Topic: Back in isolation

[Francois]

Just to let everybody know they should be extra careful to stay safe out there.
My region has just been moved from yellow to red COVID alert yesterday. We were in the yellow zone just Friday and now it's into the red.

In the news they said early this morning that we're being struck with a new mutation of the virus (European strain) that is even more contagious... that's reassuring.

[This-is-damion]

nightmare... sorry to hear

We have a local lockdown in Birmingham (UK) along with a fair few other areas of the UK.     Not helped by massively conflicting guidelines i.e  You cant go and visit 4 of your family and sit in a garden with them,  but you are fine to meet 6 people in a pub.   Basically its not safe to mix with out people, unless you can also spend money in which case you are probabaly safe.   

[Bryan]

We're seeing a surge in Washington again.  They are attributing it to the holiday weekend a few weeks ago plus students going back to school.  Whitman County, the location of my Alma Mater, Washington State University, saw a huge outbreak because the fraternities were having big parties for rush week.  People are just getting tired of this and letting their guard down, it seems like it's never going to go away at this rate. 

[Francois]

Here, bars, restaurants, venues, theaters, cinemas and museums close for a month on Wednesday.
But barber shops, stores, grocery stores and pretty much everything else stays open... including tattoo shops and massage parlors......... I just don't get it.

It's masks on for everyone even outside. But out of their great coherence, even if the mayor got the virus, they still allow the yearly garage sale days to go ahead with some special precautions: Stay 2 meters apart, wear a mask, don't touch anything you don't intend to buy and, stupidest one of all; pay with a debit card!

I've never seen anyone host a garage sale with a card terminal. End even if it was the case, I'd never use it as the risk of getting your card skimmed is multiplied by 100.

it seems like it's never going to go away at this rate. 

That's the part that really scares me. When I think that it's a virus that could have been killed with a 1 month hard shutdown.
Now, things can't get better. The problem I see is that the virus mutates very rapidly. If We take into account the theory of evolution, the strains that are the least dangerous won't reproduce as fast as the really nasty ones who do a better job at spreading themselves. So we're stuck with a virus that keeps getting tougher and people who keep dismissing it as some sort of hoax.

[02Pilot]

Not to get too deeply into the various questions of severity of non-fatal cases, persistent effects, and economic and secondary health impacts, but in simplest terms the overall fatality rate is currently 0.000128% of the global population (assuming ~7.8bil people and ~1mil fatalities), with case fatality rates in the single digits. Serious? Sure. I absolutely do not want it and take every reasonable precaution to avoid it (being an antisocial germophobe helps). But objectively, in terms of the fundamental question of mortality, it's not even remotely as dangerous as many other plagues humanity has endured. Smallpox, tuberculosis, cholera, and bubonic plague all were massively more deadly up to the early 20th Century, with case fatality rates up to 60% or more.

I'm not going to get into politics or policy here. All I'm saying is that, historically speaking, this is far from the worst disease outbreak we've encountered. And in most past cases, society rebounded quickly, sometimes far stronger than it was before (the Black Death was a causal factor in the end of feudalism, for example). This too shall pass.

[Francois]

There is something that's been bugging me since this whole mess started that maybe someone smarter than me can explain. Maybe it comes from my French background or something, I don't know.
Since when has a quarantine period been only two weeks?
Thing is the word quarantine comes from the French word quarantaine which is an extension of quarante which means forty.... So it should be forty units of something...

[Bryan]

There is something that's been bugging me since this whole mess started that maybe someone smarter than me can explain. Maybe it comes from my French background or something, I don't know.
Since when has a quarantine period been only two weeks?
Thing is the word quarantine comes from the French word quarantaine which is an extension of quarante which means forty.... So it should be forty units of something...

I'm not going to claim to be smarter than you but those of us that don't speak french didn't know that, therefore it has nothing to do with the number 40.   

[Sandeha Lynch]

The origin is Italian, or Venetian to be precise, as ships were obliged to anchor offshore for 40 days if there was a plague risk. But that just established a principle of exclusion.

The difficulty of arguing over fatality rates is fraught by political convenience, especially in England in how recording causes of death has changed in order to keep the figures looking low. Still, it is the unique cause of death for at least 1 million globally now. Some viruses peter out over time, but there still  isn't any hard evidence of immunity gained through surviving it. And worse, the effects of Long-Covid among survivors renders that moot.

Global figures if you need them - https://covid19info.live/

And UK specific, including excess death figures - https://www.travellingtabby.com/uk-coronavirus-tracker/

[02Pilot]

The origin is Italian, or Venetian to be precise, as ships were obliged to anchor offshore for 40 days if there was a plague risk. But that just established a principle of exclusion.

I think the first use was technically in Ragusa in 1377, but the practice quickly spread to the rest of the Venetian Empire. It was not confined to ships - structures (lazzaretti) were built to house those subject to quarantine, as well as those who were sick. In a place like Venice, with a constant flow of people from all corners of the Mediterranean and European worlds, it was a necessity both for survival and to maintain public confidence. In quite a few ways Venice presaged the sorts of problems much of the world deals with now, having been such a focus of travel and long-distance trade much earlier than most areas.

Should anyone be interested, William H. MacNeill's Plagues and Peoples is an excellent source for historical perspective on this sort of thing. It was published years ago, so there's no effort to relate to current events, just historical examination. Coincidentally, he also authored a book on Venice, which is also very good.

[astrobeck]

but first we had trentino for thirty days...
Fascinating reading.

[Jeff Warden]

Sorry Francois. This sucks. I hope your family stays safe.

[Francois]

We're doing our best.... It's just that it's really boring in the long run....

[Faintandfuzzy]

Not to get too deeply into the various questions of severity of non-fatal cases, persistent effects, and economic and secondary health impacts, but in simplest terms the overall fatality rate is currently 0.000128% of the global population (assuming ~7.8bil people and ~1mil fatalities), with case fatality rates in the single digits. Serious? Sure. I absolutely do not want it and take every reasonable precaution to avoid it (being an antisocial germophobe helps). But objectively, in terms of the fundamental question of mortality, it's not even remotely as dangerous as many other plagues humanity has endured. Smallpox, tuberculosis, cholera, and bubonic plague all were massively more deadly up to the early 20th Century, with case fatality rates up to 60% or more.

I'm not going to get into politics or policy here. All I'm saying is that, historically speaking, this is far from the worst disease outbreak we've encountered. And in most past cases, society rebounded quickly, sometimes far stronger than it was before (the Black Death was a causal factor in the end of feudalism, for example). This too shall pass.

That is not how mortality is calculated.  In looking at survivability of plane crashes, you would not include those who are not flying.  Average mortality is between 2% and 3%.  It is heavily age dependant.  That said, chronic health issues appear to be cropping up with those who have survived.  We are over 1 million dead...nothing to take lightly.

[02Pilot]

Not to get too deeply into the various questions of severity of non-fatal cases, persistent effects, and economic and secondary health impacts, but in simplest terms the overall fatality rate is currently 0.000128% of the global population (assuming ~7.8bil people and ~1mil fatalities), with case fatality rates in the single digits. Serious? Sure. I absolutely do not want it and take every reasonable precaution to avoid it (being an antisocial germophobe helps). But objectively, in terms of the fundamental question of mortality, it's not even remotely as dangerous as many other plagues humanity has endured. Smallpox, tuberculosis, cholera, and bubonic plague all were massively more deadly up to the early 20th Century, with case fatality rates up to 60% or more.

I'm not going to get into politics or policy here. All I'm saying is that, historically speaking, this is far from the worst disease outbreak we've encountered. And in most past cases, society rebounded quickly, sometimes far stronger than it was before (the Black Death was a causal factor in the end of feudalism, for example). This too shall pass.

That is not how mortality is calculated.  In looking at survivability of plane crashes, you would not include those who are not flying.  Average mortality is between 2% and 3%.  It is heavily age dependant.  That said, chronic health issues appear to be cropping up with those who have survived.  We are over 1 million dead...nothing to take lightly.

Certainly not to be taken lightly, but my comments were focused on the long-term macro effects as related to historical pandemics. As noted, case fatality rates are in the (low) single digits. But mortality by population is also a relevant measure of overall impact. Non-lethal impacts may also prove to be a significant factor, though I suspect the measurable economic effects will be relatively low as a component of GDP. And there may be unforeseeable additional consequences - for example, I read that the pain-blocking characteristics of COVID-19 are being studied for possible use in development of new pain relief medications, and there is some discussion that the reduction in miles driven per person per annum due to increased work-from-home practices may reduce traffic fatalities (though this has not happened in the short term). My point is simply that the currently available evidence indicates this is not as dire a situation - historically speaking - as some might suggest.

[Moto-uno]

 At almost 1/4 million dead Americans alone in barely 6 months , you'll have to excuse some of us for wondering , just what
would you consider a "dire situation " ? I would've considered the second world war as somewhat dire and it took almost 2 years
of combat to reach that number of dead (Americans alone ) .  Just a different twist FWIW . Peter

[02Pilot]

At almost 1/4 million dead Americans alone in barely 6 months , you'll have to excuse some of us for wondering , just what
would you consider a "dire situation " ? I would've considered the second world war as somewhat dire and it took almost 2 years
of combat to reach that number of dead (Americans alone ) .  Just a different twist FWIW . Peter

A fair question. I was basically confining my comments to pandemics; human losses in military conflicts tend not to be terribly high as a percentage of population, but rather concentrated heavily in specific demographic areas (young men), which in turn tends to cause rather different social impacts. Economic and political effects are far more prominent in war, though these may in turn lessen or exaggerate secondary human losses (for example, those European countries that fell under Soviet domination versus those that did not after the war.)

If you consider events like the 2nd Century Antonine Plague, the Black Death of the 14th, and even the 20th Century Spanish Influenza outbreak, the human losses are large as a percentage of general population in effected areas. The Antonine wiped out perhaps a third of the population of the Empire, at least in places (records are scant). The first wave of Black Death in 1347 did perhaps the same or worse, with some cities (like Venice, for example) losing in the neighborhood of 75% of its people. Subsequent waves carried on killing for the rest of the century, though in relatively smaller numbers. The Spanish Flu took perhaps 100 million worldwide (more than four years of conflict had, and in a quarter of the time), aided by secondary effects of the war and mass movements of population around the globe. All had massive secondary impacts that fundamentally shifted historical trends and outcomes.

As of right now, I don't see the same levels of impact on society. Upheaval, disruption, and concern? Absolutely, and with good cause. But to get to the types of impacts seen in the most severe historical cases of pandemic things would have to get much, much worse.

[Francois]

If we didn't have modern science to inform us, it would be worse.

[02Pilot]

If we didn't have modern science to inform us, it would be worse.

Agreed, though the faith we in the First World have placed in medical science as able to contend with virtually any disease has made us as a society somewhat unrealistically optimistic about its true capabilities and limitations, IMO. And being constantly informed of the latest developments - to the point of it being difficult to escape from being reminded - certainly adds to the anxiety for many.

[Skorj]

I would not normally engage in conversations like this, but it is important to note this is serious, and anyone who attempts to minimize the seriousness is part of the problem we are all experiencing now.

There is no excuse - science deniers included - why everyone should not be practicing all known non-pharmaceutical interventions:
o Wear a mask.
o Avoid close contact, confined spaces, and crowds (the 3Cs).
o Practice good hygiene.

PSA over.

[Francois]

When I think this whole ordeal could have been over in just a month if people actually listened to the right people instead of blindly believing those who have a hidden agenda.

[Skorj]

Perhaps not 'a month' (as in December, it took even the Chinese authorities to resolve what it was, and then be reasonably truthful about the first infections), and perhaps not 'over', but certainly a lot closer to under control...

By way of background, I am a crisis management professional and have been working this everyday, full-time, since January 6.
I've 1000s of data points (and a headache trying to keep up with facts).
If a fellow filmwaster was engaged on January 6, where were our governments?

Of note though, some countries in APAC, though proper use of NPIs (either voluntary or forced) have got this under control.
Taiwan, New Zealand, to start...
It can be done.

[Francois]

I know that here it's getting to be a bit of a nightmare scenario. Quebec is the worse province in all of Canada when it comes to infection rates. We have around 1000 new cases a day for a population of only 8 million. Yet the government doesn't act in a logical way.
Like in high school, 3rd grade goes to class every second day, but not 2nd or 4th grade. Why?
Most people put on a mask to get in the stores and remove it as soon as they're in.
A lot of people wear chin suspenders.
But still, the provincial prime minister keeps saying that Quebeckers are disciplined and that things are going well.

All this even though the mayor of a city just across the river from the capital has lost 49% of his population due to the virus.