Shanghai Disneyland will close in effort to contain coronavirus

That doesn't seem like a very data-driven decision, but maybe I'm just so used to failure to react at this point and people dying that I'm biased away from caution. Netherlands is at 86 cases per 100k, NYC is at 61, the US overall at 37, for comparison. I guess if I talk myself through it, maybe it's reasonable but only because we still don't have hard data on how sick people are getting from this new thing. Two conflicting studies have been published indicating same severity and less, but neither one seemed to have large samples. What's different this time is that they believe they can call an end date.

Data in an dof itself doesn't make policy decisions. Someone needs to set policy based on various data available (at least if data based approach is to be taken). Different policy makers will set different policies given the same data.

The linked article notes several things about the Netherlands which presumably played into the policy decision. Cases have actually dropped somewhat recently from record levels after a nighttime lockdown was put in place last month. Omicron arrived when the country was already dealing with a wave of infections.

Omicron cases have surged since first being found in the country 3 weeks ago. By sometime between Christmas and New Years Eve, its expected to be the most dominant variant of the virus in the country.

Hospitals in the Netherlands are already struggling with large numbers of patients in Covid wards (near the highest levels of the year). Prime Minister said that failure to act now would likely lead to "an unmanageable situation in hospitals" which have already scaled back regular care to make room for Covid cases.

More than 85% of the adult Dutch population is vaccinated but fewer than 9% of adults have had boosters (one of lowest rates in Europe). US has a higher rate.

Netherlands reported 14,616 new cases in 24 hrs. With a population of 17.44 million, thats the equivalent of about 275k cases in the US. Yesterday the US reported about 170k cases.

Data driven decisions shouldn't be based on one piece of data. You have to look at all the relevant available data. You can make different/less cautious decision now but if it proves to be wrong in several weeks, you can't go back and unring that bell.

Yeah, that's why I used per capita numbers, to adjust for inflation. If we're at 1 in 6 boosted, that's only 17%, we're not that far ahead. But it's probably more accurate to compare the Netherlands to a US state, given the size. But you can be sure that Michigan won't shut anything down.

So is not closing a data driven decision or is closing a data driven decision?

I don't know what you're arguing. I'm only saying that it doesn't seem like we have enough data to make decisions yet. Maybe that's coming tomorrow. I don't know.

Asking questions isn't arguing. Its trying to better understand the views of someone else.

Presumably Rutte would acknowledge the uncertainty. Said failure to act "likely" would lead to unmanageable situation at hospitals. Not stating that with certainty. Issue though is by the time you better understand the risks, you are already in the soup if you expect Omicron to be dominant variant in the country in the next week or two.

The Netherlands is about 10 percentage points higher than the US in fully vaccination rates. And more than 20 percentage points higher than the US in terms of at least one dose. In the US, the talk is of a crisis of the unvaccinated. The Dutch (all other things being equal -- they have slightly higher percentage of population over 65 but fewer overweight/obese percentages) should be in less of a crisis than is the US. But that doesn't appear to be the case. Though not having all of the data comparing situations in the two countries.

There's some nuance in this article that at least calls out some of the uncertainty. The problem is twofold: Most of the vaccines delivered globally are not the more effective Moderna/Pfizer, which even then are only preventing infection at three doses. The other thing is that every study so far is observing lab conditions, putting the virus in with patient samples to measure the likelihood of infection. That's not entirely reliable, as we've seen when we try to account for the differences between New York, California, Florida and Michigan.

After thinking about it since last night, I have to conceded that premature overreaction may be more productive than doing nothing. I mean, we've measured economic risk versus death once before, and it wasn't great for the people who died, or global healthcare systems. I just doubt most cultures have the stomach for it.

I feel like if the US tried to impose any of the 2020 style stay at home suggestions that some called lockdowns, January 6 style events around the country would not be a far fetched thing to become concerned about.

Moderna is saying that if you're boosted, again, you're pretty much in the safe zone as before against omicron. So in wealthy nations where you have a booster, you continue to deal with a pandemic that poses almost no risk to you. That is deeply frustrating.

First world problems?

It doesn't matter if it is. The mental health cost of the last two years is real.

The virus doesn't care about mental health.

#2020throwback

Well that's the problem. We have to pick the lesser of two evils, when a third non-evil option exists.

YES. That's why the situation sucks. This isn't April 2020, we don't have to choose between shutting everything down and risking infection. We've had a solution to that problem for a year.

I'm on a boat right now that requires all adults be vaccinated, and every human is tested before entering the terminal building. They went from the most risky thing to do to probably the safest. Let's stop pretending there's no positive outcome possible.

Jeff said:

So in wealthy nations where you have a booster, you continue to deal with a pandemic that poses almost no risk to you. That is deeply frustrating.

Yeah, I hate when something poses almost no risk to me.

You know that's not what I meant. I have to deal with all of the mitigation protocols because of moron vaccine skeptics.

Cruising back in October actually felt super safe and everything was done right. We had a blast and didn’t have covid.

Also, how dare you! Paul Rudd doesn’t need your audience to be sexy and must be protected at all costs.

Jeff said:

You know that's not what I meant. I have to deal with all of the mitigation protocols because of moron vaccine skeptics.

Same. But for some reason I find myself angriest at the unnecessary mitigation protocols.

Want a data point?
Three people in my household, all of us tested positive over the weekend. I have had two shots of Pfizer (haven't been able to find a booster yet), and I'm less sick than a typical head cold. In fact that's what I thought I had until other people in the household started getting sick. So we tested, and failed.

We haven't followed up with PCR tests, but I'm pretty sure it's Omicron. Unvaccinated Adult #1 is having a kind of a rough time, but it's really just discomfort. Unvaccinated Adult #2 is younger and barely has any symptoms. Immunized Adult is just happy he can still work from home.

The moral of this is that first of all the vaccines are effective even against Omigodicron even if they can't completely prevent infection. And second, Omigodicron presents as a head cold, so if you think that's what you have, you should probably get tested.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

They are saying that people in London with cold symptoms are more likely to have Covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/15/londoners-with-cold-s...rt-omicron

Advising people who think they have a cold to get tested for Covid. But its a challenge to find testing right now (either PCR or at-home kits). Have heard more test availability is expected in a couple of weeks. But in terms of the holidays that is a little like saying we have a lot of roses coming in the last week of February.