Wuhan Killer Sneeze (thanks Tea)

[padraig (u.s.)]

the overwhelming majority of deaths to come, as expected, from those 60+, and especially 80+ who are projected to have over 9% case fatality rate

 

[version]

The world economy tanking will cause a fair few deaths too.

 

[droid]

Stay safe guys. Tomorrow is another day.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

now they also say suppressive restrictions will have to be kept in place for the bulk of 18 months, or whenever a vaccine becomes widely available

which by their own/anyone's admission is probably unfeasible - at some point people will begin starving and then it will be Mad Max

best case scenario China, South Korea, don't experience quick resurgences once they begin lifting restrictions

that seeming like wishful thinking, what they basically suggest is we suppress as long as possible, then come up for air before being forced into a second suppressive period, and repeat as necessary

striking some kind of balance between minimizing coronavirus deaths and minimizing socioeconomic disruption

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

The world economy tanking will cause a fair few deaths too.

as I've been saying

 

[version]

Someone on WallStreetBets said a friend of their mate's just topped himself due to losses on the stock market.

 

[version]

I still haven't heard what the government expects people to do if they can't work for months. A lot of people don't have any savings to fall back on.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

right, it's just one report based on modelling, from incomplete data

the numbers are obviously very sobering, but it fundamentally doesn't tell me anything I didn't already know.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

I still haven't heard what the government expects people to do if they can't work for months. A lot of people don't have any savings to fall back on.

right, this is where the true chaos comes in

there's just no way everything non-essential can be closed for the majority of 12-18 months

that relief bill the House passed is going to be - like every government measure so far - woefully inadequate

 

[IdleRich]

Definitely not the way I take it.

OK you're differing about the reasons for changing strategy but I'm right in saying that they have changed strategy from one that seemed likely to guarantee 250,000 deaths?
And they model the US at 1.2 million deaths on their present course?

 

[version]

I wonder whether people will eventually lose patience, accept others will die and start ignoring curfews etc. I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Fuck it. Nobody's going to bail me out and they're old and sick and going to die soon anyway" attitude creeping in. There are probably plenty of people already thinking it.

 

[IdleRich]

I'm sure that there are people already thinking that. Especially those who have already had it. Why the fuck should I shut my shop and starve to death to prevent me from getting/spreading a disease I've already survived? Or words to that effect.
The main thing that I take from all this is that the slow reaction - and plain dishonesty - from the US and UK governments has been absolutely catastrophic and, given the amount of information available to them, makes a very good case for criminal recklessness.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

And they model the US at 1.2 million deaths on their present course?

that's not really how it's framed. it's unclear, other than in a strict epidemiological sense, how they define mitigation vs. suppression.

like, they strongly recommend school closures, which has either already happened or is happening

and as droid and I mentioned above, they don't say anything when these things happen or have happened in determining number of deaths

I think the specific number is the wrong thing to get hung up on

the point to take away is that in the short/medium-term suppression is the only viable strategy

 

[IdleRich]

Sure, sorry I did read what you said above about suppression/mitigation etc was just typing in a hurry there cos the thread was moving fast.

 

[version]

Some random on Reddit,

In Austria, which has had 2 deaths so far, and not a bad curve, last weeks peacemeal announcements of measures led to instant panic, massive rushes to supermarkets, but most importantly, thousands of people being fired from their jobs and hundreds of small and medium sized enterprises being immediately at the risk of shutting down. Imagine going into this crisis having just lost your job, and almost nobody hiring - and now tell those people they took this critical hit to their livelihood to protect a small percentage of the elderly and sick population in order to reduce deaths and suffering, when they will likely receive no help, no thanks and very little government aid for it.

Now imagine this goes on for , lets say, one month. Insolvencies, bankruptcies, firing, no hiring, and on 1st of April, when Rent is due, and all the fearful people will INSIST on getting their rent, nobody can move (because of the shutdown), anyone involved in the arts or cultural careers being basically out of a job for MONTHS ....

Right about that time, you ll have a LARGE LARGE part of the population starting to think "I would take a 1% risk for myself in return for not fucking up my life and my family for potentially a year or more" or even "Is this price worth the lives we save, who are mostly already old and sickly?"

Its a horrifying yet inevitable thought, to me, that our society will likely not be willing to sacrifice to this level - but I fear the only reason why I personally can afford not to think like that is because, just by random chance, my company is not affected, my apartment is large and I got an open-air fresh farmers market right outside the house.

I think we may not be able to afford saving as many people as we could .

try, for just a moment, to empathize with this real situation among my friends. A married couple, they have a 6 month old daughter, she was shift manager at a local hotel, he had a small comic store with added cafe, opened recently and investing some money. She was fired immediately on Thursday when it was announced stores and restaurants would have to close or be restricted, and now his store is closed for the forseeable future. They have zero income, at the start of the crisis, are both under 30 and have a young daughter. Just a week ago, they did "everything right", now its a not-so-fresh start. And now figure out the odds of this couple to actually have a serious problem with this virus. They already were forced, with uncertain aid (or not) in the future if that, to sacrifice investments, time, career, money. They have a dependant. And, on the outside, their individual risk of death or permanent damage is under 1% (if you figure in 70% infection rate over the next months, the current numbers, the still-present chance of getting care even if its too much, and the chance of a cure or vaccine being discovered). Do you not see how people like that wont sit idly by while those with money, pensions, goverment jobs and other guarantees tell them to keep sacrificing? I can see it, for sure. People are throwing the dice on worse odds, as anyone knowing anybody in extreme sports or the military knows, for less critical situations. I myself risked my life in the afghanistan war a decade ago, and I sure as hell took greater risks for less money or reason. Right now, we are taking that choice away. We are leaving people stranded, at the mercy of their employers or unsure government aid, for no other reason than to minimize the risk of a society that will probably not give anything back. I feel bad writing this, and I personally would prefer people like that to keep sacrificing because I have parents, elderly friends of the family and sick friends. But I sure as hell cant sit here and say thats just bad luck - because normally, we allow people to fight their bad luck. We allow people to take risks (like driving a fast car, smoking a cigarette, getting drunk, buying firearms and a myriad of other things that directly endanger others too) in the name of freedom.

I do not expect that this kind of mandated shutdown is going to last very long, at least not without massive resistance.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

"Fuck it. Nobody's going to bail me out and they're old and sick and going to die soon anyway"

I imagine many people are already feeling some resentment toward the elderly, even if they obviously can't voice it without sounding monstrous

it's common for people taking care of sick and/or elderly family members to feel resentment toward them, and those are people they love

hopefully it won't boil over into open anti-elderly sentiment as this drags on

 

[version]

There's a lot of anti-elderly sentiment already due to things like Brexit.

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

well, there you go, other people are already saying basically the same thing in much greater detail on (of course) Reddit

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

There's a lot of anti-elderly sentiment already due to things like Brexit.

that's at least partially justified generational tension

 

[IdleRich]

A married couple, they have a 6 month old daughter, she was shift manager at a local hotel,

Precocious.