This Virus Is Wily

[Kathianne]

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2020/04/14/sweden-tops-1000-deaths-criticism-herd-immunity-strategy-grows/

Herd or not?

[SassyLady]

I'm starting to lean towards herd. Maybe less impact on economy and power grabs.


Sweden’s strategy is to accept a short, severe outbreak in lieu of a much longer but maybe not much less severe one. Picture that famous graph in your mind showing how to “flatten the curve”: Sweden’s making a conscious decision to follow the taller, thinner curve in lieu of the shorter, fatter one. They’re supposed to have a big spike in deaths early; that’ll pay off for them, in theory, with many fewer deaths long-term as other countries are consumed with fighting off large second, third, and fourth waves of the disease. *If* you think “flattening the curve” is a pure matter of protecting hospital capacity, with little effect in reducing the final death toll from the disease over time, then arguably it’s better to go Sweden’s route and get it over with. It’ll be gruesome for them, but it’ll be gruesome for us too. It’ll just take longer for us.

[FakeNewsSux]

The numbers out of California kind of bear out the herd immunity strategy. There were more folks traveling directly between China and California than any other state for months between the genesis of this virus until the travel ban. Having only started social distancing two days before New York, there has to be some reason COVID cases and deaths are both just a fraction of New York's with three times the population.

[Drummond]

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2020/04/14/sweden-tops-1000-deaths-criticism-herd-immunity-strategy-grows/

Herd or not?

As I believe you know, the UK Government started out with a belief in the herd immunity principle. Our scientists believed the principle was scientifically sound ... and, indeed, it is.

What we realised, though, was that in enacting it, society would have to suffer a great death toll before the principle properly took effect. Indeed, it'd be far too massive for any healthcare system to cope with.

That's quite apart from permitting the level of suffering, sheer anguish, that the society would go through in approaching the 'scientifically sound' level of survival and viable adaptability.

This has been my own Government's great strength, in my opinion ... sheer realism, and the adaptability coming from it, unencumbered by other factors. We saw the realities involved .. & changed our thinking accordingly. We now meet the Covid-19 threat with a 'real time' realisation of what's required.

[Drummond]

I'm starting to lean towards herd. Maybe less impact on economy and power grabs.

'Herd' has two very big drawbacks, though. One is that no imaginable healthcare system could possibly cope with the rate of illness and fatalities involved. The other is, I suggest, that the psychological suffering it'd create would throw up the danger of dealing a mortal blow to any society capable of cold-bloodedly applying the system.

Imagine all the families, grieving, who'd bitterly attack any authority whose belief in herd immunity led to an avoidable 'cull' of those loved ones killed by the policy.

Businesses would still suffer. Those dying might be vital to work and processes businesses rely upon for their operation. A breakdown in one industry could have a knock-on effect on another business, or business sector, reliant on the output of the industry suffering the breakdown .. creating a secondary breakdown.

Ideologically speaking, and given as accepted fact the truth of the far bigger death toll that the 'herd immunity' method would create ... how could any applier of it, EVER claim to value individual human life ??

I thought that a cornerstone of Conservative philosophy was to value the individual ??

Sacrificing 'the masses' to preferred dogma is more reminiscent of the Leftie way of doing things ... I suggest !

It'll be interesting to see how the Swedish experiment progresses.

[SassyLady]

'Herd' has two very big drawbacks, though. One is that no imaginable healthcare system could possibly cope with the rate of illness and fatalities involved. The other is, I suggest, that the psychological suffering it'd create would throw up the danger of dealing a mortal blow to any society capable of cold-bloodedly applying the system.

Imagine all the families, grieving, who'd bitterly attack any authority whose belief in herd immunity led to an avoidable 'cull' of those loved ones killed by the policy.

Businesses would still suffer. Those dying might be vital to work and processes businesses rely upon for their operation. A breakdown in one industry could have a knock-on effect on another business, or business sector, reliant on the output of the industry suffering the breakdown .. creating a secondary breakdown.

Ideologically speaking, and given as accepted fact the truth of the far bigger death toll that the 'herd immunity' method would create ... how could any applier of it, EVER claim to value individual human life ??

I thought that a cornerstone of Conservative philosophy was to value the individual ??

Sacrificing 'the masses' to preferred dogma is more reminiscent of the Leftie way of doing things ... I suggest !

It'll be interesting to see how the Swedish experiment progresses.

I, as an individual, have ability to make decision to isolate. Which I did, way before being ordered to do so by government.

Unfortunately, individuals have become so accustomed to only doing what government dictates.

[FakeNewsSux]

'Herd' has two very big drawbacks, though. One is that no imaginable healthcare system could possibly cope with the rate of illness and fatalities involved. The other is, I suggest, that the psychological suffering it'd create would throw up the danger of dealing a mortal blow to any society capable of cold-bloodedly applying the system.

Imagine all the families, grieving, who'd bitterly attack any authority whose belief in herd immunity led to an avoidable 'cull' of those loved ones killed by the policy.

Businesses would still suffer. Those dying might be vital to work and processes businesses rely upon for their operation. A breakdown in one industry could have a knock-on effect on another business, or business sector, reliant on the output of the industry suffering the breakdown .. creating a secondary breakdown.

Ideologically speaking, and given as accepted fact the truth of the far bigger death toll that the 'herd immunity' method would create ... how could any applier of it, EVER claim to value individual human life ??

I thought that a cornerstone of Conservative philosophy was to value the individual ??

Sacrificing 'the masses' to preferred dogma is more reminiscent of the Leftie way of doing things ... I suggest !

It'll be interesting to see how the Swedish experiment progresses.

As for the two major drawbacks:

Drawback #1 - Overwhelming the Healthcare System

A significant majority of people in this country were willing to give the people in charge the benefit of the doubt about an unknown public health emergency. They accepted the argument about the surge of cases overwhelming the healthcare system and agreed to a temporary shutdown to address the problem.

The initial estimates of 2.2million deaths and associated millions of hospital beds needed by Imperial College (no doubt graduates of East Anglia University's Climate Modeling Group) proved to totally decoupled from reality. Even the fifth revision of their best guess, 62,000 dead and a couple hundred thousand hospitalized is still on the high end according to latest data. Except for a few scattered hot spots around the country the system was never really stressed and even in those hot spots, most of the additional capacity went unused.

Now compare this situation with the last two flu seasons here in the US. Last year 60,000 flu deaths and 490,000 hospitalizations. In 2018 there were 82,000 deaths due to flu with 740,000 hospitalizations. In neither year were there any breathless 24 hour breaking news vigils or mass shutdowns of the economy. Yet everyone received medical treatment. So far our hospitals, at least the ones not shutting down and laying off medical staff due to inactivity, have been able to handle the 25,000 deaths and 70,000 hospitalizations.

Drawback #2 - Demoralizing Effect of Mass Death on the Population

The people of this country have long ago accepted the risks of death due to underlying health conditions and/or unhealthy lifestyle choices. In NYC it has been reported that the one underlying health condition nearly 85% of those that died of Corona virus had in common was obesity combined with another comorbidity (diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure,etc.).

As a conservative, I agree with Sassy that as an individual I assessed the threat to me and my family and adjusted my lifestyle accordingly. The overwhelming majority of those that reacted in this fashion have been able to avoid or overcome this virus.

And all of this doesn't even take into account the benefits of herd immunity. Flattening the curve doesn't reduce the total number of deaths and hospitalizations, it just spreads them out. This is a tried and true answer for the lefties in this country. The FDR administration put the federal government on steroids in response to the Great Depression and instead of a normal four to five year economic downturn he made it last nearly 15 years. Just as many people suffered but he managed to lock up a half century of Democrat Party rule in this country in return. Funny how the prescription for our current malady calls for the economic misery to extend to the fall which just happens to be on the doorstep of our presidential election.

[Drummond]

As for the two major drawbacks:

Drawback #1 - Overwhelming the Healthcare System

A significant majority of people in this country were willing to give the people in charge the benefit of the doubt about an unknown public health emergency. They accepted the argument about the surge of cases overwhelming the healthcare system and agreed to a temporary shutdown to address the problem.

The initial estimates of 2.2million deaths and associated millions of hospital beds needed by Imperial College (no doubt graduates of East Anglia University's Climate Modeling Group) proved to totally decoupled from reality. Even the fifth revision of their best guess, 62,000 dead and a couple hundred thousand hospitalized is still on the high end according to latest data. Except for a few scattered hot spots around the country the system was never really stressed and even in those hot spots, most of the additional capacity went unused.

Now compare this situation with the last two flu seasons here in the US. Last year 60,000 flu deaths and 490,000 hospitalizations. In 2018 there were 82,000 deaths due to flu with 740,000 hospitalizations. In neither year were there any breathless 24 hour breaking news vigils or mass shutdowns of the economy. Yet everyone received medical treatment. So far our hospitals, at least the ones not shutting down and laying off medical staff due to inactivity, have been able to handle the 25,000 deaths and 70,000 hospitalizations.

Drawback #2 - Demoralizing Effect of Mass Death on the Population

The people of this country have long ago accepted the risks of death due to underlying health conditions and/or unhealthy lifestyle choices. In NYC it has been reported that the one underlying health condition nearly 85% of those that died of Corona virus had in common was obesity combined with another comorbidity (diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure,etc.).

As a conservative, I agree with Sassy that as an individual I assessed the threat to me and my family and adjusted my lifestyle accordingly. The overwhelming majority of those that reacted in this fashion have been able to avoid or overcome this virus.

And all of this doesn't even take into account the benefits of herd immunity. Flattening the curve doesn't reduce the total number of deaths and hospitalizations, it just spreads them out. This is a tried and true answer for the lefties in this country. The FDR administration put the federal government on steroids in response to the Great Depression and instead of a normal four to five year economic downturn he made it last nearly 15 years. Just as many people suffered but he managed to lock up a half century of Democrat Party rule in this country in return. Funny how the prescription for our current malady calls for the economic misery to extend to the fall which just happens to be on the doorstep of our presidential election.

Good post !!

For all the detail offered, I'm not sure there's a lot of real detail to offer in response. Still, I'll do my best !

The 2.2 million deaths would undoubtedly have been the estimate arrived-at from assuming that 'herd immunity' would've been the Government's stuck-to policy. It WAS Government policy at that specific time. Was it accurate ? Did it come anywhere near a passing resemblance of accuracy ?

Since so much of this is theoretical, and HAS to be theoretical ... how to tell ?

The later figure(s), as produced by 'authoritative' sources, would've been arrived at from assuming a rejection of the herd immunity method, in favour of containment, then, latterly, the 'delay' strategy. Naturally the later figures would be far smaller.

But at the end of the day, how much of ALL of that was just guesswork, or primarily that ? What past experiences could be learned from, to get accurate determinations ?

1. YES, a century ago, there was the Spanish flu. But ...
2. The Spanish flu was not Covid-19.

How virulent is Covid-19 ? Who would it affect, how, based on what determining factors ?

None of this was known, from actual experience, because, in our society, there was none !! Even trawling for information from other initial experiences of it, e.g China, didn't guarantee that in our population, there wouldn't be factors that created a game-changing result.

This couldn't be known ... one way or the other.

So. The 2.2 million figure, considering what it was based on, was reasonable ... because, there was no way of concluding it wasn't !! So, why NOT plan for its being an accurate figure ? Imagine the outcry, the disgust, if authorities ignored the estimate, only to find it had validity !

Government policy changed, and so did the resulting new estimate. Even with the new figure .... timing was highly important. With an expected EXPONENTIAL growth in cases, one day a hospital might easily cope, & the next, not cope at all.

We DID see signs of that. In late March:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/20/london-hospitals-struggle-to-cope-with-coronavirus-surge


Hospitals in south London are struggling to cope with a thirteenfold “explosion” in the number of patients left seriously ill with Covid-19, which has led to operating theatres being turned into makeshift intensive care units, the Guardian has learned.

Doctors in hospitals across the capital are dealing with rising numbers of patients, many of whom are being ventilated to try to keep them alive. Medics are warning that numbers are doubling every three or four days and that the NHS in London will be treating “thousands” of people with the disease within a fortnight.

On Thursday evening, Northwick Park hospital in north-west London was forced to declare a “critical incident” after running out of critical care beds. It asked nearby hospitals to look after patients as it could not cope with the Covid-19 patients it was receiving.

I'm not aware of any flu outbreak that produced such an emergency of nonexistent healthcare. Covid-19 is not flu ... it IS far more virulent.

Your country may be different .. but in mine, individual movement has been legislated for. We have a clear idea of what we are or are not permitted to do, and we can expect a police response if we don't do what we must.

Covid-19 is no respecter of individual free will. That's its reality, and we cannot change it. It'll attack, IF it has the means to. The trick is to deny it that means, but on a scale that meaningfully curbs it.

That means planning, mass direction, uniformity of preventative measures. Whether or not there's political desirability in such methodology isn't, nor could be, the point. The point is to do what is EFFECTIVE in dealing with the problem on a sufficiently large enough scale.

You say:


Flattening the curve doesn't reduce the total number of deaths and hospitalizations, it just spreads them out.

Is that true ?

Flatten a curve on a graph, and whatever's being measured, neither increases nor decreases. It PERSISTS at a particular level.

If the curve doesn't flatten nor decrease, then it shows an increase. Zero measures against Covid-19 would cause that increase. Zero measures continuing, means that nothing stops the spike increasing for the maximum time.

Herd immunity would kick in ... after HOW HIGH a spike ? Lasting HOW long ? Spikes don't come and go instantaneously. Eventually, deaths would fall. But the spike would reflect ever-increasing death tolls.

A spike representing 100,000 deaths is the same as a flat curve representing fewer deaths but over a longer period.

There's one feature about your FDR example that's 'telling'. What you had, there, was a broadly Leftie Administration not bound by limits. But ... why not have a regime where 'shelf lives' are written into any emergency legislation ?

It's what we've done in the UK. Powers written in law right now, become illegal two years from now.

It's a simple solution to the issue of excessively-employed authoritarianism. And, it works.

[Kathianne]

Lots of positive news regarding curves and testing increasing, possible opening up of states. Unfortunately there's some not good news that keeps up coming from various sources, reinfections:


https://hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/04/16/hokkaido-japan-ended-coronavirus-state-emergency-last-month-week-reimposed/

Hokkaido, Japan Ended Its Coronavirus State Of Emergency Last Month. This Week It Reimposed It
JOHN SEXTONPosted at 6:41 pm on April 16, 2020

Japan’s northern island of Hokkaido is home to about 5 million people. When the coronavirus began spreading around the world in February, Hokkaido was the first place in Japan to declare a state of emergency. And that early decision appeared to work. The number of new cases dropped and the emergency order was lifted. When the emergency ended, Hokkaido Gov. Naomichi Suzuki said, “There was no surge of infected patients that led to the collapse of the medical environment. We overcame without the fearful circumstance.”


In essence, Hokkaido had flattened the curve without overwhelming the health system. The emergency was lifted on March 19 but earlier this week Hokkaido declared a second state of emergency as the number of infections began to climb again:

...

[FakeNewsSux]

Looks like the same is happening in Wuhan!


Health
(https://babylonbee.com/news/categories/health)Uh-Oh: Wuhan Lab Changes Sign To '0 Days Since Accidentally Releasing A Virus'
April 16th, 2020

https://babylonbee.com/img/articles/article-5976-2.jpg

WUHAN—In an alarming turn of events, workers at a Wuhan research lab were seen adjusting a sign that read “92 Days Since Accidentally Releasing a Virus,” taking down the 92 and replacing it with a zero.

“Everything is still great here,” said President Xi Jinping to selected members of the press. “Nothing alarming has happened here... and certainly not for a second time.” Xi was wearing a hazmat suit, but he claimed that was because it was laundry day and that was the only thing he had left that was clean. The American press felt no need to ask any follow-up questions.
A number of “Have You Seen Me?” posters depicting a coronavirus and giving a number to call were spotted around Wuhan, though again Chinese officials say there is nothing unusual there and nothing to worry about and if you develop a sneeze, isolate yourself -- preferably in an airtight room -- immediately.
The Wuhan lab that adjusted the sign has been studying bat-related viruses for some time, though the main thing they’ve learned so far is how not to store viruses.
https://babylonbee.com/news/uh-oh-wuhan-lab-changes-sign-to-0-days-since-accidentally-releasing-a-virus?utm_source=whatfinger

[Kathianne]

Looks like the same is happening in Wuhan!


Health
(https://babylonbee.com/news/categories/health)Uh-Oh: Wuhan Lab Changes Sign To '0 Days Since Accidentally Releasing A Virus'
April 16th, 2020

https://babylonbee.com/img/articles/article-5976-2.jpg

WUHAN—In an alarming turn of events, workers at a Wuhan research lab were seen adjusting a sign that read “92 Days Since Accidentally Releasing a Virus,” taking down the 92 and replacing it with a zero.

“Everything is still great here,” said President Xi Jinping to selected members of the press. “Nothing alarming has happened here... and certainly not for a second time.” Xi was wearing a hazmat suit, but he claimed that was because it was laundry day and that was the only thing he had left that was clean. The American press felt no need to ask any follow-up questions.
A number of “Have You Seen Me?” posters depicting a coronavirus and giving a number to call were spotted around Wuhan, though again Chinese officials say there is nothing unusual there and nothing to worry about and if you develop a sneeze, isolate yourself -- preferably in an airtight room -- immediately.
The Wuhan lab that adjusted the sign has been studying bat-related viruses for some time, though the main thing they’ve learned so far is how not to store viruses.
https://babylonbee.com/news/uh-oh-wuhan-lab-changes-sign-to-0-days-since-accidentally-releasing-a-virus?utm_source=whatfinger


:laugh: