Corona Virus Thread Part 3 of ? (MOD NOTE IN OP)

[Jets 31]

My wife is american, my kids are americans, my grandkids are americans. i've lived in the US for 19 years. I comment on things from the perspective of someone who lives here (notice I don't comment on how things are from a winnipeger perspective or from someone living in canada). So get off your own high horse.

Apparently someone doesn't look at avatars .

 

[ERYX]

And my point is that you can't have a robust economy with a widespread epidemic with considerable mortality. Sweden has had a huge hit to their retail sector even without much of a lockdown, because people are staying home and saving money due to the lack of confidence in the global economy.

When you have the media irresponsibly scaremongering for clicks, this is true — and a big difference between this novel flu strain and ‘18 and ‘68. But the lockdowns made it much worse. Sweden is impacted by other nations’ lockdowns.

Here’s another article to my point. We’ve essentially killed millions to save thousands short term: 600 Physicians Say Lockdowns Are A ‘Mass Casualty Incident’

 

[Whileee]

When you have the media irresponsibly scaremongering for clicks, this is true — and a big difference between this novel flu strain and ‘18 and ‘68. But the lockdowns made it much worse. Sweden is impacted by other nations’ lockdowns.

Here’s another article to my point. We’ve essentially killed millions to save thousands short term: 600 Physicians Say Lockdowns Are A ‘Mass Casualty Incident’

The lockdowns were done without a good strategy, and poor public communication. It really has shown how under-resourced and de-prioritized Public Health is, globally. It will be worsened by defunding the WHO globally.

Many public health groups are already studying the non-Covid impacts of the pandemic. They will be considerable, both where there was and wasn't lockdowns. As you note, the economy is globalized.

What is hard to assess is what the health and economic impact of a rampant Covid epidemic would have been. We caught glimpses from N Italy and NYC. Hard to imagine a normal economy and health care system under those circumstances.

 

[scelaton]

When you have the media irresponsibly scaremongering for clicks, this is true — and a big difference between this novel flu strain and ‘18 and ‘68. But the lockdowns made it much worse. Sweden is impacted by other nations’ lockdowns.

Here’s another article to my point. We’ve essentially killed millions to save thousands short term: 600 Physicians Say Lockdowns Are A ‘Mass Casualty Incident’

The media is taking an unfair hit in this and other posts. They are reflecting the legitimate concerns of public health and medical experts.

I guarantee you the position of the 600 physicians in the above article do not reflect the sentiments of the over 1 million medical doctors in the US. The vast majority would say that the bolded in your post is a gross distortion of the net impact of lockdowns. Keep in mind that physicians also have political affiliations and many have been profoundly impacted economically by the shut-down.

Without a robust media, you can not have a democracy or open society. Blaming them for this terrible situation is all too easy, and simply wrong.

 

[ERYX]

What is hard to assess is what the health and economic impact of a rampant Covid epidemic would have been. We caught glimpses from N Italy and NYC. Hard to imagine a normal economy and health care system under those circumstances.

Which is why I think looking at places like Belarus and Georgia are legitimate. Even if they are completely "cooking the books" and reporting totally false numbers, their societies haven't collapsed. Time will tell, but Belarus hasn't locked down from the beginning and we're now into week 6 of Georgia being open.

 

[Ducky10]

Relatively short but balanced take on how the media has handled the pandemic. I think the part about media focusing on "breaking COVID news" vs more in depth coverage is particularly noteworthy. While there have been many insightful and in depth stories done on COVID, the way most people choose to consume news and the overwhelming choice of the medium used to present it, has led to far more "breaking" type stories that lack context and depth. Print media has largely have fallen into this type of presentation as well in trying to remain relevant in the click and scan age of consumption.

COVID-19 and the media: The role of journalism in a global pandemic

 

[ERYX]

I guarantee you the position of the 600 physicians in the above article do not reflect the sentiments of the over 1 million medical doctors in the US. The vast majority would say that the bolded in your post is a gross distortion of the net impact of lockdowns. Keep in mind that physicians also have political affiliations and many have been profoundly impacted economically by the shut-down.

You have no way of knowing that.

I frankly don't think the medical community is unanimous. Medicine is not an infallible system where they know everything. I mean look at how much medical practice has changed over the years. It may well change again. These people are not infallible not unanimous. There are different views.

Time will tell. I really really hope that you're right. No one would be happier than me to discover that I'm wrong and the economic impact of this will be minimal.

Without a robust media, you can not have a democracy or open society. Blaming them for this terrible situation is all too easy, and simply wrong.

The great irony of this is that our "robust media" has contributed hugely to the most authoritarian crack-down on civil liberties ever in our "democratic and open society". We don't even have courts running in Ontario for goodness sake.

I also think that you can have a "robust media" that doesn't overflow everything and make everything into a cataclysm. It's to the point that nowadays, every snowfall is a "snow event" and a stretch of regular sunny summer days requires a "heat warning" (just heard about the "heat warning" in Southern Ontario this morning because it's 30 degrees which is a typical summer day here).

 

[ERYX]

I added rhetorical question since I was pretty certain you would avoid as you have.

A minority government needs the support of other parties to survive, therefore Trudeau cannot be a dictator or push through whatever he wants, which he hasn't.

The situation has given Trudeau de facto dictatorial powers, even though he has not received de jure powers. While he has to my pleasant surprise (and admirably) resisted the temptation to invoke the Emergencies Act which would give him de jure such powers, the way the media has spun this and the way the cover it (and Trudeau) allows him much much broader lattitude and ability to act and do things he could never do before.

And the minority government is a complete non-issue because NONE of the minority parties will gainsay anything Trudeau wants to do in the current milieu because this would be political suicide. The media would absolutely crucify them if they did anything to bring down the government. Plus how would we even have an election? An election is only a theoretical/notional thing at this point with the lockdowns and emergency orders the provinces have put in place.

The Bloc also voted for the gun ban so your point about the NDP is pointless. The Canadian political spectrum is a lot more complex than Conservative and Everything Else.

The gun ban was pushed through via Order-in-Council. No one voted on it. Not even the LPC let alone the Bloc.

 

[Whileee]

Which is why I think looking at places like Belarus and Georgia are legitimate. Even if they are completely "cooking the books" and reporting totally false numbers, their societies haven't collapsed. Time will tell, but Belarus hasn't locked down from the beginning and we're now into week 6 of Georgia being open.

I'm not really sure that you want Belarus and Georgia as your examples for country policies and outcomes. They are very different than western Europe and N America, socially, culturally, and economically.

 

[Whileee]

Relatively short but balanced take on how the media has handled the pandemic. I think the part about media focusing on "breaking COVID news" vs more in depth coverage is particularly noteworthy. While there have been many insightful and in depth stories done on COVID, the way most people choose to consume news and the overwhelming choice of the medium used to present it, has led to far more "breaking" type stories that lack context and depth. Print media has largely have fallen into this type of presentation as well in trying to remain relevant in the click and scan age of consumption.

COVID-19 and the media: The role of journalism in a global pandemic

Most people only want to read or see superficial soundbites that strengthen their own biases. Most don't even know how to find a balanced review of evidence, and don't care. We live in a reality TV and social media environment, and it's making people more and more ignorant.

 

[ERYX]

I'm not really sure that you want Belarus and Georgia as your examples for country policies and outcomes. They are very different than western Europe and N America, socially, culturally, and economically.

Certainly, every place has its own unique social/cultural/economic situation. Which is why a "one size fits all" lockdown was never a good solution IMO. Maybe in some places it was necessary, but not everywhere.

That said, my only point in bringing up Georgia is that the media was literally predicting a "bloodbath" but this has not materialized.

Also, it is legitimate I think to see that places have not collapsed without lockdowns as predicted. That is all that those two examples are good for, but it's legitimate since generally people seem to suggest that EVERYWHERE (including places like Manitoba) would have completely collapsed with dead bodies on the streets zombie apocalypse style without lockdowns and auto-demolition of local economies.

 

[cbcwpg]

How pandemics are different:

U.S. Numbers

H1N1 : 60.8 million cases ... 12,469 deaths ( April 2009- April 2010 )

Covid-19: 1.7 million cases... 99,470 deaths ( 5 months )



Seems someone doesn't know what "total disaster" means.

 

[ps241]

...or until there is an anti-viral medicine that decreases morbidity and mortality in high risk groups. That will probably (hopefully) precede a vaccine and lower the risk to levels tolerable enough to resume something close to pre-Covid life. There is a lot of money and brain power hard at work on that end.

Excellent post something that is getting way less attention but could be a critical piece to the puzzle.

Along with way more robust, accessible, and accurate testing so people can understand where they are at. I am in an online community with Lou and Mei Mei and I really like the work they are doing. They spoke to us on line last month and opened up for questions. Cool bright, successful, scientist couple. Also pretty easy to mark out for a women who drops a hockey reference when talking about testing and vaccines lol.

 

[scelaton]

You have no way of knowing that.

I frankly don't think the medical community is unanimous. Medicine is not an infallible system where they know everything. I mean look at how much medical practice has changed over the years. It may well change again. These people are not infallible not unanimous. There are different views.

Time will tell. I really really hope that you're right. No one would be happier than me to discover that I'm wrong and the economic impact of this will be minimal.



The great irony of this is that our "robust media" has contributed hugely to the most authoritarian crack-down on civil liberties ever in our "democratic and open society". We don't even have courts running in Ontario for goodness sake.

I also think that you can have a "robust media" that doesn't overflow everything and make everything into a cataclysm. It's to the point that nowadays, every snowfall is a "snow event" and a stretch of regular sunny summer days requires a "heat warning" (just heard about the "heat warning" in Southern Ontario this morning because it's 30 degrees which is a typical summer day here).

To be clear, I don't see anyone saying the economic impact will be minimal, least of all me. But there is a price to pay for this pandemic either way--and the notion that we have "killed millions" to "save thousands" is way off.


Social distancing will have saved millions worldwide whereas the net negative health impacts of the shutdown are real, but very hard to calculate, especially the mental health impacts. All I can tell you is that the mental health impact of millions of unnecessary deaths (on the survivors) and of lingering disability would be profound.

Last point about the media, as we clearly disagree about their role in this pandemic. This IS a cataclysm, not an exaggerated "heat warning" and we minimize it at our peril.

 

[ERYX]

How pandemics are different:

U.S. Numbers

H1N1 : 60.8 million cases ... 12,469 deaths ( April 2009- April 2010 )

Covid-19: 1.7 million cases... 99,470 deaths ( 5 months )

Ignoring Trump's ... whatever you'd call what comes out of his Twitter account ...

I am just wondering how they know there were 60.8 million cases of H1N1; were that many people actually tested or is this an estimate/extrapolation?

Whereas I think that the COVID-19 numbers are actually people tested. But I don't think that represents the actual number of people infected, especially since there is suggestion that 80% of people infected with COVID-19 are asymptomatic.

 

[Jetfaninflorida]

A family member of ours has been tested. Day 8. Still waiting for the result.

We have the greatest testing in the world - NOT!

 

[ERYX]

To be clear, I don't see anyone saying the economic impact will be minimal, least of all me. But there is a price to pay for this pandemic either way--and the notion that we have "killed millions" to "save thousands" is way off.

Fair enough, and I may have been guilty of exaggeration to say that people are saying the economic impact will be minimal.

I think where the point of departure is whether the impact of lockdowns is outweighed by the potential impact of COVID-19 getting similar treatment to SARS or H1N1 or other pandemics of the past where we did not lock people in their homes and prohibit them from earning a living for a prolonged period.

Social distancing will have saved millions worldwide whereas the net negative health impacts of the shutdown are real, but very hard to calculate, especially the mental health impacts. All I can tell you is that the mental health impact of millions of unnecessary deaths (on the survivors) and of lingering disability would be profound.

I don't think that even the most dire models/predictions said that millions would die without a lockdown. Certainly not in Canada.

I have looked for models worldwide ... one predicted 40 million dead with no lockdown and this would seem to be one of the most pessimistic: Without any interventions like social distancing, one model predicts the coronavirus could have killed 40 million people this year

So let us assume that's true. My argument is that millions WILL eventually die prematurely due to the lockdown. We already have the UN predicting 30 million dying due to starvation because of the breakdown of supply chain and failure to plan in countries like India where they even locked down their farmers. That's already 3/4 of the "no intervention model" of deaths, then we must factor in the reduced standard of living due to a destroyed economy, depression, suicide, drug abuse due to job loss and the negative effects of being locked up with no way of knowing if the government will ever let people out again. And that's the short-term stuff. I think this easily adds up to a lot more than 40 million within the next few years.

Then we must consider long-term. They are predicting 35% unemployment in the US after this. Canada will be similar. It will take decades to recover from that. We are condemning our children and grandchildren to a much lower standard of living than we have enjoyed because of the economic destruction.

The counter argument is that the economy would have collapsed worse without the interventions, but I don't see how you get worse than the government overnight unemploying 60% of the population. That would not have happened even in a worst-case model.

We are essentially trading short term "gain" (i.e. fewer deaths now) for longterm "pain" in my view. Kind of like how we rack up government debt. We kick the can down the road for our children and grandchildren to suffer the consequences.

Last point about the media, as we clearly disagree about their role in this pandemic. This IS a cataclysm, not an exaggerated "heat warning" and we minimize it at our peril.

Yes, I strongly disagree that this is a cataclysm. A cataclysm would be sometime like a World War or deaths that compare to that. I think we've had it so good for so long that we've lost a bit of perspective on what an actual catastrophe looks like.

 

[Ducky10]

Most people only want to read or see superficial soundbites that strengthen their own biases. Most don't even know how to find a balanced review of evidence, and don't care. We live in a reality TV and social media environment, and it's making people more and more ignorant.

Exactly my point, and unfortunately the mainstream media caters to it, mainly for survival.

 

[Whileee]

Certainly, every place has its own unique social/cultural/economic situation. Which is why a "one size fits all" lockdown was never a good solution IMO. Maybe in some places it was necessary, but not everywhere.

That said, my only point in bringing up Georgia is that the media was literally predicting a "bloodbath" but this has not materialized.

Also, it is legitimate I think to see that places have not collapsed without lockdowns as predicted. That is all that those two examples are good for, but it's legitimate since generally people seem to suggest that EVERYWHERE (including places like Manitoba) would have completely collapsed with dead bodies on the streets zombie apocalypse style without lockdowns and auto-demolition of local economies.

I don't recall any reputable predictions of an "apocalypse" in Manitoba. Why exaggerate?

I don't think we have a clear picture of what's happened in Georgia.

Have you followed the situation in Brazil? Some are building temporary field hospitals to deal with overwhelmed hospitals. The large majority of the public is opposed to the government response, as cases and deaths increase. They are now finally shut off from travel to the US, and will likely be isolated by other countries for a long time until their epidemic abates.

 

[Howard Chuck]

Excellent post something that is getting way less attention but could be a critical piece to the puzzle.

Along with way more robust, accessible, and accurate testing so people can understand where they are at. I am in an online community with Lou and Mei Mei and I really like the work they are doing. They spoke to us on line last month and opened up for questions. Cool bright, successful, scientist couple. Also pretty easy to mark out for a women who drops a hockey reference when talking about testing and vaccines lol.

I agree that the way out of this is likely a treatment before a vaccine. I’m sure there are those motivated by altruism as well as money. Either way, there is motivation.

 

[Ducky10]

Those who have posted know where others stand.

Really? Maybe a few but I doubt that’s the case for many of us. Seems a little simplistic to me.

 

[Whileee]

Exactly my point, and unfortunately the mainstream media caters to it, mainly for survival.

Well, I would make the obvious point that the fringe media and politically extreme echo chambers are much worse than the "mainstream media". Think about how persistent the support for chloroquine has been from Fox and even moreso in the right wing fringe media. Of course, this is all in political servitude to Trump, but it's much less fact-based than most "mainstream" media.

France has recently stopped using chloroquine and halted enrollment in trials due to safety concerns. WHO has also halted trials and is awaiting further analyses.

 

[SensibleGuy]

A family member of ours has been tested. Day 8. Still waiting for the result.

We have the greatest testing in the world - NOT!

if it was positive you'd have heard within 2 days...probably sooner. How many times does it have to be said...sheesh.

 

[scelaton]

I don't think that even the most dire models/predictions said that millions would die without a lockdown. Certainly not in Canada.

I have looked for models worldwide ... one predicted 40 million dead with no lockdown and this would seem to be one of the most pessimistic: Without any interventions like social distancing, one model predicts the coronavirus could have killed 40 million people this year

So let us assume that's true. My argument is that millions WILL eventually die prematurely due to the lockdown. We already have the UN predicting 30 million dying due to starvation because of the breakdown of supply chain and failure to plan in countries like India where they even locked down their farmers. That's already 3/4 of the "no intervention model" of deaths, then we must factor in the reduced standard of living due to a destroyed economy, depression, suicide, drug abuse due to job loss and the negative effects of being locked up with no way of knowing if the government will ever let people out again. And that's the short-term stuff. I think this easily adds up to a lot more than 40 million within the next few years.

Then we must consider long-term. They are predicting 35% unemployment in the US after this. Canada will be similar. It will take decades to recover from that. We are condemning our children and grandchildren to a much lower standard of living than we have enjoyed because of the economic destruction.

The counter argument is that the economy would have collapsed worse without the interventions, but I don't see how you get worse than the government overnight unemploying 60% of the population. That would not have happened even in a worst-case model.

We are essentially trading short term "gain" (i.e. fewer deaths now) for longterm "pain" in my view. Kind of like how we rack up government debt. We kick the can down the road for our children and grandchildren to suffer the consequences.



Yes, I strongly disagree that this is a cataclysm. A cataclysm would be sometime like a World War or deaths that compare to that. I think we've had it so good for so long that we've lost a bit of perspective on what an actual catastrophe looks like.

For sure it would have killed > 1 million in the US alone without social distancing. Their toll is already ~ 100, 000 in <3 months--will be twice their Vietnam deaths and > all their WW1 deaths in a couple of weeks.
The UN Secretary General has warned that COVID is the greatest threat to the world since WW2....maybe he is part of the media conspiracy

The other analogy to war is that the economic impact is very severe but recovery happens faster than people imagine, often prompted by necessary technological breakthroughs and scientific advances.

I do almost agree with your last sentence though--our comfortable lives have made some of us complacent and unable to appreciate a potential catastrophe when it's in front of us.

I have to work now so will sign off. This has been a very civil discussion even if we disagree--thanks!

 

[ERYX]

I don't recall any reputable predictions of an "apocalypse" in Manitoba. Why exaggerate?

Wasn't that what the lockdown was predicated on?

Have you followed the situation in Brazil? Some are building temporary field hospitals to deal with overwhelmed hospitals. The large majority of the public is opposed to the government response, as cases and deaths increase. They are now finally shut off from travel to the US, and will likely be isolated by other countries for a long time until their epidemic abates.

I've heard of what's going on in Brazil.

Time will tell. Absolutely, short term, numbers will likely be higher without a lockdown, and of course the people will be upset because the media worldwide has been telling everyone over and over that lockdowns are what MUST be done. Right or wrong, the President of Brazil took a position that was always going to be unpopular and he is taking the heat for it.

Keep in mind that Brazil's population is 211 million people. They've had 23,400 deaths so far which is about the same as the state of New York which had draconian lockdowns and a population of 19 million (less than 1/10th the population of Brazil).

Can you explain to me why Bolsonaro is condemned as a "killer" while Gov. Cuomo is praised as a savour by the media, when Brazil has had less than 1/10th of the deaths per capita of New York? I say it's because of how the media portrays things. People should be in the streets calling Cuomo a killer for putting infected people back into care homes. But it's Bolsonaro who is getting that flak. Because that is how the media has chosen to portray things, IMO.

But the proof will be long-term. Brazil I suspect will experience more pain now, but in the long run will fair better because their economy won't be as utterly destroyed as other places. Although they cannot escape the impact of neighbours locking down.