Shanghai Disneyland will close in effort to contain coronavirus

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yheIyCcicSU

It doesn't matter if it's "doable" to continue mitigation efforts. If we don't, the outcome will be more dead and sick people. I guess it goes back to what Gonch said weeks ago, how much is "ok?" Americans are still polling on the side of risking hunger over sickness at the moment, so people aren't going to flock back to restaurants even if they can.

If that uncertainty isn't enough, this is a really good read about the inconsistency of outcomes so far:

The Covid-19 Riddle: Why Does the Virus Wallop Some Places and Spare Others? https://nyti.ms/3fdwPFn

Interviews with more than two dozen infectious disease experts, health officials, epidemiologists and academics around the globe suggest four main factors that could help explain where the virus thrives and where it doesn’t: demographics, culture, environment and the speed of government responses.

Those four categories vary wildly even within the US.

Jeff said:

In the US, we're at 0.3% of the population. Even if 100 times the people have been infected because they were asymptomatic, that only gets us to 30%.

I get that the numbers you're throwing out are on the super optimistic side and I don't think anyone is seriously thinking that 30% of the population has it yet, but IF it were at that level, I could see an argument for making a move towards herd immunity for an additional 1 - 1.5x the current death toll (60k). That's getting much nearer to my break even point, though I wild-ass-guess that 100x is about an order of magnitude too high.

sirloindude said:

I just don't think staying shut down until one of the other three options is realized is doable without the severe consequences we've already gone on about numerous times.

I'm genuinely curious if we predict different things will happen or if we value different outcomes differently. What do you anticipate will be the outcome if we begin to rollback restrictions? Like, what is the best approach and what do you think is the median and mean outcome for that?

Jeff said:

Americans are still polling on the side of risking hunger over sickness at the moment, so people aren't going to flock back to restaurants even if they can.

This is purely one man's anecdotal experience, but I've been surprised at how different things look on TV and in print than it does once you step outside and see what people are doing. Granted, I'm seeing the people that are going to flock back to restaurants, but they're out there - even if the majority thinks otherwise. Assuming all the social distancing type stuff goes in to play, I think there's enough "I Need a haircut" crowd to open these places at that level. Now whether that actually helps or sustains those businesses is a different dilemma...

ApolloAndy said:

I'm genuinely curious if we predict different things will happen or if we value different outcomes differently.

I think that's been the disconnect for the majority of this conversation. I think there's a little variation among us for the former and a great deal of variation among us for the latter.

Jeff said:

I'll echo eightdotthree that we're close to the point where loosening restrictions makes sense (probably a week or two early)...

Jeff - I meant to ask you about this an eternity ago when you posted this (April 28). Why at that point did you think loosening the restrictions was starting to make sense? It seemed curious at the time that you were starting to feel OK with restarting some stuff.

And what has changed between now and then to make you rethink that?

As I scan through my social media feeds (why do I do that?!) I get the impression that there is a fairly large segment of the population, which seems to include people with authority, which seems to have forgotten the reason that we closed everything down in the first place. It wasn't to keep people from getting the virus. It was to keep everybody from getting sick with the virus all at once and overwhelming the healthcare system. So we buttressed the hospitals against the coming onslaught, shut everything down, and in theory, after 14 days we would be able to tell who was sick and who was healthy, separate those groups from each other and get on with our lives.

Roughly 50 days later, we've successfully protected the healthcare system, but people's genuine needs to circulate haven't stopped the spread of the virus. Not that they would have, given the free circulation of the virus in isolated populations. But that isn't the problem. The virus is still (slowly? rapidly?) infecting people, and people are still getting sick, but at a readily manageable rate.

We are all going to be exposed to this virus at some point. That's pretty much inevitable. Hopefully most of us will be exposed to small enough doses that we will make antibodies before we get sick. Eventually the infectious dose for most of us will be large enough that we don't have to worry about it anymore. And that will ultimately happen whether we are out and about in a restricted fashion or in an unrestricted fashion.

The question is, have we yet reached a point where the combination of new behaviors (wash your shpxvat hands! And I can't believe that is a new behavior) and prior exposure will continue to limit the hospitalization rate if restrictions are lifted? But the trouble with this is that we have no way of knowing unless we actually try it.

Watch closely the states that are opening up, but pay no mind to the skyrocketing confirmed case numbers, because that will be an artifact of increased testing. Watch what happens to the hospitals two weeks out. That's the number to watch.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Jeff said:

I don't see a world where regional parks open this year. I don't see how it could be a safe activity.

Holiday World has set a date

https://wbkr.com/holiday-world-sets-new-2020-opening-date-for-sunday-june-14th/

I expect to see more parks attempt a mid June opening. If the curve has been flattened and it's no more or less risky to go to a park than it is to go grocery shopping or back to work, why shouldn't they?

Came here to share that. How will they handle their drink and sunscreen stations? Staff at each one?

Also of note, Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) has gone from 33 to 25 to 3 new hospitalizations in the last three weeks. If that’s not a flattening of the curve I don’t know what is.

Shades said:
Why at that point did you think loosening the restrictions was starting to make sense? It seemed curious at the time that you were starting to feel OK with restarting some stuff.

Well, notice I said, "Where it makes sense." I'm sure that means something totally different to each person here. 😁 I think we've learned enough to use safer behaviors in certain circumstances. No-contact delivery, restaurant take-out, circulating apart in parks, etc., we're getting good at those.

But I wouldn't get a massage or a tattoo yet, or go to a movie theater or theme park. Honestly, I wouldn't go to a restaurant either, but happy to get takeout.

I am curious what the 25% restaurant capacity will look like in FL starting tomorrow. Will most people still do takeout? Or will there be demand to sit and eat in the restaurant?

Gates in why testing as it is today isn't useful:

https://www.inc.com/jason-aten/bill-gates-says-covid-19-testing-is-...ix-it.html

He's an unlikely expert in all of this, because curing disease is one of the primary functions of the foundation. It's what he has been doing for a long time.

There's a really good podcast (also transcribed) with Gates at Vox.

https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/2020/4/27/21236270/bill-gat...es-podcast

He really seems to know his stuff.

To summarize the last 6-7 weeks of our lives, this thread, and everything the news has reported:

The key is testing. We must have testing. Testing isn't useful. A viable vaccine is two years away. A viable treatment isn't close. But this treatment might be viable. No wait, it's not. But this one is. Well, maybe. But we're rushing the vaccine. But it'lll still take two years. You can't go anywhere. Ok, well, you can go to these places on List A. But not these places on List B. But after this arbitrary date you can go to some of the places from List B. But not all of them. We've got a List C going, but we aren't ready to share what it is yet. But you can go to List B. Unless too many people go, then it's back to only List A. But if not enough people go to the List B locations they'll lose money and close forever. Holiday World is opening in a month. But theme parks won't be able to open until 2022! The only safe way to get through this is to stay at home and slow the spread! Any time you step foot onto your driveway you start your 14 days all over again! But you have to go out and resume your life - we've got to get some sort of herd immunity among the healthy population! Only .0001% of people have had it. But maybe 30% of us have had it and don't even know! We need antibody tests! But the antibody tests aren't accurate! But if you have the antibodies you are immune. Except in cases when immunity wears down and you are able to catch it again.

No wonder the last six weeks have made my dreams so f***ed up.

It makes me wonder what we would think if we were living in New Zealand.

BrettV said:

I am curious what the 25% restaurant capacity will look like in FL starting tomorrow. Will most people still do takeout? Or will there be demand to sit and eat in the restaurant?

The "Im healthy, don't lock me up" crowd will flock to the restaurants and as soon as they realize they have to wait an hour for their favorite place because the place only has 12 tables at 25% capacity they will go back to take-out until restrictions are lifted. I still intend to do take-out for the foreseeable future.

BrettV said:

If the curve has been flattened and it's no more or less risky to go to a park than it is to go grocery shopping or back to work, why shouldn't they?

Because one is essential/necessary/unavoidable and the other is strictly leisure?

I agree. But, as I mentioned in my example from the other day. Is my local Krispy Kreme any more or less essential than Cedar Point? If anything, I'd say Cedar Point is more essential as it seems the entire City of Sandusky depends on them having some kind of season.

No more essential than a carwash but you could visit both with minimal contact with anyone. Not exactly the same when visiting Cedar Point.

Here’s A Way To Contain Covid-19 And Reopen The Economy In As Little As One Month

So this is a thing.