|
Post by Hawk Attack on Apr 9, 2020 15:48:49 GMT -5
Hmm. As a deadly disease is sweeping around the world, who should be in charge of policy? Infectious disease doctors? Or economic pundits? reality show actors? Let's not forget, just a month ago Kim Kardashian was at the White House advising the POTUS on criminal justice reform.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Apr 9, 2020 15:50:45 GMT -5
Let's not forget, just a month ago Kim Kardashian was at the White House advising the POTUS on criminal justice reform. Oh...man...forgot about that! LOL!
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,904
|
Post by bluepenquin on Apr 9, 2020 15:50:46 GMT -5
Now that is the way to call a post 'extremely ignorant' while following it up by making at least an equally ignorant statement. Bravo!. How is my statement ignorant? People who are not taking this seriously will allow the virus to thrive longer. It's a fact. The number or % of people that is following the social distance guidelines is much higher than what anyone could have expected. It is also very possible (likely) that people that have a different opinion of the cost/benefit of these social distancing measures are still abiding by the social distancing. You make it sound like people are actively going around trying to infect people as opposed to current conditions are mostly reflective of actions taken weeks ago and the process of this moving in spite of the social distancing - like the essential work/life contact that continues. And the implication that those of a particular political persuasion is the cause of the proliferation or preventing this from ending earlier, which seemed to be the crux of your comment.
|
|
|
Post by staticb on Apr 9, 2020 15:54:16 GMT -5
This is all so overblown. The "models" - based on social distancing - are coming in at 3-4-5-6 times reality. Folks being admitted for renal failure who also have COVID are being called COVID cases and COVID deaths. This madness has to stop. We can't keep letting infectious disease doctors run this country or we will NEVER go back to work, out to eat, or to the movies. Much less have a volleyball season. If they have renal failure and a COVID--and they die--I don't see why that you wouldn't list both as reasons for death. It's like HIV doesn't really kill people, but it weakens them enough to where something else will.
If anything, models are also on the low side because we don't know how many people have it and aren't presenting symptons or are just staying at home and recovering or they people with symptoms and are "presumed cases" are also not counted in the actual counts either. Anecdotally, you hear people who work at hospitals all saying they are overwhelmed right now. Whose right?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Apr 9, 2020 16:16:21 GMT -5
I'm just very thankful that we spent the last ten years paying down our public debt, investing in our infrastructure, and preparing ourselves for economic trouble. This would have hurt so much harder if we had irresponsibly given ourselves big tax cuts and run up unprecedented budget deficits when the economy was humming along.
|
|
|
Post by noblesol on Apr 9, 2020 16:17:57 GMT -5
False either or choice. POTUS and the Governors decide policy, Federal and State Senators and Representatives are in charge of appropriations, oversight, and new laws as needed. Public Health officials advise and carry out policy and generate regulations. The Courts settle disputes between the branches of Government and the public.
The IMHE model (from University of Washington Medicine Research Center) for COVID-19 is the main model in play being used by public health officials. It has always factored in mitigations. Initial estimates of that model, crafted by infectious disease experts and doctors, has gone from 100,000-240,000 U.S. deaths, to 80,000 deaths, to 60,000 deaths, over about a week. Drug overdose deaths in the U.S. have recently been in the 60,000 - 70,000 range. Suicides ~ 50,000. Flu and Pneumonia (2017)~60,000. Chronic lower respiratory disease (2017) ~ 160,000. Accidents-unintentional (2017) ~170,000.
An infectious disease doctor, well, what do they know or care about modeling drug abuse and overdoses, or perhaps suicides, as a function of no jobs, no income, no small business, a cratering family life, and societal enforced social isolation? Apparently it's not their job.
Now, that does sound like something an economist/social scientist/actuary might be good at. But, where are those models? IMHE I.D. doctor says lockdown and social distancing is good, leads to fewer deaths. However how foolish is it to craft a total approach to the war against COVID-19 if it doesn't also have models for the collateral damage of lockdown and social isolation. Obviously to craft wise policy, one must know as much as possible about all the collateral damage of fighting that war using the supermegaton weapons of lockdowns and societal distancing for extended periods. For instance, what about the disruption to the worlds food supply of continued lockdowns,? Leading to hotspots of hunger and malnutrition, where is that model?
In multiple ways on multiple fronts, the collateral damage from lockdowns and social isolation add up over time and build on one another, interact with one another and creat new pandemics of disease, hunger, death, crime, and a crumbling civil order. The infectious disease doctor that doesn't see it, doesn't think it falls within their job description to see it, doesn't care to factor it into their model, doesn't think it is relevant to his task at hand, is not the person that I want in charge of fighting the war. And the advice of the infectious disease doctor should come with a big warning label describing all the possible side-effects of taking their prescription.
What models have you been seeing for deaths from drugs/crime/suicide in the wake of social distancing? I'm sure you have expert numbers and aren't just making this up. I'm gonna take a wild guess that the experts already considered that and decided social distancing was the right idea. They saw the economic numbers decreasing in China. It's not like nobody considered that slowing the economy down is bad before you. None of the numbers in the above post are made up. They come from the CDC, most from 2017, drug overdose ranges from 2017-2018. Obviously, the numbers are from prior to COVID-19, lockdowns, and social distancing leading to social isolation.
The usage of the IMHE model has been shared with the public. We know that it is what has generating the estimates guiding the policy of mitigations which include lockdowns and distancing. We assume without knowing for sure, that those heavy weapons have factored into bringing down the COVID-19 death estimates, number of ICU beds that might be needed, ventilators that may be needed, etc. But it is a wild ass guess on all of our parts as to what models have been used, if any, to advise our policy makers on the collateral damage that lockdowns and social distancing and isolation will have on: death rates from other causes, such as increases in crime; an increase in civil disorder; crumbling infrastructure and supply chains; national security; and food security, to name a few.
The public is impacted by the good, and the bad, of lockdowns and social distancing. The numbers from the IMHE model are reported to us, but that is obviously not the total picture. We should also be informed of the extent of the bad that they are doing, so we can be prepared, and have proper oversight over our policy leaders. We are a Republic, our political leaders must answer to us. We must all cast our votes. And we all have a responsibility to be properly informed as to what extent lockdowns and societal distance can be credited with fewer COVID-19 deaths, but also what high costs and collateral damage are being incurred by them.
We must know what that total cost is.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 9, 2020 16:41:16 GMT -5
False either or choice. POTUS and the Governors decide policy, Federal and State Senators and Representatives are in charge of appropriations, oversight, and new laws as needed. Public Health officials advise and carry out policy and generate regulations. The Courts settle disputes between the branches of Government and the public.
The IMHE model (from University of Washington Medicine Research Center) for COVID-19 is the main model in play being used by public health officials. It has always factored in mitigations. Initial estimates of that model, crafted by infectious disease experts and doctors, has gone from 100,000-240,000 U.S. deaths, to 80,000 deaths, to 60,000 deaths, over about a week. Drug overdose deaths in the U.S. have recently been in the 60,000 - 70,000 range. Suicides ~ 50,000. Flu and Pneumonia (2017)~60,000. Chronic lower respiratory disease (2017) ~ 160,000. Accidents-unintentional (2017) ~170,000. An infectious disease doctor, well, what do they know or care about modeling drug abuse and overdoses, or perhaps suicides, as a function of no jobs, no income, no small business, a cratering family life, and societal enforced social isolation? Apparently it's not their job.
Now, that does sound like something an economist/social scientist/actuary might be good at. But, where are those models? IMHE I.D. doctor says lockdown and social distancing is good, leads to fewer deaths. However how foolish is it to craft a total approach to the war against COVID-19 if it doesn't also have models for the collateral damage of lockdown and social isolation. Obviously to craft wise policy, one must know as much as possible about all the collateral damage of fighting that war using the supermegaton weapons of lockdowns and societal distancing for extended periods. For instance, what about the disruption to the worlds food supply of continued lockdowns,? Leading to hotspots of hunger and malnutrition, where is that model?
In multiple ways on multiple fronts, the collateral damage from lockdowns and social isolation add up over time and build on one another, interact with one another and creat new pandemics of disease, hunger, death, crime, and a crumbling civil order. The infectious disease doctor that doesn't see it, doesn't think it falls within their job description to see it, doesn't care to factor it into their model, doesn't think it is relevant to his task at hand, is not the person that I want in charge of fighting the war. And the advice of the infectious disease doctor should come with a big warning label describing all the possible side-effects of taking their prescription.
What models have you been seeing for deaths from drugs/crime/suicide in the wake of social distancing? I'm sure you have expert numbers and aren't just making this up. I'm gonna take a wild guess that the experts already considered that and decided social distancing was the right idea. They saw the economic numbers decreasing in China. It's not like nobody considered that slowing the economy down is bad before you. So what is the number of deaths that warrants shutting down the economy?
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Apr 9, 2020 17:09:05 GMT -5
What models have you been seeing for deaths from drugs/crime/suicide in the wake of social distancing? I'm sure you have expert numbers and aren't just making this up. I'm gonna take a wild guess that the experts already considered that and decided social distancing was the right idea. They saw the economic numbers decreasing in China. It's not like nobody considered that slowing the economy down is bad before you. So what is the number of deaths that warrants shutting down the economy? How many lives are you going to sacrifice to open the country back up? 9/11 shut down a lot of the country over 3,000. Estimates are over a million for no social distancing, and still at least 80k with social distancing. I'll take two months inside to save that 920k difference.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Apr 9, 2020 17:11:06 GMT -5
What models have you been seeing for deaths from drugs/crime/suicide in the wake of social distancing? I'm sure you have expert numbers and aren't just making this up. I'm gonna take a wild guess that the experts already considered that and decided social distancing was the right idea. They saw the economic numbers decreasing in China. It's not like nobody considered that slowing the economy down is bad before you. So what is the number of deaths that warrants shutting down the economy? www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/rebelo/htm/epidemics.pdf
|
|
|
Post by cindra on Apr 9, 2020 17:11:36 GMT -5
What models have you been seeing for deaths from drugs/crime/suicide in the wake of social distancing? I'm sure you have expert numbers and aren't just making this up. I'm gonna take a wild guess that the experts already considered that and decided social distancing was the right idea. They saw the economic numbers decreasing in China. It's not like nobody considered that slowing the economy down is bad before you. None of the numbers in the above post are made up. They come from the CDC, most from 2017, drug overdose ranges from 2017-2018. Obviously, the numbers are from prior to COVID-19, lockdowns, and social distancing leading to social isolation.
The usage of the IMHE model has been shared with the public. We know that it is what has generating the estimates guiding the policy of mitigations which include lockdowns and distancing. We assume without knowing for sure, that those heavy weapons have factored into bringing down the COVID-19 death estimates, number of ICU beds that might be needed, ventilators that may be needed, etc. But it is a wild ass guess on all of our parts as to what models have been used, if any, to advise our policy makers on the collateral damage that lockdowns and social distancing and isolation will have on: death rates from other causes, such as increases in crime; an increase in civil disorder; crumbling infrastructure and supply chains; national security; and food security, to name a few.
The public is impacted by the good, and the bad, of lockdowns and social distancing. The numbers from the IMHE model are reported to us, but that is obviously not the total picture. We should also be informed of the extent of the bad that they are doing, so we can be prepared, and have proper oversight over our policy leaders. We are a Republic, our political leaders must answer to us. We must all cast our votes. And we all have a responsibility to be properly informed as to what extent lockdowns and societal distance can be credited with fewer COVID-19 deaths, but also what high costs and collateral damage are being incurred by them.
We must know what that total cost is.
You're talking authoritatively about how all of these changes will happen. I'm interested in whatever estimates you've seen about crime, suicide, etc. that are making you think this, just so I know you're not massively over-weighing those factors. Again, the professionals have already thought of this. They've talked about opening back up in press conferences and such, but decided against it. I have a weird feeling that the government (which contains both doctors and economists) are more qualified and have better data than some internet rando.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Apr 9, 2020 17:12:43 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2020 17:14:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 9, 2020 17:30:18 GMT -5
What do you mean 'that is not how models work'? Sure it is. Earlier models had less data, and as we collect more and more data they SHOULD be getting more accurate. I only skimmed those articles, but they both heavily reference the initial Imperial College model of deaths if we did nothing (2.2 million in America). Totally agree that comparing that model to ones today is like comparing apples and oranges. However, the 100,000-240,000 number was presented by the White House a week ago when all of this social distancing had already been in place for several weeks. It's just over the past week (with plenty of knowledge of social distancing) that those numbers are getting more promising. I think it's definitely reason for optimism.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Apr 9, 2020 17:50:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by noblesol on Apr 9, 2020 18:41:32 GMT -5
None of the numbers in the above post are made up. They come from the CDC, most from 2017, drug overdose ranges from 2017-2018. Obviously, the numbers are from prior to COVID-19, lockdowns, and social distancing leading to social isolation.
The usage of the IMHE model has been shared with the public. We know that it is what has generating the estimates guiding the policy of mitigations which include lockdowns and distancing. We assume without knowing for sure, that those heavy weapons have factored into bringing down the COVID-19 death estimates, number of ICU beds that might be needed, ventilators that may be needed, etc. But it is a wild ass guess on all of our parts as to what models have been used, if any, to advise our policy makers on the collateral damage that lockdowns and social distancing and isolation will have on: death rates from other causes, such as increases in crime; an increase in civil disorder; crumbling infrastructure and supply chains; national security; and food security, to name a few.
The public is impacted by the good, and the bad, of lockdowns and social distancing. The numbers from the IMHE model are reported to us, but that is obviously not the total picture. We should also be informed of the extent of the bad that they are doing, so we can be prepared, and have proper oversight over our policy leaders. We are a Republic, our political leaders must answer to us. We must all cast our votes. And we all have a responsibility to be properly informed as to what extent lockdowns and societal distance can be credited with fewer COVID-19 deaths, but also what high costs and collateral damage are being incurred by them.
We must know what that total cost is.
You're talking authoritatively about how all of these changes will happen. I'm interested in whatever estimates you've seen about crime, suicide, etc. that are making you think this, just so I know you're not massively over-weighing those factors. Again, the professionals have already thought of this. They've talked about opening back up in press conferences and such, but decided against it. I have a weird feeling that the government (which contains both doctors and economists) are more qualified and have better data than some internet rando. The numbers provided by the CDC in my post are not estimates, they were actual deaths from the associated causes for years 2017/2018. They came from years prior to COVID-19, lockdowns, and social distancing.
It is a fact that lockdowns and social distancing have derailed the economy, leading to massive business losses and unemployment in just one month. And not just in the U.S. To the extent that globalization has made us interdependent, lockdowns across the world impact supplies worldwide for essentials. Drugs, PPE, and food for instance flow back and forth across the worlds borders. Shortages and panic and greed induced hoarding becomes part of the pandemic equation. Exacerbated by lockdowns and distancing rules disrupting business, logistics, manufacturing, and inducing distortions in supply chains.
It is a fact that lockdowns and forced social distancing are leading to increased poverty, unemployment, social isolation, stress, shortages of life essentials, mortgages and rents not being paid, higher levels of personal and business debt, dramatically reducing savings, crumbling social support infrastructures, divorce, spouse and child abuse, neglect of the young, the elderly, and the vulnerable, and increasing vulnerability of everyone to crime as either a victim or becoming criminal to survive. All of these will incur a health cost on people and tear away at society. All can induce more proposals for ever more authoritarian dictates to solve. As with the Great Depression, such conditions history teaches us, leads to a loss of independence, loss of freedoms, and a populace willing to entertain the thought of dictators, tyranny, and wars.
Lockdowns and social distancing must be ended as soon as possible. POTUS and our Governors, and the public, need to know to what extent lockdowns and social distancing leading to social isolation is helping in the war against COVID-19. All factors of the disease and treatments must be considered though, one can't assume lockdowns and social distancing is the whole cause of any improvement. Likewise all factors of the negative impacts of extended lockdowns and social isolation on public health and society must be considered and weighed. To the extent they can be modeled, they must be modeled as well.
The equation is not lives versus dollars, but lives versus lives. Lockdowns and social distancing may improve COVID-19 outcomes over the short term, but lockdowns and social isolation over a long-term may at some point cost more lives than it saves.
You are free not to be convinced. I encourage you to seek out and understand all the advice being given by our public health officials to our POTUS and Governors. How do they know how many lives are being saved by lockdowns and social distancing? How do they know how many lives will be lost by collateral damage from lockdowns and social isolation? We the public must know whatever they are being told so we can prepare and we can inform ourselves. We are the ultimate oversight over our policy leaders and we must each decide for ourselves if the benefits of their policies will be worth the cost. Then, vote accordingly.
|
|