Objectively intelligent.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You write this as if everyone is now sheltering in place and we are curbing the spread of the virus, when in fact it is still spreading and numbers are still growing. It would be easier to stomach your posture of hard truth-telling if you were really grappling with the hard truths.

And it will continue to spread and the numbers will grow forever. So that is a useless measure. The moment our healthcare system can handle all cases, all transmission-related restrictions should be lifted. At that point, they serve no rational purpose, other than political theater.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Right. And a whole lot more people appear to have it than confirmed numbers suggest. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...iously-thought

There is also a good bit of limited thinking at work here:

1. People flip about about acute and sudden deaths but don't focus on deaths over time (9/11 effect; school shooting effect, etc.);
2. People are highly suggestible when shown doom porn, and the media is feeding them a steady diet of that: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4...d-help-reelect
3. Americans are generally confused by math: https://theconversation.com/math-mis...ovid-19-134520

The unknown denominator is a devil here. We know it's really fucking high based on all studies of controlled groups to date (the cruise ship was something like 50% asymptomatic). But we also know the death rate is under-reported, and adjustments in the numerator change findings more than small changes in the denominator.

But we know that even if there were a lot of covid deaths attributed incorrectly to other causes, it still was not a significant amount. You saw no news stories in January or February talking about strange upticks in deaths. You did hear stories about a nasty flu, but even then, the flu death numbers weren't unique.

We had to flatten the curve, and we have to protect doctors. But there is a much needed discussion about how long and to what extent such efforts have to be kept in place. And people need to get over this kneejerk emotional need to make everything an argument of absolutes. This is an argument about balancing things moving forward. Which is a very positive message. People screaming, "If we go back, we're doomed!" are not helping anything. The question is to what extent and in what fashion do we start wading back into the pool?

This is why testing is key. The key to this virus is you can get it, feel nothing, and spread it to someone else who dies. That's what makes it different from the flu.
If you mass test and isolate you have a real chance at crushing the curve. It looks like the countries that did that are past it.

Contact tracing is tough at this stage. All someone has to say is "I rode the subway in March" and it's spread like wildfire.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

. . .



If you use their adjustment for people who never experience symptoms, you get a roughly 1/5 increase in denominator. .

Add in the symptomatic people who never got tested and sort of think they had it. I would say that at least every other person in my peer group has lost their sense of taste and smell along with the other more generic symptoms over the past 6 weeks.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I
I'm more optimistic about California because we have had spread for longer, and because we are managing it better. Pennsylvania has nearly 4x the per capita death rate that we did, and things are getting worse faster. Also, once we get our testing program together, we can limit control to the state. There are already agricultural control checkpoints at the borders. Much harder to manage that in Pennsylvania.

Again, the places with early and severe lockdowns have the fewest deaths/lowest death rates.

[LessinSF]

I am curious what the attorneys here think. The UCLA law school dean, Jennifer Mnookin, is a high school classmate of mine. Same year. We were even on the school's Academic Decathalon team together. I like Jennifer, but I side with Professor Volokh on this: https://reason.com/2020/04/14/ucla-l...ussing-a-case/

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

And it will continue to spread and the numbers will grow forever. So that is a useless measure. The moment our healthcare system can handle all cases, all transmission-related restrictions should be lifted. At that point, they serve no rational purpose, other than political theater.

When can the health care system handle all cases? Please, give me a date.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I am curious what the attorneys here think. The UCLA law school dean, Jennifer Mnookin, is a high school classmate of mine. Same year. We were even on the school's Academic Decathalon team together. I like Jennifer, but I side with Professor Volokh on this: https://reason.com/2020/04/14/ucla-l...ussing-a-case/

I am in the "white-people-redact-with-'N-Word' camp."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

I am in the "white-people-redact-with-'N-Word' camp."

2. I get the prof's point, but it is a no win for him.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

I am in the "white-people-redact-with-'N-Word' camp."

So a black prof can accurately quote a US Supreme Court opinion, but a white one cannot? UCLA is a state school. You have just given Professor Volokh a cause of action.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

So a black prof can accurately quote a US Supreme Court opinion, but a white one cannot?

Heavy man, great point!

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

2. I get the prof's point, but it is a no win for him.

I think it may end up being a huge win for him. Almost any other law school would be glad to have him, likely for much more money. http://www.leiterrankings.com/facult...newprofs.shtml

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

When can the health care system handle all cases? Please, give me a date.

That will depend upon testing. In addition to the Santa Clara study, now there is this below. If the virus is 12x or 50-80x more endemic than the current statistics show, the answer is pretty close to "now."
https://news.yahoo.com/test-200-peop...144732703.html

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

So a black prof can accurately quote a US Supreme Court opinion, but a white one cannot? UCLA is a state school. You have just given Professor Volokh a cause of action.

Sorry not the school rule. Just “Common Sense for White People”.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

That will depend upon testing. In addition to the Santa Clara study, now there is this below. If the virus is 12x or 50-80x more endemic than the current statistics show, the answer is pretty close to "now."
https://news.yahoo.com/test-200-peop...144732703.html

Sorry, if you’ve missed my 90 posts on this. If you could test and isolate you’re talking 4 weeks to Opening Day.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Sorry, if you’ve missed my 90 posts on this. If you could test and isolate you’re talking 4 weeks to Opening Day.

I appear to be on ignore. We will have subsequent peaks. They will be smaller.