What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic entail?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby JackRiddler » Fri Apr 10, 2020 8:43 pm

He doesn't doubt that it's a flu-type disease that develops as described.

Otherwise, you'd have to listen to the fellow.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15057
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Apr 12, 2020 4:35 pm

Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 10:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.

“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”

Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.



Thanks for this. I don't understand why I should disagree this guy. Can somebody tell me why?
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Apr 12, 2020 4:44 pm

Definitively reliable data on actual death rates from C19 infection might tell you why, but that has yet to arrive. It's why I prefer Ioannides's more hedged version for the moment.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15057
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Apr 12, 2020 6:58 pm

JackRiddler » 12 Apr 2020 20:44 wrote:Definitively reliable data on actual death rates from C19 infection might tell you why, but that has yet to arrive. It's why I prefer Ioannides's more hedged version for the moment.


I have been playing thought experiments both ways (actual deadly threat vs. purposefully overblown somewhat more deadly flu "threat") since this crisis began.

Either way, the current "response" -- hide yourself inside indefinitely (or else!) while we effectively do nothing to increase our capacity to handle a respiratory pandemic -- doesn't add up.

Were our current situation actually so deadly, wouldn't rich and powerful people would be demanding that we implement steps to mitigate this pandemic (as well as future pandemics) beyond hide yourselves inside indefinitely or else?
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Apr 14, 2020 4:06 am

stickdog99 » 13 Apr 2020 08:58 wrote:
JackRiddler » 12 Apr 2020 20:44 wrote:Definitively reliable data on actual death rates from C19 infection might tell you why, but that has yet to arrive. It's why I prefer Ioannides's more hedged version for the moment.


I have been playing thought experiments both ways (actual d[vimeo][/vimeo]eadly threat vs. purposefully overblown somewhat more deadly flu "threat") since this crisis began.

Either way, the current "response" -- hide yourself inside indefinitely (or else!) while we effectively do nothing to increase our capacity to handle a respiratory pandemic -- doesn't add up.

Were our current situation actually so deadly, wouldn't rich and powerful people would be demanWding that we implement steps to mitigate this pandemic (as well as future pandemics) beyond hide yourselves inside indefinitely or else?

In Australia it appears obvious the "hide yourself away" option is working for now. (And we aren't taking it that seriously. Going for walk is consideted an essential activity. You could have one mate round for beers, billies and video games but not two.) To the point when we stop is a genuine question now, and the six month time frame put on it beforehand is probably now one month.

We're a big island at the arse end of the world so that helps. It's hard for new cases to arrive and if we can track all cases and prevent spreading then the virus will be dead here at a certain point. We effectively need zero cases, then two, maybe three weeks of absolute minimum interaction, with ongoing zero case rates or no new infections and its done.

The economy might be fucked but it was anyway and at least this way we have a chance to get some control back over it.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Apr 14, 2020 4:33 am

Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 20:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.

“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”

Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.


So Im four minutes into this and I have some issues with it. On one hand we should only lock the old and vulnerable away. We shouldn't lock down as it will extend the epidemic. Europe has locked down.

One the other hand the epidemic is over anyway.

That's a bit of a double bind.

Also ... We have experience with SARS and MERS, both coronaviruses. One has a 10% mortality rate, the other is over 36%.

We're expected to potentially wear that many deaths just to build herd immunity. We might not have a herd left. Furthermore this virus is far more infectious than either of those two. And people are infectious before they show symptoms.

It just strikes me that its a little bit blase considering no one really knows what they are draling with yet.

I'll watch some more. But before I do ... China and SKorea are reporting what seems to be a secondary wave of infections. So the epidemic isnt over and this wave seems to follow relaxing of the isolation and quarantine policies.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Apr 14, 2020 4:50 am

So I lasted another two minutes and he just seems to be talking shit. He doesn't take onto account the exponential rate of infection, just assumes it'll plateau where it is now. There's no where near enough testing in the US to have a clue what the real infection rates are and deaths at home are up by eight to ten times.

The us is testing with positive rates that are very high. Is most of the people tested have the virus. If you extrapolate that across the whole population then the numbers are extensive.

I'm not really prepared to waste any more time on this video because of that. It's either sloppy or deliberately misleading.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby stickdog99 » Tue Apr 14, 2020 2:54 pm

Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:33 wrote:
Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 20:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.

“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”

Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.


So Im four minutes into this and I have some issues with it. On one hand we should only lock the old and vulnerable away. We shouldn't lock down as it will extend the epidemic. Europe has locked down.

One the other hand the epidemic is over anyway.

That's a bit of a double bind.

Also ... We have experience with SARS and MERS, both coronaviruses. One has a 10% mortality rate, the other is over 36%.

We're expected to potentially wear that many deaths just to build herd immunity. We might not have a herd left. Furthermore this virus is far more infectious than either of those two. And people are infectious before they show symptoms.

It just strikes me that its a little bit blase considering no one really knows what they are draling with yet.

I'll watch some more. But before I do ... China and SKorea are reporting what seems to be a secondary wave of infections. So the epidemic isnt over and this wave seems to follow relaxing of the isolation and quarantine policies.


What did you expect? We cannot stop this virus from working its way through our populations. All social distancing can do is dampen and prolong the curve.
Last edited by stickdog99 on Tue Apr 14, 2020 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Grizzly » Tue Apr 14, 2020 3:04 pm

What dis you expect? We cannot stop this virus from working its way through our populations. All social distancing can do is dampen and prolong the curve.


Not only that, what if it's much much worse...
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=41979&p=686039#p686039
If Barthes can forgive me, “What the public wants is the image of passion Justice, not passion Justice itself.”
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 3003
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby stickdog99 » Tue Apr 14, 2020 3:06 pm

Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:50 wrote:So I lasted another two minutes and he just seems to be talking shit. He doesn't take onto account the exponential rate of infection, just assumes it'll plateau where it is now. There's no where near enough testing in the US to have a clue what the real infection rates are and deaths at home are up by eight to ten times.

The us is testing with positive rates that are very high. Is most of the people tested have the virus. If you extrapolate that across the whole population then the numbers are extensive.

I'm not really prepared to waste any more time on this video because of that. It's either sloppy or deliberately misleading.


You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what our current interventions can achieve at best, which is only to dampen the curve of infection so that our healthcare facilities are not overrun with so many victims at once that they cannot handle the load. The same number of people (billions) will be infected regardless over time. There is no intervention that can stop this from occurring.

Again, do you actually think that any intervention can stop this virus from infecting the vast majority of any population eventually? Even if we all hide in our homes until we are given forced vaccinations, the vaccine itself will be introducing the virus into us in some sort of attenuated form.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3731
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Apr 18, 2020 6:52 am

stickdog99 » 15 Apr 2020 05:06 wrote:
Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:50 wrote:So I lasted another two minutes and he just seems to be talking shit. He doesn't take onto account the exponential rate of infection, just assumes it'll plateau where it is now. There's no where near enough testing in the US to have a clue what the real infection rates are and deaths at home are up by eight to ten times.

The us is testing with positive rates that are very high. Is most of the people tested have the virus. If you extrapolate that across the whole population then the numbers are extensive.

I'm not really prepared to waste any more time on this video because of that. It's either sloppy or deliberately misleading.


You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what our current interventions can achieve at best, which is only to dampen the curve of infection so that our healthcare facilities are not overrun with so many victims at once that they cannot handle the load. The same number of people (billions) will be infected regardless over time. There is no intervention that can stop this from occurring.

Again, do you actually think that any intervention can stop this virus from infecting the vast majority of any population eventually? Even if we all hide in our homes until we are given forced vaccinations, the vaccine itself will be introducing the virus into us in some sort of attenuated form.


Well actually... Islands that can close their borders, well anywhere that can successfully close their borders can. Three or four week full lockdown will see the virus unable to spread and then a full border closure could work.

Anyway we all understand what flattening the curve is and in Australia most people are happy to do it cos we all know vulnerable people and the economy doesn't belong to us anyway.

No doubt that will change after a few more weeks with less than 50 new infections per day.

The level of callousness required to let this virus run it's course without trying something doesn't sit well with a lot of us and that is fine by me.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Apr 18, 2020 7:04 am

There also seems to be a relationship between the infectious dose and the severity of infection. The more severe the infection the more severe the viral load and the greater the rate of spread. As well as the greater your chance of being seriously Ill. But also the higher the infectious dose that is in the environment can be. Which means more severe cases as well.

Population density probably increases potential infectious dose as well.

Add this to the density of sick people in hospitals and you can see the risk increase for health workers but also supermarket workers (or anyone else if society is still functioning.)

Whatever happens its gonna be shit.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby 0_0 » Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:49 am

Hey Joe, I understand you're in Australia and that Australia is in lockdown. Can you explain to me what the plan is exactly? Are you guys going to stay in lockdown until the virus has left Australia? And what then? Are you going to hermetically seal your continent with no incoming tourists or goods allowed ever? Or are you guys waiting for bloodtests for everyone wanting to travel, track and trace devices for the whole population and/or mass vaccination? I am genuinely curious.
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:35 pm

0_0 » 18 Apr 2020 22:49 wrote:Hey Joe, I understand you're in Australia and that Australia is in lockdown. Can you explain to me what the plan is exactly? Are you guys going to stay in lockdown until the virus has left Australia? And what then? Are you going to hermetically seal your continent with no incoming tourists or goods allowed ever? Or are you guys waiting for bloodtests for everyone wanting to travel, track and trace devices for the whole population and/or mass vaccination? I am genuinely curious.


No one knows what the plan is.

Right now state borders are closed for the first time since the Spanish Flu pandemic.

The lockdown essentially means no public gatherings or non essential activity. So buying beer is okay. Or other supplies. There are gathering limits of two people (except in one household obviously) indooors or out except for essential activity. Playing Golf is okay in NSW but not in Victoria. Everyone is allowed to walk themselves or animals if they claim its for exercise.

Different states have different rules, different plans for exiting lockdown etc etc.

Its school holidays as well.

As usual its a bit chaotic and unorganised.

Because our transmission rates are dropping off a cliff for nearly two weeks now and hospital admissions from untraced sources are very low there is genuine feeling it isn't widespread through the community.

The plan is over the next four weeks restrictions will start to lift progressively. So indoor meetings to five then ten, outdoor ones to ten then fifty. Mass gatherings like footy or music festivals may be years away. This is obviously dependent on keeping our infection rates low and traceable transmission, but it is being talked about as a probable outcome.

If rates stay low till the end of April of mid May the restrictions will begin to ease.

At this point the state govs have ruled out using tracking software on smart phones, due to public objections, but that may change if people get jack of lockdowns.

The border is open to goods but they are sterilized and quarantined. We are still exporting too. Its closed to non Australians and all other entries (Australians returning home of international transport crews with temporary stays ) are quarantined for 14 days if they are Australian or until they leave in their plane or ship.

Dunno what will happen with essential foreign workers but i imagine that will mostly be around fire fighting activities if we have another shit fire season. Maybe some form of isolation of quarantine if we need it.

I think New Zealand is pretty much the same.

Were not expecting any form of vaccination for at least a year. Maybe never. Corona viruses are notoriously hard to develop vaccines for.

If treatments - say with anti virals, convalescent plasma or other sources - become available we may push for deliberate exposures among controlled groups to develop herd immunity.

Otherwise who knows what the long term holds.
Plagues have historically changed the world in unpredictable ways. Dunno why this would be different.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What would a rational response to a deadly pandemic enta

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:15 am

stickdog99 » Sun Apr 12, 2020 3:35 pm wrote:
Thanks for this. I don't understand why I should disagree this guy. Can somebody tell me why?


Agree x Disagree is a pretty weak paradigm for uncertain times.

But, it's worth considering that "herd immunity" isn't an option with this. That's essentially a bet that this is a naturally occurring, "zoonotic" coronavirus, right? That just happened to emerge within a few miles of the only Level 4 lab in China. Which just happened to be working on coronavirus variants since they opened. To me, that seems like a coin toss right now. I am also a fucking idiot, though, so factor that detail into all of my wagers.

Testing is still a chaotic, inconsistent and often ineffective pipeline and there have been persistent "reinfection" reports in multiple countries (10+ so far). Either way, there is definitely a second wave incoming and that is where the real demand for "one world government" solutions will be begin, both in the press and in the general population.

The problem is coordination. There is none and none is possible without radical, global changes. Meanwhile, nobody in power will want to admit -- perhaps not even to themselves -- how bad this really is. The pressure to pretend things are, Walt Kelly style, "Fine, Jes' Fine" will be just as merciless in the US and EU as they were in "communist" China. That can only last so long in the face of reality, but the denial phase will be ugly & dumb.

Vaccines and treatments that do not work will be hailed as saviors. (We saw this dynamic already with HIV and Tamiflu.) nCoV deaths will get pushed into other categories. (This is why 'mortalities over expectations' has been a more valuable and reliable metric than the testing of corpses in overwhelmed ERs.)

Personally, I don't see a globalist solution coming, the fault lines are already too clear. For all the rhetoric about Coming Together, everyone knows where they're located on the totem pole. I'm sure Bill Gates and his Rockefeller Boys will have many moments in the sun in the months to come, but those will be photo opportunities. Solutions will be regional and those alliances will forecast the borders to come.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10572
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 20 guests