Shanghai Disneyland will close in effort to contain coronavirus

Actual text from my kid in Paris:

<link to CNN article about Paris being at risk of lockdown>

Welp, it's been a fun week y'all. LOL. Perhaps this was caused by the man I watched push his mask down so he could sneeze into his hand on the metro, so ya know."

I know it's in fashion to **** all over ourselves (the US) about how much we suck at everything, but the truth is, we're pretty average when grading on the curve. I think most of the people that point at other countries as superior examples would often be surprised to see that country firsthand. But I digress.

So yeah, latest kid update is that Paris remains worse than what she was seeing here.

At some point, (and this is mostly for conversation, devil's advocate type stuff), maybe the problem isn't that people (as a whole) won't lockdown/mask up long term, but rather that we expect them to and adopt such a sanctimonious tone when they don't?

I mean, it's just not happening at large. You can't exactly blame the example that Trump is setting for actions of the European populations. At what point are you fighting a losing battle?

At what point are we asking people to do too many things that go against human nature all at once for too long? And as Gonch mentions being snippy when they can't/won't do it to the level we are asking and feel they ought to be capable of? Many people complaining that others are "selfish" because they won't do what is asked/demanded of them but I don't think a lot of people truly realize what they are asking of others. Not to be a jerk but to put a bit of context to this I'm about to end up medicated just to be able to function and follow the state mask mandate at the same time.

Really? If wearing a mask and keeping distance from people is too hard for the general public, we're ****ed if we have to do anything genuinely hard. There's no shame in needing to medicate for anything.

I don't think we get to say we're average with 4% of the population and 20% of the deaths. We're definitely something, but not average.

Lord Gonchar said:

I mean, it's just not happening at large. You can't exactly blame the example that Trump is setting for actions of the European populations. At what point are you fighting a losing battle?

I don't think anyone is blaming Trump for anything happening across the pond. The point is, he does have a huge influence here...in an almost cult-like fashion to his minions (although to be fair this tribalism is not rare for either party, especially so close to an election).

He had an enormous opportunity to influence/change the behavior of millions of Americans, and he failed. Miserably. That doesn't help anyone like Wahoo Skipper who actually has to work with these people on a daily basis. His diagnosis could have been a turning point, but instead it became an even deeper line drawn in the proverbial sand.

There were some interesting stats that I saw (I'm sure they're Googleable) where early in the pandemic, counties that voted Hillary in 2016 accounted for the majority of cases, which one would reasonably expect anyway because they were also the most densely populated, and cities tend to vote Democrat. The same was true of blue states in general. Then shortly after Memorial Day, and into June, the trend reversed. Red states, and those run by Republican governors, started to see the biggest rises in new infections, Ohio being a notable exception. This is true today, when you look at the NYT list of states where "new cases are higher and staying high." You could argue that this is just the pandemic making its way to rural America, but the per capita infection rates of most of these rural counties are higher than they ever were in NYC. I think the leadership at the top and at the state level matters. I mean, North Dakota and Montana, what the hell are they doing up there?

It's worth noting that the poor and minorities are, as usual, being hurt the worst in all ways, in terms of health and economy.

I'm just the messenger. Trump has come up more than a few times. We sort of have a control group and... well...

Jeff said:

Well, pandemic apathy is definitely not just an American phenomenon.

‘Pandemic fatigue’ affects parts of Europe as they lock down again, the W.H.O. warns

(Again, just playing a little devil's advocate if I'm being totally honest.)

Jeff said:

If wearing a mask and keeping distance from people is too hard for the general public, we're ****ed if we have to do anything genuinely hard.

I don't think it's that it's hard. It's not hard...at all. And that's why it's so frustrating. It's just not something that people (all over the world, apparently) are going to do long term. (or short term as the case may be)

I mean, isn't this sort of the same reasoning you guys gave me for not separating/protecting/isolating the oldest, most vulnerable segment of the population? That it's too hard to do?

We've been over it a million times, but we all value different things and have different tolerances for risk and ability for risk assessment and so on and so forth. While it may be simple to an individual, it's far from simple to a population.

All you have to do is match the names to the posts to see the wide rainbow of individual hot takes on the whole pandemic. None of us is right. Most of us just think we are.

I dunno. I chose the word "sanctimonious" deliberately in that last post, because after six months an 113 pages, I finally figured out that's the recurring tone in the thread that I find particularly offputting.

Jeff said:

Really? If wearing a mask and keeping distance from people is too hard for the general public, we're ****ed if we have to do anything genuinely hard.

Where is the quantitative evidence that any of these measures used to mitigate the spread of this virus (masks, lockdowns, distancing, school and border closures, etc.) actually work?

The top 10 countries in coronavirus deaths per million population all have masks mandates and have locked down in some capacity, some extremely hard in both categories (see Peru). Sweden is 12th. No lockdowns, no masks. Sweden has had single digit COVID daily mortality for more than 75 consecutive days, including many days with zero. For comparison, Michigan (who has a similar population, with a mask mandate and that locked down) has had 22 days total with single digit mortality during that same timeframe.

Regarding school closures, we've known for a while that those under the age of 25 are statistically at almost no risk from the virus (less than 500 deaths total out of 100 million in that age group in the US). There's a gentleman by the name of Andrew Bostom who has been compiling data on 50 different universities since they reopened. You can see the data and accompanying chart here. Out of 70,000 "cases" (i.e., positive tests) there have been a total of 3 hospitalizations and 0 deaths at those schools among students. Schools simply are not major sources of transmission, and we know that because many European countries kept their schools open with no discernible increase in virus spread. Sweden has had schools for under age 16 students open during this entire episode. They have had a total of zero COVID deaths for those under the age of 20.

At some point we need to question whether the COVID countermeasures are even effective at all (with the notable exception of strategies protecting high-risk individuals, which we need to continue to do). We have real-world data now. We're already starting to see the high costs as a result of these measures - major increases in suicides, homicides, Alzheimer's deaths, domestic abuse, disadvantaged children being left behind in schools, contraction of GDP. Some of the results won't be evidenced for years down the road - increased deaths because of missed medical diagnoses, increases in worldwide famine, etc. This won't be the last worldwide health crisis. The sooner we learn about how effective, if at all, these measures are the better we can respond next time we're faced with a similar situation.

Really? Are you even occupying the same planet as the rest of us? Forget the lockdowns for the moment, because there never really were any lockdowns. Basically restaurants and bars closed in most places, that was it.

Masks and social distancing do work, and there are mountains of peer reviewed studies that indicate this. Try the Googlefoo. Heck, even zookeepers have worn masks working with primates for years prior to the pandemic. Why do you suppose that is?

Where do kids go after school? They go home to their adult parents and grandparents. You know that, right? Schools most certainly are a transmission vector. You made the argument for me... they're less at risk and don't die very often. Bummer that they have to live with grownups. My wife practically barfs up a lung every time she gets bronchitis, but by all means, let's put our kid on a bus with other kids that pick their noses and don't wash their hands in the bathroom. Kids are gross. They've already had to temporarily close two high schools in my district.

There are no federally compiled statistics on suicide in the US in 2020. The numbers do not exist, let alone any large studies that draw any kind of causation between suicide and the pandemic. Shooting deaths are up (despite an overall drop in violent crime), and the change in many cities is tied more closely to the civil rights triggering events than the pandemic.

You want quantitative evidence that you can readily find, but yet the first link you made is to a propaganda site run by a marketing "consultant" who has zero expertise in anything useful if you look at his LinkedIn profile. Your second link is to an Irish Times article that says, "The report says it is unknown how infectious asymptomatic children are." We knew in July, with a study involving 65,000 people that kids are effective spreaders, especially 10 and up. Another study of a quarter-million people reinforced this observation.

Please don't spread bull**** here.

...not to mention sanctimonious jerks killing each other over masks and other stupid crap...

What has happened is that the onslaught of COVID rules, combined with the entirely predictable results of taking away the routine, livelihood, recreation, employment, education, social interaction, and finally even the faces and voices of most of the population has increased everyone's level of aggravation, disrupted everyone's lives, and left everybody looking for someone to blame. It's made everybody perpetually mad as hell, put people on hair-triggers, then given them plenty to be upset about. And we wonder why overdoses, homicides, suicides, and all forms of domestic violence are on a dramatic increase this year.

All because "we're really not asking that much, just a few simple things." Everybody thinks he has the answers, and is so upset, aggravated and fatigued as to be ready to throw a punch at anyone who disagrees. To say nothing of the level of political discourse.

"Sanctimonious". Yeah, that's a word for it. And over the past six months it's been taken to new levels and given people more reasons than ever to hate each other. I don't know about you, but I am not particularly enjoying it. I guess some people must, though...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Challenges with the virus. Health impact ranges from mild/no symptoms to symptoms that resolve in several weeks without medical intervention to serious symptoms requiring hospotalization but resolving to death. Risk in that spectrum isn't random though. Certain people are at much higher risks of being on the worse end of that spectrum than others.

Mitigation impacts are on a spectrum as well. Some people are not impacted at all. Or at least are only marginally impacted. At least economically. More so socially but some groups are more impacted than others by the social aspects as well. Other people have lost their jobs (employer shut down/closed or just reductions in staff). Some kids in school are doing better than others. Get behind and its often tough to catch up.

Overlay the two spectrums and there is a tendency for people to be on the opposite sides. Low risk side for virus impacts and high impact side of mitigation efforts. And vice versa. Not 100% overlap though.

Further challenging is uncertainty of timing of need for mitigation. Hope is its shorter term going forward. But that is uncertain. Still waiting for a safe and effective vaccine. Also not sure how long they will last or how effective they will be. Flu shots are good for about 6 months but it works because there is a flu season. Covid doesn't appear to have a season. May change going forward but we just don't know. Acceptable mitigation efforts from a societal standpoint look much different if they are needed for say 6 months versus 2-3 years (or longer). But at this point we don't know that.

RideMan said:

All because "we're really not asking that much, just a few simple things."

Wearing a piece of cloth over my face and not being an asshole have hardly been a burden on my every day life. I've already been doing the latter my whole life, give or a take a few questionable moments in my teens and early 20s. Like I've said here before, I am extremely fortunate that I have not lost employment and am not in, nor do I come into regular contact with, anyone in a high risk group.

I feel like because so many people aren't willing to do a few simple things, everyone has to then deal with more than that as time progresses.

RideMan said:

...taking away the routine...

The wording you use is the problem. People act like there's some oppressive force of human beings who have imposed this on the world. That's stupid. No one gets cancer and thinks, "Damn the people who make me do chemo!" There is a highly contagious pathogen that passes through the air between people and appears to kill 1 in 100 people. No one took anything away, we're responding the way a society has to reduce the amount of death.

And we wonder why overdoses, homicides, suicides, and all forms of domestic violence are on a dramatic increase this year.

Except none of that is true, as I mentioned above. There is no data about suicide available, homicides are linked mostly to occurrences of police killings, and overall violent crime is in fact still going down, 2% as of July.

Check your facts, yo.

Lord Gonchar said:

I dunno. I chose the word "sanctimonious" deliberately in that last post, because after six months an 113 pages, I finally figured out that's the recurring tone in the thread that I find particularly offputting.

Jeff said:
Really? Are you even occupying the same planet as the rest of us?

Not sure what Gonch is talking about...

The question "where is the quantitative evidence" reminds me of when Occupy Wall Street was going on, and reporters kept repeating the question, "What do they want?" They had actually published a manifesto stating exactly what they wanted, you just had to read it. You didn't have to agree with it, obviously, or think it was remotely achievable - but it was there. Likewise, we're piling up tons of quantitative evidence, but you have to actually look for it and read the articles.

It's fair to say the general-audience media hasn't done a good job of summarizing this stuff. That's frustrating. It takes a bit more time, which not all of us have, and a functioning S-detector. For me, the most convincing sources have been Vox, which regularly runs good summaries of what we know now, and the Atlantic. From the latter, an interesting explanation of what happened in Japan. Long and a bit technical, but it strikes me as an explanation consistent with the facts we know.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-var...ic/616548/

(Paywall at the Atlantic; you get 4 free looks per month.)

I'm not sure why believing observable fact is now "sanctimonious" any more than calling educated scientists and doctors is "elite" in a negative sense. I'm just exhausted by this idea that everyone can "draw their own conclusions" about things they don't even take the time to understand, let alone observe what is in plain sight.

Sorry, but I am going to get a little bit personal here. I don't know how much this applies to anybody else, but...well, here we go...

BrettV said:

Wearing a piece of cloth over my face and not being an asshole have hardly been a burden on my every day life.

That's easy for you to say because it's easy for you. Believe it or not, it isn't easy for everybody no matter how much you would like to pretend that it is. Since I am not an asshole, I thought it would be easy for me...until I found out that it isn't. Now I'm second-guessing my now-irreversible decision to vote in person because I forgot to consider the fact that I'm going to have to sign my name, which is kind of hard to do when your hands are shaking uncontrollably, which is one of the more noticeable unpleasant things that tend to happen when I wrap a piece of cloth over my face. I deal with it because...as I mentioned previously...I am not an asshole.

But that I am dealing with it means I am an adult and I am not an asshole. It doesn't mean it's easy, and it doesn't mean I don't become a pretty aggravated, agitated, and at times downright nasty person to deal with as a result. Don't irritate me in the grocery store; I am doing my best not to just destroy everything in reach and go barreling straight through the plate glass window to remove myself from the situation. Because that's what my lizard-brain, the part that's exclusively tasked with keeping me alive, which is absolutely convinced that *something* is dreadfully wrong, desperately wants me to do.

This is, of course, why I haven't been to Cedar Point this season.

Just because it's easy for you doesn't mean it's easy for everybody. And as this situation continues I am finding it's getting worse, not better, for me. Thankfully, on that mitigation impact scale that GoBucks89 talked about, I'm actually benefitting from some of the mitigation impacts, as I now get to work from home. That's especially good because I am relatively high risk, I have at least three of the top comorbidities, and my official workplace is a giant call center floor...one of the most dangerous scenarios possible for virus distribution, where a non-trivial number of people have tested positive since March.

I don't want to argue about the science. I understand the mechanism. I understand the anecdotal data (and I don't care enough to research the experimental data). I understand the theory. I also understand that it's useless to put so much effort into trying to put masks on healthy people just because we don't have a quick, cheap, reliable, and widespread testing or screening method to figure out who is actually healthy...so we have to make the clearly inaccurate, (but only "safe") assumption that everybody is sick. It just isn't a good assumption to make, and it really isn't getting us any closer to the end of this epidemic.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

What RideMan said...if you aren't having the issues we are you won't understand what it feels like. It's bad enough that it feels the way it does but having people not understand or appreciate how hard you're trying makes it that much worse.

Yeah, I get it, but raging about it is like having skin cancer and raging against sunscreen. It's just what you have to do, and it's nobody's fault.

Not really. It's like if the leaders/experts of our country mandated that we must put on sunscreen at all times if we're outside.

And I can assure you that I would not be compliant. I couldn't tell you the last time I wore sunscreen.

But it's still not a fair comparison because I can't give you skin cancer when I don't wear sunscreen - which goes back to the masks. I wear it to protect you (and shut you up). If there was no risk to others and the only COVID risk was to me, I wouldn't be wearing a mask in public.

Lord Gonchar said:

If there was no risk to others and the only COVID risk was to me, I wouldn't be wearing a mask in public.

In this scenario there would be no reason to wear a mask in public...