The hypocrisy of politicians and lock downs

[tango]

I do find Gavin‘s actions disgusting. And he’s not the only one. But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong about the threat.

We can make endless claims and counterclaims. It's hard to take warnings of a threat seriously when the governor and some of the top medics talk as if this virus is deadly and then act as if it's nothing to be worried about. Maybe they just think the rules are for other people but you'd have thought the people at the top would know more than the rest of us, and if they aren't worried it's hard to see why we should be worried.

 

[tango]

The fatality rate is complex. Estimates take into account the fact that not all cases were reported. If you look just at reported cases, you'd get a fatality rate of 2%. Everyone agrees that this is too high. In the Spring the fatality estimate I believed was 0.5% or a bit higher. (Here's the most recent estimate I've seen. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-10-covid-deaths-infection-fatality-ratio.html. It's about 1%.)

I haven't seen estimates for the current spike. My point is that looking at the reported cases and seeing that we don't see as many deaths as in the past doesn't work, because we're probably getting more reported cases. But that's looking at conclusions a layman draws from the reported numbers. The actual fatality rate that people quote isn't based on reported cases, but estimates of actual.

I'd guess that that real rate has also gone down somewhat. There are better treatments than in the Spring. But you can't use the case numbers you see in the press to verify that.

Hmmm.... here's something discussing the decrease over time: https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/11/03/death-rates-have-fallen-for-hospitalized-covid-19-patients-as-treatments-improve/. However it may be slightly misleading. In the Spring hospitals were severely limited in capacity. It's reasonable to assume that a larger fraction of people who are infected are now going to the hospital. That would tend to lower the death rate in hospitals. That rate isn't quie comparable to the overall IFR, the fraction of all people infected who die, which is what most people mean by death rate.

Sure, the fatality rate is simple in theory but figuring the numerator and denominator is tricky. What we can be certain of is that the numerator was probably overstated and the denominator was almost certainly understated. I remember back in April or May I read a report that indicated CDC estimates were that people under about 50 with no particular health issues were expected to have something like a 99.95% survival rate.

If we're getting more reported cases but not as many reported deaths that suggests the fatality rate is lower. Maybe it was always lower and we just had the denominator badly wrong before. It's certainly possible. I know several people (myself included) who are convinced we had COVID back in February, long before it was officially anywhere near this area. I personally know someone who was sick at around the same time I was, who believes they had COVID at that time, who recently gave blood and tested positive for COVID antibodies. Another person (mid 60s and obese) lost taste and smell (this was before loss of taste and smell were associated with the virus), got laid out for a couple of weeks and then it passed and they got on with their life. It does start to raise questions about whether the two doctors who were talking about the number of people infected with the virus being vastly higher than we were being told (and the implication that the fatality rate was far lower than we were being told) but who were endlessly censored were actually right about it. It's starting to look like a very plausible possibility at the moment.

Improved survival rate due to better hospital treatment certainly goes some way towards explaining a reduced fatality rate, but most people I know who have tested positive don't have symptoms anywhere near bad enough to warrant hospital treatment. One person (in their early 30s) lost taste and smell and that's about it. An older couple (late 60s) are tired all the time but both still very much at home. Hospital treatments improving go some way to explaining a reduced death rate in hospital but doesn't explain why case numbers spiking doesn't seem to result in a comparable spike in hospitalizations. Looking at the charts you'd be forgiven for expecting the kind of apocalypse scenario the media were howling about in April but it's just not here. Maybe it's yet to come. Maybe the virus has mutated and is less dangerous now. It's hard to know among all the media howling.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

We can make endless claims and counterclaims. It's hard to take warnings of a threat seriously when the governor and some of the top medics talk as if this virus is deadly and then act as if it's nothing to be worried about. Maybe they just think the rules are for other people but you'd have thought the people at the top would know more than the rest of us, and if they aren't worried it's hard to see why we should be worried.

I agree here. In B.C. there are restrictions for all of two weeks with the hope of "bending the curve". And two weeks will do... what? But I suppose that restrictions are supposed to be some panacea - some belief that the officials are "on top of it"

 

[tango]

I agree here. In B.C. there are restrictions for all of two weeks with the hope of "bending the curve". And two weeks will do... what? But I suppose that restrictions are supposed to be some panacea - some belief that the officials are "on top of it"

I said back in about April that unless lockdowns were total and global, to the point that nothing moved until every single person with the virus had either recovered or died, then cases would start to rise as soon as lockdowns were ended. It seemed like basic common sense. Instead our "flatten the curve" rhetoric turned into "flatten the economy" as the rules dragged on, and on, and on, with no end in sight and no indication that the governors-turned-emperors would ever give up the power they unilaterally seized.

How the US can call itself the land of liberty now remains a mystery. At least in North Korea a man can choose between eight or so hairstyles. For much of the US for so many months a man wasn't even allowed to go and get his hair cut at all. Unless he was the governor of course - looking smart on TV is obviously more important than obeying your own rules.

Usually I enjoy conspiracy theories as a source of amusement - some of them can be quite inventive. Increasingly I'm finding myself wondering how much of the restrictions we're being subjected to, with the endlessly shifting rules based on data nobody will release and science that's apparently settled but varies day to day and location by location, are more about social engineering than anything else. When science "proves" things that are the exact opposite of what can be readily experienced by just about anyone it doesn't help improve faith in the system.

 

[hedrick]

No, it's not a conspiracy. Leaders are trying to balance opposite considerations. That results in a compromise. It's possible that compromise is a bad idea, but it's the usual outcome.

I'm not even sure it's a bad idea. Nowhere else do we act like lives have an infinite value, particularly when shutdowns can cause death in other ways. Controlling infection enough that we don't overload the medical system is not an irrational position. Whether it's our announced policy or not, that's roughly the point where most states have acted. The main exception is NY State. Their targeted local policies seem actually to have worked.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Oaky, so I followed the "mandate" and wore a mask in Starbucks. There were no seats inside (so I thought) so braved a bit of a chill outside. It's not bad - I'm hooded and have ear warmers. But APPARENTLY I could have sat three feet away from someone else inside with no issue as another person is presently doing...

 

[JRT]

Trump's COVID response has been a disaster from beginning to end. Today I read that the Texas National Guard has delivered or is about to deliver as many as ten portable morgues to various hot spots in the state including El Paso where they are deploying 36 specialists in handling cadavers. Maybe it won't be long before flat bed trucks will roll slowly through the streets with a loudspeaker blaring "Bring out your dead."

 

[Lamb]

Trump's COVID response has been a disaster from beginning to end. Today I read that the Texas National Guard has delivered or is about to deliver as many as ten portable morgues to various hot spots in the state including El Paso where they are deploying 36 specialists in handling cadavers. Maybe it won't be long before flat bed trucks will roll slowly through the streets with a loudspeaker blaring "Bring out your dead."

How are the number of deaths in the US different from the percentage of deaths in other countries? From the data I've seen they aren't too far apart. So that means that every ruler in every country in the world is a disaster?

 

[tango]

Trump's COVID response has been a disaster from beginning to end. Today I read that the Texas National Guard has delivered or is about to deliver as many as ten portable morgues to various hot spots in the state including El Paso where they are deploying 36 specialists in handling cadavers. Maybe it won't be long before flat bed trucks will roll slowly through the streets with a loudspeaker blaring "Bring out your dead."

Woohoo! Another dose of orangemanbad.... just what we needed.

Didn't other nations have similar problems with infection rates? And if I recall there was a lot of question over whether Trump even had the authority to institute nationwide rules. Much like Germany, that has a very similar situation where some people are crying out for the government to Do Something even as the government's hands are largely tied because of devolved powers.

Of course if anyone thinks the Democrats would have done better, remind me who it was who said it was all overblown and we should go into Chinatown to commemorate the Chinese New Year?

 

[tango]

How are the number of deaths in the US different from the percentage of deaths in other countries? From the data I've seen they aren't too far apart. So that means that every ruler in every country in the world is a disaster?

Yes, but orangemanbad and that means anything in orangemanland is much worse than elsewhere.

 

[tango]

No, it's not a conspiracy. Leaders are trying to balance opposite considerations. That results in a compromise. It's possible that compromise is a bad idea, but it's the usual outcome.

I'm not even sure it's a bad idea. Nowhere else do we act like lives have an infinite value, particularly when shutdowns can cause death in other ways. Controlling infection enough that we don't overload the medical system is not an irrational position. Whether it's our announced policy or not, that's roughly the point where most states have acted. The main exception is NY State. Their targeted local policies seem actually to have worked.

Trying not to overrun the medical system was the reasoning behind a two-week lockdown back in April that was presented as a means to "flatten the curve" but turned into more of a means to flatten the economy and make political statements. Like when the Emperor decided to reopen an urban area that had worse figures by every single published measure than a more rural area, while keeping the rural area locked down. Surely the (Democrat) Emperor wasn't rewarding the (Democrat) urban area while punishing the (Republican) rural area with objectively better figures and a far lower population density?

Compromise isn't inherently a bad thing. It's just hard to take things seriously when it's apparently far too dangerous for me to go to the local shoe store where I'll probably be one of half a dozen customers if they are busy but perfectly safe to stand in line to get into Walmart to buy a pair of shoes. Or when I can go to the pub and have a beer but only if I also buy food, and when I finish my meal I can't have another beer. It looks less and less like it's anything to do with compromise and more and more like it's a thinly veiled attempt to force local businesses out of business.

If a local business makes their own decision that they don't want to stay open that's up to them. It's hard to take the idea of it being For Our Own Good when it comes down from on high as a diktat when it's so riddled with inconsistencies.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Woohoo! Another dose of orangemanbad.... just what we needed.

Didn't other nations have similar problems with infection rates? And if I recall there was a lot of question over whether Trump even had the authority to institute nationwide rules. Much like Germany, that has a very similar situation where some people are crying out for the government to Do Something even as the government's hands are largely tied because of devolved powers.

Of course if anyone thinks the Democrats would have done better, remind me who it was who said it was all overblown and we should go into Chinatown to commemorate the Chinese New Year?

As I'd said either here or in another thread, I agree that the U.S. doesn't have a monopoly on "we ain't got this". B.C.'s health minister was held up as the model of "how to handle COVID" a few months ago. Now that things are on the uptick again she seems paralyzed by what to do other than, "do your best to stay in your bubble and don't see your friends and family for a few weeks... Oh, and wear a mask".

 

[tango]

I found an interesting article written by a couple of professors. Their comments were that masks work in the lab but appear to work much less effectively in the real world.

My guess as to why - in a lab you can have a fake head making a simulated cough and comparisons are done with no mask and with a fresh mask perfectly fitted. Throw in a bit of imperfection in the fit and the mask getting damp over time and it's not difficult to imagine ways that it might become less effective. But where this article talks of a mask really needing to be changed every four hours other chatter I see suggests people can get by with one mask per day.

My own experience is that an N95 mask can become almost completely airtight within an hour or less when working in warm conditions. But science has proven that masks don't block passage of air that it doesn't happen so presumably I'm expected to believe a boffin in a lab coat rather than my own experience. Maybe I was better at fitting an N95 mask than the average person. Based on my own experiences I won't wear anything that isn't partially open so I can get fresh air into it. The fuhrer can say what he likes.

Face masks cut disease spread in the lab, but have less impact in the community. We need to know why

Face masks work well to stop the spread of diseases like coronavirus in the lab, but in the real world they seem to be less effective.

theconversation.com

 

[hedrick]

The CDC disagrees. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html also https://www.thespectrum.com/story/n...ess-mask-wearing-against-covid-19/6264646002/

 

[Lamb]

The CDC disagrees. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html also https://www.thespectrum.com/story/n...ess-mask-wearing-against-covid-19/6264646002/

From the first link quoted above
"Upwards of 80% blockage has been achieved in human experiments that have measured blocking of all respiratory droplets,4 with cloth masks in some studies performing on par with surgical masks as barriers for source control."

80% means that 20% of the droplets are still escaping which is why the masks are not working. We need a mask that will have a higher percentage of stopping the droplets.

 

[hedrick]

From the first link quoted above
"Upwards of 80% blockage has been achieved in human experiments that have measured blocking of all respiratory droplets,4 with cloth masks in some studies performing on par with surgical masks as barriers for source control."

80% means that 20% of the droplets are still escaping which is why the masks are not working. We need a mask that will have a higher percentage of stopping the droplets.

Epidemics grow or fade based on statistics. We don't have to stop all transmission. We need to reduce it enough that R goes below 1.

 

[tango]

The CDC disagrees. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html also https://www.thespectrum.com/story/n...ess-mask-wearing-against-covid-19/6264646002/

... and this is what "settled science" looks like, apparently

The CDC and WHO don't seem to agree on much about this. The WHO said it was airborne, then the CDC agreed only to retract their statement and say they posted it in error and then put it back a few weeks later. You'd almost be forgiven for thinking they're making it up as they go along.


ETA: From the first link, "multi layer cloth masks can block up to 50-70% of these fine droplets and particles" (emphasis mine). So the masks most people are wearing maybe block half of what they are exhaling and even that's listed with the "up to" caveat.

The article I linked didn't say masks are useless, merely they are a lot less effective in the real world (i.e. not a laboratory) than might be expected from laboratory results. And when even the CDC figures aren't claiming any more than 70% blockage and that figure comes with caveats I'm not sure the CDC is disagreeing. The way the endless "wear a mask, wear a mask, wear a mask" bleating goes it sounds more like brainwashing than reasoning, even as the effectiveness of them is still the topic of debate among scientists.

 

[Lamb]

Different fabrics have different types of weaving, some tighter than others which is a reason why not all masks are going to work well. Even multi-layers aren't protecting anyone (me or you) well enough. Newer masks need to be thought of for future pandemics...and you all know this isn't going to be the last one.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Meanwhile in Ontario:

Data Error means Ontario Reports Just 1009 New COVID Cases, Almost Half In Toronto

A spokesperson for Health Minister Christine Elliott said that yesterday's figure of 1,589 cases (which appeared to be a record high) inadvertently included eight-and-a-half extra hours worth of data from Nov. 22, meaning the total count was inflated. Today's number adjusts for the mistake.

 

[Lamb]

Meanwhile in Ontario:

Data Error means Ontario Reports Just 1009 New COVID Cases, Almost Half In Toronto

That's a huge mistake!