do not know how long immunity lasts is something to look at, but within that 12-18 month timeframe, we will come up with ways to fight this, or at least disperse a vaccine out to a good amount of people to at least stem a future outbreak.
Yes but vaccine estimates I mention are also minimums too. I saw an interview with Bill Gates yesterday where he predicted 18 months optimistically but said it could also be 24 months or longer.
That estimate is extremely optimistic to say the least; the fastest that a vaccine has ever been developed is four years. There's really no history or precedent to believe we're capable of developing and mass producing this vaccine within that time period.
It was one I saw Bill Gates make with the caveat that yes, it was pretty optimistic and could take longer.
yeah, we don't want to make a vaccine that makes everybody develop a multiple sclerosis ... it takes time to assert innocuity .
No there were no actual shortages, there is no revisionism going on. There were predictions and concerns that there would be shortages, but it never actually happened. New York state stockpiles ended up being enough in the end.
This really is beside the point though. My original reason for bringing this up was because I was pointing out that if NYC's health care system managed to hold up after 20% of the entire city was infected within a month or so, which is unbelievably fast, there's no reason to believe that a much slower and measured exposure over a longer period of time (which is what will inevitably start to happen as restrictions are lifted) would be insurmountable.
I remember all the folks telling us Debbie Downers off when this all started that it's overblown etc. If this pandemic has taught us anything, being overcautious is key. Treat it like everyone you see is a carrier and that you might be carrying it too. We have to continue to listen to the medical experts. Physical touching is off the table. This entire thing sucks. It really does, but this is a once in a lifetime event (hopefully) if the entire world plays its cards right. The old normal that we keep reaching for is not happening anytime soon thanks to the virus still going around wreaking havoc. The sooner we all accept this the faster (with less casualties) we get through this. I know so many frontline workers at their limits. If we get hit with the second wave, I really fear for the medical community.
That one "The mental health of this community" thread is all you need to know
We put people on the moon, condensed all of human knowledge into a pocket sized device, and also developed nuclear bombs, im sure a fast tracked vaccine can also be done if enough resources and brains are devoted to it. It's this century's biggest emergency (along with climate change) and it's going to be solved because the global economy depends on it. Sad that that's what it takes but it is what it is- capitalism.
Anyway it's cool to be cynical and nihlistic for psudo intellectual brownie points on social media but what's cooler is to actually believe in your kind
Last edited:
The problem is we HAVE solutions, its just we aren't using them
Contact tracing is absolutely effective, as is social distancing, banning of large gatherings, mask wearing, etc
We could employ thousands to become contract tracers if the federal government would step up
We could make wearing a facial covering for going to public places indoors mandatory
We could re-open with capped restaurants, and still no concerts/sports/outdoor events/conventions/etc etc
But we don't seem to be doing any of that on a national scale
Very much where I'm at. I can sympathize with what people are going through, and I'm sure this has taken quite the toll on people's mental health, but just, being as cautious as humanly possible, is for the best right now.
there's also no precedent for.. a need for a vaccine for a virus of this magnitude. a vaccine taking 4 years for other viruses wasn't entirely just because it NEEDS 4 years, but rather without a massive amount of public health interest and money/resources, that's just how long it takes. when a virus like this one puts the entire world economy on it's knees, this isn't Ebola or SARS or Measles or even Polio, it's something way worse, to the point that economic interest alone becomes more valuable to spend whatever it takes as the cost otherwise would be far greater.
As one of the aforementioned weirdo introverts mentioned recently in this thread, I'd like to say that this echoes my thoughts well. Though I think it's a bit fascinating to see parts of society have to cope with things that I consider normal, I don't want people to suffer. Not physically, not emotionally, not financially. And, yeah, sadly I know countless people are suffering and it makes me feel like shit, too.
We have to follow the advice that, even if things suck right now, we're effectively investing in it sucking less later if we stick with it.
Irvine has been pretty good with wearing masks, I'd say about 70-80% of the people I see in stores wear them.
I agree that all of those things are reasonable and should be implemented. But it's not going to stop future waves of infections, just mitigate the velocity at which it's spread. There are people that are arguing complete containment is the only way forward, but that's unrealistic. Mitigation needs to be the strategy; containment until a vaccine is developed is unrealistic without a complete lock down.
I'm sure it's going to be expedited, but at the end of the day the timeline is still wishful thinking. All it takes is one serious side effect in a small number of people to derail a promising vaccine. I'm hoping for the best, but I don't think it makes sense to center our entire strategy going forward on the hope that a perfect, no faulty vaccine will be produced at mass scale within the optimistic timeline that's been thrown around.
The only reason why I brought this up originally was because there are people literally arguing to stay locked down until a vaccine is developed. Again, that's an unrealistic expectation and would be absolutely disastrous in so many respects.
A lockdown (which can vary in intensity ofc) can be used to achieve either. It's just a tool and not a strategy. You can either try to eliminate the virus in a certain region completely so it runs out of hosts or you can try to keep infections at a level that the public systems can cope with. In countries with well functioning systems the latter is preferable bc to eliminate the virus in the country you will need a complete lockdown and afterwards control borders diligantly in order to prevent new outbreaks. It seems India sort of tries this approach.
There is a big difference between being optimist and being not aware or even actively trying to ignore the situation.
Yes, a full lockdown is not the solution for the long term, but it is the solution until you get the infection rate down to a manageable value. And that value very much depends on the other measures each country (or state) is able to put in place to contain the spread going further. From that perspective there are countries who are ready to move forward and a lot more countries who are not there yet and relaxing the measures in the latter ones will make things worse pretty quickly.
What I find pretty rich is that it's usually the places where the lockdown was not that strict or not enforced properly that have the most people arguing for relaxing the measures and US and partially UK are at the front of that. And neither of them are ready for it yet. By having still a very high number of infections and not having the proper resources for proper containment (mass testing, screening, proper contact tracing).
Yes, a full lockdown is not the solution for the long term, but it is the solution until you get the infection rate down to a manageable value. And that value very much depends on the other measures each country (or state) is able to put in place to contain the spread going further. From that perspective there are countries who are ready to move forward and a lot more countries who are not there yet and relaxing the measures in the latter ones will make things worse pretty quickly.
What I find pretty rich is that it's usually the places where the lockdown was not that strict or not enforced properly that have the most people arguing for relaxing the measures and US and partially UK are at the front of that. And neither of them are ready for it yet. By having still a very high number of infections and not having the proper resources for proper containment (mass testing, screening, proper contact tracing).
In a week's time, early May, I'll see my parents and sister for the first time since February. We live 10-15 minutes apart, but only next week I'll be allowed to visit them.
Very good post. Sorry but I'm not getting killed for the economy.
