Lockdowns don't work.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

hanimmal said:
The US is testing more per capita than any country but Italy, now you said, what is it per capita that we are testing? Is it enough to even get reliable statistics to extrapolate out to the rest of the population? Who is getting tested, just the sick people? I know in Michigan healthcare workers are not getting tested yet, and the PPE gear is getting tight too in the hospitals. So if there is a wave of people leaving their relatively unexposed (if it wasn't already) homes to go back to work, if there is another wave and the hospitals are not fully restocked, we put them back at risk of having to deal with a bunch of new patients without proper protections. Instead we could wait a couple weeks while the states deal with getting everything their hospitals need while employers figure out how they are going to move forward safely.

The amount of covid testing that the US has done was with almost no help from the federal government. It was achieved by many cometeing regional systems by obtaining what kits they could. It was still enough to put the US as one of the biggest covid testers. All I'm demonstrating here is the viability of a huge testing and tracing strategy.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Testing

Explore data on COVID-19 testing across the world.

ourworldindata.org

Some very useful graphs in this link and it's full of info. US went from almost no covid testing, to one of the world leaders, just like that. With federal money and far less than what was thrown at the economic stimulus or what will be lost to the lockdowns killing production and business, we could easily have a testing program like that of South Korea, scaled up for us. Tens of thousands people are currently already being hired by many disparate medical bodies and regional systems for contact tracing. Literally, in a matter of days all of this could be brought under federal control, along with temporary legislation completely violating privacy rights to have online covid mapping. The electronic surveillance aspect would be far easier and cheaper than it seems. It's already essentially ready.

Dr.Amber Trichome · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
I know what it is. It's bullshit. Yeah, that's my opinion and yes, I know you disagree. That doesn't mean you have to feel offended. It's bullshit.

There were 7,468 new cases in New York in the last 24 hours. The 24 hour period before that saw 6,337 new cases. Follow this for a moment because this is where things turn into bullshit (yes my fucking opinion, GD) if you go to the trouble first of verifying the numbers I just told you, then look for the numbers of new cases from mid march, when it was dozens of new cases per day, you will see that on a logarithmic graph, the growth rate will look exactly the same when it was dozens of new cases as it does now that there are thousands of new cases per day.

I told this to someone else who argued the science with me. Please, assume that I understand the advanced mathematics because I am a highly educated professional who lives by numbers very passionately dedicated to life science. It's not to say I can't be wrong, but you can assume I know what the words mean that I am using.

Now, that case growth in NYC, if you look at it logarithmically, is 16%. It's astronomical. It's anything but flat. If we're EXTREMELY fortunate, it will flatten now. Then, for several days (Hopefully not for weeks) there will be 7500 new cases, every single day. Then, there will be a slight decrease but still thousands of new cases per day, and if we're extremely lucky, it will decrease at the same rate that it increased for the last few weeks. The chances of it being that lucky are dismally low and I could get into that, in fact I'd love to. For now, we can agree that at best, there will be thousands of new cases, everyday, for weeks. That's what "flatten the curve" means. That only applies to a logarithmic graph. Looking at it in a linear graph, it's an increase of total cases by more than 6% in two days, suggesting a doubling time barely better than global average.

What they don't talk about much, but which I assure you is a part of this strategy, is the "pumping of the breaks". Meaning they will try to loosen the lockdowns enough to get some economic output, but then reapply the lockdowns. I'll try to find some more info on that. It's bleak as fuck.

All indications are that we will have to continue like this until there is a vaccine, 16 months from now while the economy is crushed. The point of "flattening the curve" is to not exceed the capacity of the healthcare system. So there's also a baseline which can go up and down based on how we equip that healthcare system. They want to keep that line above the apex of the curve.

If the curve continues to rise at the current rate, just in NYC, it will be 15k new cases per day, in a week (again, a hopeful estimate) and then we will look back on today, when it was just shy of half that as I wish that was the growth rate. That baseline is going to go down everytime a nurse or doctor dies.

It would take less then that amount of time to implement a system like the one in South Korea.

Yup that sounds correct. Thanks for breaking it all down, your brilliant. I just read the antibody test out are a wash. They are unreliable .

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

Dr.Amber Trichome said:
Yup that sounds correct. Thanks for breaking it all down, your brilliant. I just read the antibody test out are a wash. They are unreliable .

The at home seroligical tests are not 100% but they're not useless. They may give false negatives, but it is very unlikely to get a false positive. This can actually be extremely useful as a first step for contact tracing. It can help expose infection chains and notify those who the patient has been into contact with. They can be in our hands by the millions very rapidly for a very cheap price.

The sort of tests used in South Korea drive through testing can also be mass produced by US companies and they're extremely accurate, giving results in 3 days. Both have now been approved by the FDA.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

hanimmal said:
This is a fundamental shift in our economy.

Yes, no matter how you cut it. We need to act now, decisively. I can take the insults and I'm stuck inside, just like you but just imagine that baseline of medical capacity that we're trying to keep above the apex of the curve. That baseline will sink if the economy continues to tank.

DIY-HP-LED · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
I know what it is. It's bullshit. Yeah, that's my opinion and yes, I know you disagree. That doesn't mean you have to feel offended. It's bullshit.

There were 7,468 new cases in New York in the last 24 hours. The 24 hour period before that saw 6,337 new cases. Follow this for a moment because this is where things turn into bullshit (yes my fucking opinion, GD) if you go to the trouble first of verifying the numbers I just told you, then look for the numbers of new cases from mid march, when it was dozens of new cases per day, you will see that on a logarithmic graph, the growth rate will look exactly the same when it was dozens of new cases as it does now that there are thousands of new cases per day.

I told this to someone else who argued the science with me. Please, assume that I understand the advanced mathematics because I am a highly educated professional who lives by numbers very passionately dedicated to life science. It's not to say I can't be wrong, but you can assume I know what the words mean that I am using.

Now, that case growth in NYC, if you look at it logarithmically, is 16%. It's astronomical. It's anything but flat. If we're EXTREMELY fortunate, it will flatten now. Then, for several days (Hopefully not for weeks) there will be 7500 new cases, every single day. Then, there will be a slight decrease but still thousands of new cases per day, and if we're extremely lucky, it will decrease at the same rate that it increased for the last few weeks. The chances of it being that lucky are dismally low and I could get into that, in fact I'd love to. For now, we can agree that at best, there will be thousands of new cases, everyday, for weeks. That's what "flatten the curve" means. That only applies to a logarithmic graph. Looking at it in a linear graph, it's an increase of total cases by more than 6% in two days, suggesting a doubling time barely better than global average.

What they don't talk about much, but which I assure you is a part of this strategy, is the "pumping of the breaks". Meaning they will try to loosen the lockdowns enough to get some economic output, but then reapply the lockdowns. I'll try to find some more info on that. It's bleak as fuck.

All indications are that we will have to continue like this until there is a vaccine, 16 months from now while the economy is crushed. The point of "flattening the curve" is to not exceed the capacity of the healthcare system. So there's also a baseline which can go up and down based on how we equip that healthcare system. They want to keep that line above the apex of the curve.

If the curve continues to rise at the current rate, just in NYC, it will be 15k new cases per day, in a week (again, a hopeful estimate) and then we will look back on today, when it was just shy of half that as I wish that was the growth rate. That baseline is going to go down everytime a nurse or doctor dies.

It would take less then that amount of time to implement a system like the one in South Korea.

Abandon this is much too general a discussion:
Are you speaking of the American, non existent plan of economic recovery? Whose team consists of no public health experts.
The California plan, which is a reasoned incremental approach? And based on expert advice
The Canadian Plan which is similar to California's?

The problem with any plan to reopen the economy is testing, no testing, no reopening of the economy in the wealthier nations. Testing provides an essential feedback loop to maintain control of the epidemic and keep it below the hospital capacity.

Let's not focus on North America for a minute though and look at how the situation will unfold where you live (for now), in the Philippines. You are the expert on the ground there, not me. I don't believe these numbers at all, most people don't see a doctor and most simply die at home. Also I think the lock down there is gonna breakdown soon and I'm sure it has already. Other than banning mass gatherings and recommending social distancing there's not much the national government can do, even if it was competently done

It doesn't matter much if you plot it logarithmic or linearly, the number of dead remains the same, the challenge is to keep that number as low as we can while surviving economically. We don't need to mount counter arguments, merely cut and paste those of the experts, we have nothing to prove here. You know what the standards of evidence are and the mathematical criteria for that evidence.

NAME	CONFIRMED	CHANGES TODAY	DECEASED	CHANGES TODAY	RECOVERED	TESTS








★ Philippines	5,453	↑ 230 (4.40%)	349	↑ 14 (4.17%)	157	45,486

Khyber420 · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
No, sorry, it isn't. Hasn't been correct since about 3 weeks ago.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Testing

Explore data on COVID-19 testing across the world.

ourworldindata.org

It's honestly kind of a dumb question and an appeal to emotion. I'm telling you lockdowns don't work. I showed you numerically how well it worked in NYC which has one of the strictest lockdowns in the world. I presented 4 examples of outbreaks that have been very effectively controlled without such lockdowns. Rome's numbers are quite similar to those of NYC. I'm not placing anyoen anywhere. I'm telling you lockdowns don't work and that your information regarding numbers is just wrong, with solid citations.

I'm not trying to harass you. I am well aware that I am becoming extremely unpopular for stating shit nobody wants to hear. Sorry, not sorry.

Lockdowns don't fucking work. Testing and tracing does.

But lockdowns do work, working fine in Canada. Seems to be working in India, seems to be working in Germany, regardless of transparency it even seemed to work in China.

Perhaps New York needs better testing and tracing in addition to a lock down. It doesnt have to be one or the other. Nobody likes how long this is taking, but it's either this or survival of the fittest. At least this is proof that, around the world, humans have socially evolved beyond general barbarism. Sacrificing the economy to save lives *pats globe on back*

Dr.Amber Trichome · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
The at home seroligical tests are not 100% but they're not useless. They may give false negatives, but it is very unlikely to get a false positive. This can actually be extremely useful as a first step for contact tracing. It can help expose infection chains and notify those who the patient has been into contact with. They can be in our hands by the millions very rapidly for a very cheap price.

The sort of tests used in South Korea drive through testing can also be mass produced by US companies and they're extremely accurate, giving results in 3 days. Both have now been approved by the FDA.

I put my name on a list for the antibody test. Only 1000 are being randomly distributed in my state of 4 million people.
I would love to know if I have immunity because I am a health care provider and I am having quite a bit of difficulty running around with my N95 mask and face shield on today. I have allergies and post nasal drip.
What do you think of Dr.Fauci ?

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

Dr.Amber Trichome said:
I put my name on a list for the antibody test. Only 1000 are being randomly distributed in my state of 4 million people.
I would love to know if I have immunity because I am a health care provider and I am having quite a bit of difficulty running around with my N95 mask and face shield on today. I have allergies and post nasal drip.
What do you think of Dr.Fauci ?

Fauci is doing great. I'm going to make another htread touching on that.

DIY-HP-LED · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
Fauci is doing great. I'm going to make another htread touching on that.

Better titled I hope, so as not to paint yourself into a corner. You're a smart guy who can learn from his mistakes, if ya get knocked down I expect ya to roll with the punches and be back on your feet raring to go, I detect some spirit here.

Rob Roy · Apr 15, 2020

Khyber420 said:
But lockdowns do work, working fine in Canada. Seems to be working in India, seems to be working in Germany, regardless of transparency it even seemed to work in China.

Perhaps New York needs better testing and tracing in addition to a local down. It doesnt have to be one or the other.

Isn't a lockdown a way to flip from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent " though ? If that were a goal, a lock down is certainly a fine way to get there.

Fogdog · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
The at home seroligical tests are not 100% but they're not useless. They may give false negatives, but it is very unlikely to get a false positive. This can actually be extremely useful as a first step for contact tracing. It can help expose infection chains and notify those who the patient has been into contact with. They can be in our hands by the millions very rapidly for a very cheap price.

The sort of tests used in South Korea drive through testing can also be mass produced by US companies and they're extremely accurate, giving results in 3 days. Both have now been approved by the FDA.

The serological tests are good for making policy decisions but aren't very useful for when testing individuals. The PCR test for the coronavirus is the one that is useful for determining where to implement actions to prevent the virus from spreading. The PCR test is the one S Korea mainly uses to manage and contain the virus so that people can more or less conduct life outside.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

Khyber420 said:
Nobody likes how long this is taking, but it's either this or survival of the fittest.

No, I disagree. Furthermore, I have the utmost confidence that Canada will see the sense in vastly expanding test and trace over "flatten the curve". "Flatten the curve" is a failing strategy and logarithmic graphs are asinine and I'm honestly not just saying that to anger people. I expounded on this argument at length on post #420 (last post of previous page) in regard to why "fltten the curve" is a failing strategy in my opinion. What we need is test and trace, like South Korea.

That baseline in your graph (I assure you, I understand logarithmic graphs) represents healthcare capacity. What do you think will happen to that line if the economy falters? Please read that post so I don't have to keep writing it, I'm under constant assault in this thread but I am still defending my position. I don't have time to address each comment individually and repeat arguments. Please read #420 of this thread.

Fogdog · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
No, I disagree. Furthermore, I have the utmost confidence that Canada will see the sense in vastly expanding test and trace over "flatten the curve". "Flatten the curve" is a failing strategy and logarithmic graphs are asinine and I'm honestly not just saying that to anger people. I expounded on this argument at length on post #420 (last post of previous page) in regard to why "fltten the curve" is a failing strategy in my opinion. What we need is test and trace, like South Korea.

That baseline in your graph (I assure you, I understand logarithmic graphs) represents healthcare capacity. What do you think will happen to that line if the economy falters? Please read that post so I don't have to keep writing it, I'm under constant assault in this thread but I am still defending my position. I don't have time to address each comment individually and repeat arguments. Please read #420 of this thread.

From your posts, it's clear that you don't understand how to read a log plot of an exponential curve. For example, the graph below shows daily deaths per day (seven day rolling average) from the early stages of when the virus was active to today. If lockdowns had no effect then the lines would all be straight, rising up and to the right. But they aren't. The curves roll over after social distancing orders were put into place, showing that the lockdowns worked. The more complete the social distancing measures are, the sooner that the death rate drops.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

I know what it is. It's bullshit. Yeah, that's my opinion and yes, I know you disagree. That doesn't mean you have to feel offended. It's bullshit.

There were 7,468 new cases in New York in the last 24 hours. The 24 hour period before that saw 6,337 new cases. Follow this for a moment because this is where things turn into bullshit (yes my fucking opinion, GD) if you go to the trouble first of verifying the numbers I just told you, then look for the numbers of new cases from mid march, when it was dozens of new cases per day, you will see that on a logarithmic graph, the growth rate will look exactly the same when it was dozens of new cases as it does now that there are thousands of new cases per day.

I told this to someone else who argued the science with me. Please, assume that I understand the advanced mathematics because I am a highly educated professional who lives by numbers very passionately dedicated to life science. It's not to say I can't be wrong, but you can assume I know what the words mean that I am using.

Now, that case growth in NYC, if you look at it logarithmically, is 16%. It's astronomical. It's anything but flat. If we're EXTREMELY fortunate, it will flatten now. Then, for several days (Hopefully not for weeks) there will be 7500 new cases, every single day. Then, there will be a slight decrease but still thousands of new cases per day, and if we're extremely lucky, it will decrease at the same rate that it increased for the last few weeks. The chances of it being that lucky are dismally low and I could get into that, in fact I'd love to. For now, we can agree that at best, there will be thousands of new cases, everyday, for weeks. That's what "flatten the curve" means. That only applies to a logarithmic graph. Looking at it in a linear graph, it's an increase of total cases by more than 6% in two days, suggesting a doubling time barely better than global average.

What they don't talk about much, but which I assure you is a part of this strategy, is the "pumping of the breaks". Meaning they will try to loosen the lockdowns enough to get some economic output, but then reapply the lockdowns. I'll try to find some more info on that. It's bleak as fuck.

All indications are that we will have to continue like this until there is a vaccine, 16 months from now while the economy is crushed. The point of "flattening the curve" is to not exceed the capacity of the healthcare system. So there's also a baseline which can go up and down based on how we equip that healthcare system. They want to keep that line above the apex of the curve.

If the curve continues to rise at the current rate, just in NYC, it will be 15k new cases per day, in a week (again, a hopeful estimate) and then we will look back on today, when it was just shy of half that as I wish that was the growth rate. That baseline is going to go down everytime a nurse or doctor dies.

It would take less then that amount of time to implement a system like the one in South Korea.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

Let's continue all of the extremely miraculous luck that we are going to need for that "flatten the curve" strategy to work. We then need to not have any more New Yorks, which is fucking doubtful. Then we need to keep that baseline which represents healthcare capacity above that curve apex all the way until there's a vaccine.

What do you think a faltering economy will do to that baseline?

Fogdog · Apr 15, 2020

abandonconflict said:
I know what it is. It's bullshit. Yeah, that's my opinion and yes, I know you disagree. That doesn't mean you have to feel offended. It's bullshit.

There were 7,468 new cases in New York in the last 24 hours. The 24 hour period before that saw 6,337 new cases. Follow this for a moment because this is where things turn into bullshit (yes my fucking opinion, GD) if you go to the trouble first of verifying the numbers I just told you, then look for the numbers of new cases from mid march, when it was dozens of new cases per day, you will see that on a logarithmic graph, the growth rate will look exactly the same when it was dozens of new cases as it does now that there are thousands of new cases per day.

I told this to someone else who argued the science with me. Please, assume that I understand the advanced mathematics because I am a highly educated professional who lives by numbers very passionately dedicated to life science. It's not to say I can't be wrong, but you can assume I know what the words mean that I am using.

Now, that case growth in NYC, if you look at it logarithmically, is 16%. It's astronomical. It's anything but flat. If we're EXTREMELY fortunate, it will flatten now. Then, for several days (Hopefully not for weeks) there will be 7500 new cases, every single day. Then, there will be a slight decrease but still thousands of new cases per day, and if we're extremely lucky, it will decrease at the same rate that it increased for the last few weeks. The chances of it being that lucky are dismally low and I could get into that, in fact I'd love to. For now, we can agree that at best, there will be thousands of new cases, everyday, for weeks. That's what "flatten the curve" means. That only applies to a logarithmic graph. Looking at it in a linear graph, it's an increase of total cases by more than 6% in two days, suggesting a doubling time barely better than global average.

What they don't talk about much, but which I assure you is a part of this strategy, is the "pumping of the breaks". Meaning they will try to loosen the lockdowns enough to get some economic output, but then reapply the lockdowns. I'll try to find some more info on that. It's bleak as fuck.

All indications are that we will have to continue like this until there is a vaccine, 16 months from now while the economy is crushed. The point of "flattening the curve" is to not exceed the capacity of the healthcare system. So there's also a baseline which can go up and down based on how we equip that healthcare system. They want to keep that line above the apex of the curve.

If the curve continues to rise at the current rate, just in NYC, it will be 15k new cases per day, in a week (again, a hopeful estimate) and then we will look back on today, when it was just shy of half that as I wish that was the growth rate. That baseline is going to go down everytime a nurse or doctor dies.

It would take less then that amount of time to implement a system like the one in South Korea.

I am not offended one bit that you are wrong about social distancing working.

abandonconflict · Apr 15, 2020

Fogdog said:
I am not offended one bit that you are wrong about social distancing working.

I'm all for social distancing. What about those 7,468 New Yorkers in the last day? Should they be arrested now? They clearly broke the law and came into contact with fomites. Can you at least read the argument before you judge me? Pretty fucking please?

Budley Doright · Apr 15, 2020

Fogdog said:
I am not offended one bit that you are wrong about social distancing working.

Well it sure seems someone is getting offended lol.

Budley Doright · Apr 15, 2020

“That can be accounted for, in fact it facilitates the exposure of infection chains. It actually makes it easier that the spread is over a wider area.”
WTF? The spread was not over a wider area, it was concentrated to a large group of church goers for the most part, which would have made it easier to contain correct? This sure is fun lol.

doublejj · Apr 15, 2020

when the health care system gets overwhelmed, the economy has none chance.....were doomed. We must keep the health care system functioning.....wash your hands, stay home, save lives

Lockdowns don't work.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member