Shanghai Disneyland will close in effort to contain coronavirus

Sure - first principles come into conflict all the time. Figuring that out - or, helping people understand better what their moral beliefs are, and which are more important, and when - is part of the point.

Maybe you are younger than I am. But I just don't have the time to help people understand better what their moral beliefs are or which are more important. And if I did, I think that would appeal to me a little less than a trip to the Star Wars hotel (even if you paid for my trip I would have no interest).

At least we know where you stand on the Star Wars slider.

You're wrong, of course. ;)

The take on Star Wars was what earned my +1 on the post.

And a new Coasterbuzz meme was born...

The Vulnerable Can Wait. Vaccinate the Super-Spreaders First

GoBucks89 said:

But I just don't have the time to help people understand better what their moral beliefs are or which are more important.

Isn't this the most essential and critical part of advancing a society? Behavior is learned, and if we're not teaching the "right" behavior, then we have white people wearing hoods and carrying tiki torches.

A take that our individual morality should not come into play in helping us decide and explain what we think is right is....interesting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/23/health/coronavirus-holiday-gatherings.html

Listen to science, data and experts!

But are dinners and backyard barbecues really the engine driving the current surge of infections? The available data do not support that contention, scientists say. Still, the idea has been repeated so often it has become conventional wisdom, leading to significant restrictions in many states.

But many epidemiologists are far less certain, saying there is little evidence to suggest that household gatherings were the source of the majority of infections since the summer. Indeed, it has become much harder to pinpoint any source of any outbreak, now that the virus is so widespread and Americans may be exposed in so many ways.

“Somebody says something, and somebody else says it, and then it just becomes truth,” said Julia Marcus, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Harvard University. “I worry about this narrative that doesn’t yet seem to be data-based.”

Social gatherings have become a convenient scapegoat for political leaders flummoxed by the steeply climbing numbers, some experts said.

“It seems like they’re passing off the responsibility for controlling the outbreak to individuals and individual choices,” said Ellie Murray, an epidemiologist at Boston University.

A constant drumbeat about the dangers of social gatherings may help to convey the seriousness of the current surge, she said. On the other hand, in some states the misperception has led to draconian policies that don’t square with science.

Lord Gonchar said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/23/health/coronavirus-holiday-gatherings.html

Listen to science, data and experts!

Indeed, it has become much harder to pinpoint any source of any outbreak, now that the virus is so widespread and Americans may be exposed in so many ways.

The answer is we don't f-ing know anything about what is happening in the US, because we are testing too few people and have insufficient contact tracing. Other countries do have this data, though---it turns out the US is not the only place this is happening, and those other countries can teach us stuff. One of the things those countries are teaching us is that indoor gatherings that take place over time with unmasked people talking with one another in the presence of inadequate ventilation is a good way to spread infection.

Put more simply, the secondary headline is "these get-togethers may not account for the huge rise in cases.", not "these get-togethers do not account for the huge rise in cases."

Don't conflate "we can't tell" with "it's not true."

You're also changing the context. The article says that individual gatherings absolutely cause the spread of infection at the appropriate scale, but not necessarily the spike we're seeing now.

How many times are we going to have this murky discussion along the lines of, "We don't know, so maybe don't trust anything, and just live your lives?"

Jeff said:

How many times are we going to have this murky discussion along the lines of, "We don't know, so maybe don't trust anything, and just live your lives?"

Probably as many times as we say to follow experts, science and data...unless it conflicts with personal concerns.

A couple important bits from that NYT piece:

In most places, the virus is too widespread to claim with any confidence where someone became infected. Where once clusters were obvious — in nursing homes and meatpacking plants, for example — now there are thousands of small outbreaks in restaurants, bars, bowling alleys, colleges and gyms.

In this sort of conflagration, it’s impossible to estimate how much social gatherings contribute to community transmission.

In Minnesota, up to the week ending Nov. 12, there were about 202,000 coronavirus infections...

...more than 115,000 of the cases could not be traced back to a known setting. “Identifying any one activity as the driver of the surge misses the fact that all activities become riskier as local case levels rise,” Dr. Murray said.

So basically the takeaway is that small private gatherings could have been safe, maybe, if we weren't in the midst of a massive outbreak resulting from people packing into restaurants, bars, colleges, etc. for the last several months. But we are in the middle of a massive outbreak, so it's not safe to have small private gatherings.

When cases are in the "red" zone (currently all but two states) the White House Coronavirus Task Force which includes Dr Fauci recommends the limit on private gatherings because like djDaemon mentions, there's so much infection out there that the risks are much higher.

What individual state governments decide to do does get weird, but the recommendations on private gatherings is based on guidance from the WCTF and CDC.

Criteria
New cases above 100 per 100,000 population in the last 7 days, and a diagnostic test positivity result above 10%.

Recommendations
For policy makers:

• Close bars and gyms, and create outdoor dining opportunities with pedestrian areas.
• Limit social gatherings to 10 people or fewer.
• Institute routine weekly testing of all workers in assisted living and long-term care facilities. Require masks for all staff and prohibit visitors.
• Ensure that all business retailers and personal services require masks and can safely social distance.

For everyone else:

• Wear a mask at all times outside the home and maintain physical distance.
• Limit social gatherings to 10 people or fewer.
• Do not go to bars, nightclubs, or gyms.
• Use take-out or eat outdoors socially distanced.
• Reduce your public interactions and activities to 25% of your normal activity.

References
https://covidactnow.org/
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/28/us/states-report-vir...ly-26.html

I think a big part of the reason we are seeing so much attention placed on private gatherings is that while various mitigation strategies can be employed and enforced in public settings, that simply is not possible in private settings. If you are asking government to solve the problem, government can only solve the problem in areas where it has influence. That pesky fourth amendment puts pretty severe limitations on what government can require you to do or to not do when you are in your home. Unable to mandate mitigation in private settings, the alternative is a PR campaign.

Of course that means the strategy of shutting down or limiting access to activities and facilities in public places where mitigation strategies can be required, deployed and enforced and thus pushing people back into private spaces makes a whole lot of sense, right? My Governor asked me to reduce my interactions with other people on a daily basis, then effectively told all the restaurants and retailers to close early. So last night for the first time in four months I had to wait for a table at a restaurant, and I had to shop for groceries in a store packed with people. How does this help, again? What science tells us the virus only comes out after 10pm? Why aren't we mandating that stores stay open all night long to spread the crowds out?

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Lord Gonchar said two weeks ago:

The rise in numbers is about to collide with Thanksgiving gatherings and an awful lot of people are going to be getting dead grandparents for Christmas this year.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with anyone here (hence the self-quote).

You can rationalize, question, interpret and read subtext however you'd like. But experts and scientists in that article explicitly state that data doesn't confirm that personal gatherings are responsible for the latest surge.

That's all. Don't kill the messenger.

Lord Gonchar said:

Jeff said:

How many times are we going to have this murky discussion along the lines of, "We don't know, so maybe don't trust anything, and just live your lives?"

Probably as many times as we say to follow experts, science and data...unless it conflicts with personal concerns.

I go back to the example I've used before... I may not be personally concerned that the sun can cause skin cancer, but it will still cause skin cancer if I don't take precautions. That's what's asinine about this entire faction of people who try to make this political. Nature itself gives no ****s what your concerns are, it's still going to infect you if it can, and 1 in 100 won't survive it. Maybe some people are cool with that, but the same narcissism that leads them to believe that their opinions are on equal footing with experts also puts me and people I care about at risk, because I have to share this rock with them. Not sure where that puts them on the morality scale, but if "selfish asshole" is a notch, it's probably there.

Behavior is learned. How many hours are you dedicating every day to teaching people to be less selfish assholey (as an essential and critical part of advancing our society)?

Between being a parent, managing people and lecturing people on CoasterBuzz, apparently a lot. It was an essential part of coaching high school volleyball as well. It's a part of my talks on process generally, too. I don't know if it really takes a village, but I'm not gonna sit here and opt out as "not my problem."

How is teaching morals an essential part of coaching volleyball?

I would believe that teaching sportsmanship is at least equivalent to teaching morals. It is difficult to have one without the other.

Coming from another youth coach.