I’m in a high crime area as it is, right now. But even my NY home which is in a low crime area, concerns of break-ins and people shipping your home, especially if empty are right on the table.
Yes, we broke out the shot guns, bear spray, checked the security lights and alarms here and our dogs are put to work by sleeping down stairs. There are advantages owning a mean looking pitbull.
No spike in home break ins here, but there have been incidents in parking lots of grocery stores. Make sure you lock your door when returning your empty cart. There have been some grab and runs. here. And as always, be vigilant when walking to your vehicle, and loading it with groceries.
After the success of Phase III trials is when all of the clinical data is submitted to the FDA. A decision can take months, even up to a year.
The two phase III drugs referenced above, Tocilizumab and Remdesivir, are both being used in current covid-19 patients outside of the Phase III trials, under ‘compassionate use’ rules.
The FDA can change any of these regulations/approval processes as needed…but they are generally very conservative in allowing access to developmental drugs, or speeding up the approval process. OTOH we are in a crisis.
I completely agree that no lockdown will be tolerated for very long. I just spoke with friends in Spain for a while, and the social tension there is already getting very bad, even though Spain is used to less personal freedoms.
America is quite different from Spain, and it is a heavily armed country. People who think that the police or national guard will be able to control anything really have little understanding of how these situations develop.
It will not come to that anyway, except in a very few places perhaps. The economy will not be sacrificed for a virus with such a low lethality rate (from all indications). It would be incredibly selfish for the elderly and vulnerable to expect that the society will be destroyed so that they can feel safer.
The solution will ultimately be some form of “cocoon the vulnerable, save the economy.” (Interesting blog post with that title today by Steve Hsu, professor at MSU - easy to google.)
I doubt people who ignore the science will be influenced by peer pressure.
I agree with you that they are being selfish, and are prolonging the time it takes us to flatten the curve, which in turn increases the time we have to shelter in place…which in turn could lead us in to a Depression.
"1. Define a high-risk (age 65+, pre-existing condition) and low-risk population. Perhaps 15% in the first category, 85% in the latter.
Let the low-risk people go back to work. Start the economy up again.
Issue a "shelter in place" order for ALL high-risk people. Low-risk individuals who co-habit with high-risk people (e.g., family members) have a choice: self-isolate as well, or move into government provided accommodation.
The isolated people receive regular food deliveries and medical care (virus tests). Existing platforms for food delivery (Lyft, Uber) can be used almost immediately for this purpose.
This seems to be a good solution in that:
a. it minimizes damage to the economy,
b. reduces deaths significantly (if executed efficiently), and
c. matches the sacrifices (inconveniences) to the people who benefit most.
Would it work? When I first heard about herd immunity and cocooning the vulnerable, I was skeptical. But now that whole countries have experienced lockdown, and financial markets have descended into chaos, I suspect that the solution above would be widely acceptable as an alternative."
Point c above bears repeating. It is no one’s fault that someone is elderly or has preexisting conditions. It is moral to require the highest sacrifices from those who will benefit the most.
Although there is so much about course of this new virus that we don’t know, we do know a ton about viruses in general and even coronaviruses in particular. Without basic science research, we would not understand these things. For the most part, private industry is not going to fund basic science research because it doesn’t make money, so we need the government to continue to support it. Therefore, we need the American people to continue to support it. I am very grateful to the (not highly compensated) scientists who laid the foundation of knowledge we have to fight this virus.
While I understand your point, if the State of CA wanted to lockdown people in their houses than they would have put that in their new “Safer at Home” ordinance.
We went on a 2 hour hike yesterday and while the trail was more crowded than normal, people kept their distances. The possibility of a virus transmission doing a hike (or going to a beach) seems extremely remote and again if the government authorities thought this was a problem I would think they would shut down these activities down immediately.
We do need the government to conduct basic research (which has endured budget cuts for many years)…but private industry does spend significant $ every year on basic science research.
If the entire world would agree to the same amount of lockdown for the same time - 3-4 weeks, then the lockdown strategy might have a chance of working. As it is, unless each area that locks down then completely closes its borders until there’s a vaccination or effective treatment, the lockdown only slightly delays things. As soon as cases reduce in one city or state, as soon as movement starts again the infections will ramp back up as people travel to/from other areas. This is already happening in China. They almost eliminated their infections by a hard core lockdown for a couple of months and now they’re starting to see infections increase as people travel. We’re all doing huge harm to our local economies for little long term gain, just a delay in cases.
Given that a vaccine is 18-24 months away, it’s questionable if people are willing and any sort of viable economy can survive for 18-24 months of periodic lockdown as cases ebb and flow. And no economy is set up to survive a total travel or import/export ban for 18-24 months.
I suspect when unemployment numbers are next reported the futility of doing this modified lockdown on and off for the next 18-24 months will be very, very evident.
I am reluctant to trust data that comes from China and highly doubt they have no new cases. There are reports that they actually don’t test as much and are not completely honest with the situation.
It is true that most people “make it”. However, mortality rate is higher than the influenza ( probably 1-1.5% from what it looks ). Different countries have different criteria for reporting the cause of death, which may account for some of the high mortality in Italy and lower in Germany or they may be at different phases of the peak in their infection.
The frail and the elderly need to be protected, even if it tanks the economy. Why ? Because we are not animals, we are civilized humans who sacrifice for each other in time of need. We can rise up to the situation or be petty and live with our pettiness for the years to come. It is a good lesson for our children, teaching them that it is not all about “me, me, me and my inflated self esteem”. You don’t have milk ? Drink tea. You don’t have a graduation party ? Take a walk around the house and call grandma to check on her, since you have time.
Humanity does not thrive on doomsday stories, it thrives on human sacrifice and greatness stories.
I told my IT colleague : don’t tell me what you can’t do, tell me what you can.
65+ year old people would be about 15% of the US population by itself. Then you have to add the people under 65 who have high blood pressure, diabetes, asthma, etc… The total is likely to be a lot more than 15% of the population.
Even cocooning just the 65+ year old people would have major economic effects, since many of them spend money of things other than food and medical care. Lots of 65+ year old people like to travel, so if they are afraid of COVID-19 (regardless of whether there are governmental restrictions), the travel industry (airlines, hotels, cruises, etc.) will severely contract, with additional effects rippling through the economy.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo expressed his frustration Sunday morning over the sight of large groups of people in New York congregating outdoors this weekend.
"This is just a mistake. It's a mistake. It's insensitive. It's arrogant. It's self-destructive. It's disrespectful to other people. And it has to stop and it has to stop now. This is not a joke. And I am not kidding," Cuomo said.
@ucbalumnus - I believe Steve means to include only the over-65 crowd that has preexisting conditions that are worrisome in that 15% estimate. Maybe it is 20%. Also, there is a world of difference from a risk perspective for someone age 60-65 versus 75+. So, relatively healthy 60-70 year olds should be fine.
I am all for the cocooning idea so long as it is voluntary. Not all 65+ will choose to cocoon. My 81 year old mother will not, even now. But I suspect that most will.
Yes, the economy takes a hit. But allowing the virus to range through the population will mean that subsequent waves will be much less virulent.
Also, the economy takes a smaller hit if 15% are cocooned versus 100% trying to engage in a strict lockdown. Many of this 15% are not economically productive anyway except as consumption functions.
There are practical considerations as well. America cannot be lockdowned very well anyway for long. Just consider who would be being shot if strict curfews were to be imposed. It is all well and good for posters on here to muse about strolling through their farms or suburban parks. That is not going to work in places like the Bronx, East LA, Little Haiti in Miami, etc. Not for very long anyway. People will be outside.
K-12 schools will reopen in the fall as well. The virus will still be a threat, but the media will downplay it and life will go on. That is my bet, let’s check back in a few months.
@OneMoreToGo2021 A lot of younger people do elder care or have handicapped relatives. They can’t be left alone while the employed caretaker is in an low risk workers housing situation.
It is like that in our extended family. My 30ish nephew works and then at night does things for his uncle with COPD. Our 35ish cousin works but also is guardian of another cousin with significant health issues.
@“Snowball City” I totally understand the connections between the elderly and the younger. My wife and son are right this hour spending time taking care of my 92 year old father in law. In our culture, younger generations do not abandon their elderly to institutions unless it is absolutely necessary (life or death right then).
People will simply need to make a choice. The elderly face the risk anyway, not so much the younger. So, if someone younger is working now, and then taking care of their relatives at night, that could still continue even if there was government housing. Thus, the risk profile is no different than right now. There is no reason to choose to abandon elderly relatives who need care. the government is not going to be able to force anyone.
It is a crisis. Hopefully the elderly face it with the courage that my father in law and mother are.
High numbers of younger people are being admitted to the ICU. Even if they live, high medical debt plus student loan debt plus losing their jobs will not leave them in a very good position.
Do they say this because of the mask shortage, though? I highly doubt this would be their recommendation without it.
Thanks for pointing that out. Worldometers is constantly adding new and useful features and I missed that addition.
No immunity has been proven yet. Hope there is one but no guarantee. In fact, there have been reports from China of people getting sick and testing positive again after being “recovered” - few but it has reportedly happened.
In my state, they’ve moved now to just testing health care workers and those needing to be hospitalized. So, I guess those sites have suddenly become moot. Are others seeing the same policy in their states?
They are testing everyone flying into the country. I wish we had the ability and forethought to do the same.