Jump to content
The Man in Blue

The COVID-19 Thread - Discussion & Cancellations

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Biscuit said:

..there's no reason we can't be back to mostly normal life by June, or July at the latest.

I don't disagree, but I'm very curious what "mostly normal" life is going to look like post-COVID-19.   I think what we think of as normal is going to take a good while to return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other models have said anywhere from mid-May to mid-June. Wuhan has lifted their stay-at-home, after almost 80 days - of course, their rules were a lot more strict than our states are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Biscuit said:

We're not there yet, but we are pretty close. The model by the University of Washington has the peak occuring a week from today, with a number of states already surpassing that point. 

Don't get me wrong, the Corona Virus is serious, but there's also been some unnecessary alarmism. Unless something changes drastically, there's no reason we can't be back to mostly normal life by June, or July at the latest.

"Normal" isn't going to be the normal you envision.   Normal will, likely, be a June start to phasing in businesses and activities (not all at once)...normal will also likely involve wearing a mask in public for the foreseeable future.   There will be a second and likely third wave to this.  People will be dying of COVID a year from now, just a much lower (hopefully) frequency.   Until there's either a treatment or a vaccine we're going to have to take precautions.   These actions we're taking today are just prolonging the cycle, to ensure the health care system doesn't collapse under everyone getting infected at once.  It also gives us a chance to catch up on supplies of medical equipment and PPE so we can take some precautions without avoiding each other altogether.

Normal may still involve some distancing measures in some areas, for many months.

Normal will involve more hand sanitizers, and those cashier plexiglass setups aren't coming down.

Normal will be a general reluctance to use shared touch screens, perhaps forever.  It won't surprise me to see them come down...or see an acceleration to voice recognition technology.

Normal may be a whole new way to greet people, and handshakes will go the in the bin of lost traditions.

Normal may be sports games without fans...and certainly no autograph sessions....in the short term at least.

If you think this is over in July you're in for a rude awakening.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

"Normal" isn't going to be the normal you envision.   Normal will, likely, be a June start to phasing in businesses and activities (not all at once)...normal will also likely involve wearing a mask in public for the foreseeable future.   There will be a second and likely third wave to this.  People will be dying of COVID a year from now, just a much lower (hopefully) frequency.   Until there's either a treatment or a vaccine we're going to have to take precautions.   These actions we're taking today are just prolonging the cycle, to ensure the health care system doesn't collapse under everyone getting infected at once.  It also gives us a chance to catch up on supplies of medical equipment and PPE so we can take some precautions without avoiding each other altogether.

Normal may still involve some distancing measures in some areas, for many months.

Normal will involve more hand sanitizers, and those cashier plexiglass setups aren't coming down.

Normal will be a general reluctance to use shared touch screens, perhaps forever.  It won't surprise me to see them come down...or see an acceleration to voice recognition technology.

Normal may be a whole new way to greet people, and handshakes will go the in the bin of lost traditions.

Normal may be sports games without fans...and certainly no autograph sessions....in the short term at least.

If you think this is over in July you're in for a rude awakening.

 

I don't think it will be immediate, no, but I also don't think it'll be what you're imagining with a terraformed social landscaped. 

Here's the thing. Once most people have been exposed to it (to be clear, this is based off the current understanding that this is mostly a one time disease, if that's not true we're all screwed anyway), it will be just like the other millions of serious but super rare risks we have in our daily lives. It won't be worth worrying about.  I'll tell you this, once I'm out of "quarantine", I won't be wearing a mask or taking incredible measures because of fear of the virus. Yes, it's real. Yes, we need to take measures while it's raging through the country. No, we don't need it to change our lives in huge ways once this blows over out of fear.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Biscuit said:

I don't think it will be immediate, no, but I also don't think it'll be what you're imagining with a terraformed social landscaped. 

Here's the thing. Once most people have been exposed to it (to be clear, this is based off the current understanding that this is mostly a one time disease, if that's not true we're all screwed anyway), it will be just like the other millions of serious but super rare risks we have in our daily lives. It won't be worth worrying about.  I'll tell you this, once I'm out of "quarantine", I won't be wearing a mask or taking incredible measures because of fear of the virus. Yes, it's real. Yes, we need to take measures while it's raging through the country. No, we don't need it to change our lives in huge ways once this blows over out of fear.

You may not have a choice on the mask - I have a feeling it will be mandated, for the short term anyway.   The mask isn't for you...it's for everyone else.  You could have the virus, have no symptoms, have no realization you have it...and pass it on to someone else.  The mask (unless medical-grade) won't protect you...it will offer a better chance of protecting others.

That's going to be a risk for the next 12-18 months, and it's highly likely that most countries will have some degrees of measures in place for that period of time - it's not going to blow over in June...we're just going to pass the current peak...the virus won't be gone...this won't "blow over" until there's a vaccine...or, you've already been exposed to it, and recovered - and remember, because of the social distancing measures we're taking, many of us will not have been exposed to it...There will be a second wave. 

This one's different...it's highly contagious...it's not "Ebola" or "Small Pox" or "Spanish Flu" deadly, but it's far deadlier than the seasonal flu, it could be weeks before you know you're exposed...there's no vaccine...and there's no herd immunity...And the last two won't be achieved until long after July.  Letting our guard down would be a tremendous mistake.  We need to get back to work and get things back online, absolutely...but that doesn't mean tossing all the precautions out the window.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

You may not have a choice on the mask - I have a feeling it will be mandated, for the short term anyway.   The mask isn't for you...it's for everyone else.  You could have the virus, have no symptoms, have no realization you have it...and pass it on to someone else.  The mask (unless medical-grade) won't protect you...it will offer a better chance of protecting others.

That's going to be a risk for the next 12-18 months, and it's highly likely that most countries will have some degrees of measures in place for that period of time - it's not going to blow over in June...we're just going to pass the current peak...the virus won't be gone...this won't "blow over" until there's a vaccine...or, you've already been exposed to it, and recovered - and remember, because of the social distancing measures we're taking, many of us will not have been exposed to it...There will be a second wave. 

This one's different...it's highly contagious...it's not "Ebola" or "Small Pox" or "Spanish Flu" deadly, but it's far deadlier than the seasonal flu, it could be weeks before you know you're exposed...there's no vaccine...and there's no herd immunity...And the last two won't be achieved until long after July.  Letting our guard down would be a tremendous mistake.  We need to get back to work and get things back online, absolutely...but that doesn't mean tossing all the precautions out the window.

 

 

 

 

The entire point of flattening the curve is to keep the hospitals under capacity (or at least, limit how far over capacity they go). Pretty much everyone will get it no matter how we handle this, but as long as hospitals are not over capacity, then we want to go as fast as possible. Of course, it's much worse to not flatten the curve enough than to flatten it too much, but it is definitely possible to flatten it too much.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Biscuit said:

We're not there yet, but we are pretty close. The model by the University of Washington has the peak occuring a week from today, with a number of states already surpassing that point. 

Don't get me wrong, the Corona Virus is serious, but there's also been some unnecessary alarmism. Unless something changes drastically, there's no reason we can't be back to mostly normal life by June, or July at the latest.

I hate to break it to you, but that's kinda a pipe dream.  Today, the WH gave a new, more optimistic model of US-deaths, revising it down to 60,000 from 80,000.  Still pretty horrific, but better.  Here's the problem:  the model that came up with that number assumes that social distancing, etc, be maintained through August.  That would preclude normal (or perhaps "post-apocalyptic" would be better) life in June or July.  New York *might* be on a plateau, but it's not on a downward cycle at all.  And Michigan, Georgia, the DC/MD/VA area, etc, are all just getting started.  We're pushing 2K dead/day right now.  Let's not get too far over our skis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, HokieUmp said:

I hate to break it to you, but that's kinda a pipe dream.  Today, the WH gave a new, more optimistic model of US-deaths, revising it down to 60,000 from 80,000.  Still pretty horrific, but better.  Here's the problem:  the model that came up with that number assumes that social distancing, etc, be maintained through August.  That would preclude normal (or perhaps "post-apocalyptic" would be better) life in June or July.  New York *might* be on a plateau, but it's not on a downward cycle at all.  And Michigan, Georgia, the DC/MD/VA area, etc, are all just getting started.  We're pushing 2K dead/day right now.  Let's not get too far over our skis.

Again, as long as hospitals aren't over capacity, the number of total deaths probably won't really change, unless we wait the two or three years it will take to have a vaccine. There is absolutely no way that's worth it. We should shoot for running hospitals at just below capacity, using conservative models. 

Now, in some places that are being hit really hard, New York for example, maybe these measures will have to go on that long. I don't really know. My gut says no, but that's not really informed by anything.

However, many places do not need to wait that long. I live on the Kansas Missouri Border. Under the Washington University's model, which yes is the most optimistic, but also is the one that most agencies are using, neither Kansas nor Missouri are expected to ever exceed their ICU bed or ventilator capacity, even here in the Kansas City Area.

No, that doesn't mean we can relax everything all at once. I'd expect the royals probably aren't playing in front of a crowd in July, or at least, not a full crowd. Large indoor gatherings will probably have some limitations till at least the end of the summer. But most businesses could open. We could go back to baseball, though maybe with no handshakes at the plate meeting for a bit. Most of the activities we're used to will be doable, if slightly modified at first. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Biscuit said:

Pretty much everyone will get it no matter how we handle this, but as long as hospitals are not over capacity, then we want to go as fast as possible.

That's pretty cavalier.

If someone told you you could go back to the normal life you experienced in 2019...all you have to do is play Russian Roulette once...would you play if the gun had...

5 chambers?

10?

50?

100?

500?

1000?

What's your line?   And what if you were told that if you chose to play, then the ten people you love the most MUST play as well.

Flattening to below capacity is priority one.   Priority two is flattening it further, as much as possible, without collapsing the economy...to minimize the chances of everyone getting it before a vaccine or treatment is found.

Most people will start getting back to work in the summer...but there will be rules.   And practices will change.  A lot of the corporate world is figuring out they that can work from home effectively...and they're learning some lessons about how to do it efficiently...and when people need to be in the office and when they don't...the people who should be really afraid are management companies that lease office space, and companies that run parking lots...their occupancy could easily drop by a third.

Your position suggests that 2-3 million Americans will die if everyone gets it eventually.   So, over what period of time does that need to occur to be within health system capacity....if you go by the current belief that the outbreak will go 12-18 months...that's something like 5000-7500 COVID deaths per day.    Roughly 7000 people in the US die every day of EVERYTHING combined.

We will not need to lockdown forever, as China has shown...but there will have to be rules and guidelines when restrictions are lifted...as China has shown...and there will have to be mechanisms to quickly re-implement lockdowns where new outbreaks are detected...as China has shown.   And those decisions will have to be made quickly...not hemming and hawing and living in denial for weeks or months before acting.

And remember...China's two month lockdown, to get things where they are now, was far more universal and stringent than the US is doing.

Even if US opens up most things domestically, they're going to keep borders closed to most of the world for many months, until all those countries can demonstrate they have things under control domestically too...So, much of the tourism and travel industries won't be near normal.  There won't be a Little League World Series.  There won't be a US Open tennis tournament.   There probably won't be NFL games in London.

MLB is considering baseball all happening in Arizona, with no fans.  NHL is considering all hockey happening in North Dakota, and not until August.

Those are the realities huge business entities are contemplating in order to start generating SOME revenue, realizing that "normal" is many months away.

You also need to realize the logistics of what happens in this new world when someone is diagnosed with COVID.   Let's say your baseball resumes...you go back to umping and a couple of weeks later it comes out that the ump you partnered with the night before has COVID.   Now you, everyone he partnered with, and every player and coach in any game he umped, for the past two weeks needs to be tested (and self-isolate until test results come in)....and if anyone of those tests positive, rinse and repeat.  And that's just a simple baseball game.  To help alleviate the chance of those kinds of stops and starts across all areas, there will have to be rules....like everyone must wear a mask in public, or any setting where they can't be more than six feet apart.   Yes, I can visualize summer amateur baseball games where all the fans, umps, coaches and players are all wearing some kind of face covering.   Hell, I can visualize MLB doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Most people will start getting back to work in the summer...but there will be rules.   And practices will change.  A lot of the corporate world is figuring out they that can work from home effectively...and they're learning some lessons about how to do it efficiently...and when people need to be in the office and when they don't...the people who should be really afraid are management companies that lease office space, and companies that run parking lots...their occupancy could easily drop by a third.

This paragraph is exactly what I've been working on for the past month. The company I work for isn't office space or parking lots, but it's certainly dependent on people being in offices.

Our research is showing that after quarantine, a vast number of workers will return to their desks. Companies have leases on their office space, often long-term, so they aren't going to leave the area empty and let workers continue working from home. Workers are also becoming tired of looking at the same wall and window for 8 hours a day, so they want to go back to work.

Long term, though, we do see some companies allowing remote work more often than before. As leases come up, companies will weigh the cost/benefit to smaller spaces and make moves accordingly. But, it's not easy to just decide to move to somewhere smaller and get it done over a weekend; and once it's done, you'll have to stick with that plan for a few years - something many companies may not see being worth the expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, yawetag said:

This paragraph is exactly what I've been working on for the past month. The company I work for isn't office space or parking lots, but it's certainly dependent on people being in offices.

Our research is showing that after quarantine, a vast number of workers will return to their desks. Companies have leases on their office space, often long-term, so they aren't going to leave the area empty and let workers continue working from home. Workers are also becoming tired of looking at the same wall and window for 8 hours a day, so they want to go back to work.

Long term, though, we do see some companies allowing remote work more often than before. As leases come up, companies will weigh the cost/benefit to smaller spaces and make moves accordingly. But, it's not easy to just decide to move to somewhere smaller and get it done over a weekend; and once it's done, you'll have to stick with that plan for a few years - something many companies may not see being worth the expense.

Yup - it will really be the transient workforce that gets changed first.  They'll work from home rather than an office providing a bunch of empty cubicles "just in case" someone needs to come into the office that day...sales people...billable people on bench between projects...that type of stuff.

I think you'll see more shared spacing - work from home 2 or 3 days a week.   Fewer people will have a dedicated desk or cubicle...and there will be more collaboration areas..it won't be a one for one reduction, but over time, probably 1/4 to 1/3 wouldn't be out of realm of possibility.

It will be a cultural shift as much as anything, but many "old school" company leaders have been forced to see that it CAN work.

You're right, there will be a lag, as many have long-term leases...some may choose to not contract, but you'll also see a reluctance to expand...they'll look at WFH options instead of adding capacity.

As far as my company...I built the framework about five years ago to allow for the possibility of every staff member to work remotely, using H1N1 discussions we had some five years before that as a model (in all honesty, it started as planning for a localized state of emergency, but was really easy, with no incremental cost, to plan for a national/international SoE)  As a result, in mid March we went from 50 concurrent remote workers to 1000 almost overnight, without batting an eye...and now our CEO is looking at a couple of offices with leases ending soon and realizing he can consolidate.   His mindset went from inter-office mobility to just plain mobility in a matter of days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

It will be a cultural shift as much as anything, but many "old school" company leaders have been forced to see that it CAN work.

Less than a year ago, my Director and I presented to the CEO a new line of business that would market to WFH employees, trying to compete with a smaller start-up doing something similar. We tried to buy the start-up, but negotiations failed. Our company ended up dropping the idea.

The day after we got a WFH order from our company, our CEO told us to get the program running - we had our first order a week later and now are selling about 1,000 units a day.

Our CEO isn't "old school" at all, but he did say in our meeting that he'd never expect this type of program to work. Now, he's expecting this to be a $100MM/year line for us, even after the COVID scare is over - probably a bit high, but not impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

That's pretty cavalier.

If someone told you you could go back to the normal life you experienced in 2019...all you have to do is play Russian Roulette once...would you play if the gun had...

5 chambers?

10?

50?

100?

500?

1000?

What's your line?   And what if you were told that if you chose to play, then the ten people you love the most MUST play as well.

Flattening to below capacity is priority one.   Priority two is flattening it further, as much as possible, without collapsing the economy...to minimize the chances of everyone getting it before a vaccine or treatment is found.

Most people will start getting back to work in the summer...but there will be rules.   And practices will change.  A lot of the corporate world is figuring out they that can work from home effectively...and they're learning some lessons about how to do it efficiently...and when people need to be in the office and when they don't...the people who should be really afraid are management companies that lease office space, and companies that run parking lots...their occupancy could easily drop by a third.

Your position suggests that 2-3 million Americans will die if everyone gets it eventually.   So, over what period of time does that need to occur to be within health system capacity....if you go by the current belief that the outbreak will go 12-18 months...that's something like 5000-7500 COVID deaths per day.    Roughly 7000 people in the US die every day of EVERYTHING combined.

We will not need to lockdown forever, as China has shown...but there will have to be rules and guidelines when restrictions are lifted...as China has shown...and there will have to be mechanisms to quickly re-implement lockdowns where new outbreaks are detected...as China has shown.   And those decisions will have to be made quickly...not hemming and hawing and living in denial for weeks or months before acting.

And remember...China's two month lockdown, to get things where they are now, was far more universal and stringent than the US is doing.

Even if US opens up most things domestically, they're going to keep borders closed to most of the world for many months, until all those countries can demonstrate they have things under control domestically too...So, much of the tourism and travel industries won't be near normal.  There won't be a Little League World Series.  There won't be a US Open tennis tournament.   There probably won't be NFL games in London.

MLB is considering baseball all happening in Arizona, with no fans.  NHL is considering all hockey happening in North Dakota, and not until August.

Those are the realities huge business entities are contemplating in order to start generating SOME revenue, realizing that "normal" is many months away.

You also need to realize the logistics of what happens in this new world when someone is diagnosed with COVID.   Let's say your baseball resumes...you go back to umping and a couple of weeks later it comes out that the ump you partnered with the night before has COVID.   Now you, everyone he partnered with, and every player and coach in any game he umped, for the past two weeks needs to be tested (and self-isolate until test results come in)....and if anyone of those tests positive, rinse and repeat.  And that's just a simple baseball game.  To help alleviate the chance of those kinds of stops and starts across all areas, there will have to be rules....like everyone must wear a mask in public, or any setting where they can't be more than six feet apart.   Yes, I can visualize summer amateur baseball games where all the fans, umps, coaches and players are all wearing some kind of face covering.   Hell, I can visualize MLB doing this.

Sure, it's cavalier. I also think it's reality. 

Let's take your analogy to the extremes. Someone who you implicitly believe has the power to end all of this, for some reason, hands you an impossibly large gun with 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chambers, and says if you and your 10 closest loved ones play Russian roulette with this gun, your life, and everyone else's, goes back to normal. Would I do it? Heck yeah I would, and so would you. Take off a zero. Would I? Yeah. I don't know where I'd stop, but it wouldn't be for awhile.

Now let me show you how cavalier I can be. Let's change this into more what we're seeing. Let's say you were (again, were in the hypothetical that doesn't make sense) told that some sort of disaster would occur, which would force us into isolation and shut down the economy for 10 years. A button is put in front of you. If you push this button, the crisis is averted, but one random person dies. Would you push this button? I'd hope so. Now add a zero to the number of people dead. Would you push it? I hope you would in this scenario again. Where's the line on that? Again, I don't have an answer.

I'm sure you understand what I'm getting at. Yes, the sooner we open the economy and get back to normal life, the more people will die, and people dying is bad. You have to weigh the cost vs benefit, and when the cost is measured in human life, that's hard. I'm so glad that I don't have to do that in anything more than an abstract sense like we're doing here, but it has to happen.

As a side note, part of that calculation has to be the cost in human life and quality life of NOT restarting normal life. There WILL be people who die as a side effect of flattening the curve. Something I've been wanting to look up, is how is this affecting suicide? I isn't know if it's yet caused any sort of spike, but if this goes on long enough, it will. 

There's a few problems with your estimation of 2-3 million dying if the economy opens. First, it's based off the assumption that the economy opens with no restrictions whatsoever. I have not argued that we should do it that way. We'll get back to this. Second, it's based off the assumption that the outbreak would last 12-18 months. My understanding is that a timespan of 12-18 months is if we continue with our  current restrictions, and includes 2nd and 3rd waves, which will happen either way. Third, it relies on a death rate based on those who have already been tested, but that is certainly much too high due to selection bias. How many people have had it and, because they were asymptomatic, had it early on before you could get tested, or thought they just had the flu, never were diagnosed? The truth is, we have no idea how serious it is, but it's almost certainly not as bad as looking at only those who have been tested.

From the start, my point, and what I've been attempting to argue, is that we  could, in the not too distant future, return to most of the activities we previously were engaged in, albeit with some precautions at first. Not only can we restart life soon, but we should.

With all that being said, I'm in no way an expert. I'm just a wholly unqualified 18 year old with too much time on his hands philosophizing on the internet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Biscuit said:

From the start, my point, and what I've been attempting to argue, is that we  could, in the not too distant future, return to most of the activities we previously were engaged in, albeit with some precautions at first. Not only can we restart life soon, but we should.

With all that being said, I'm in no way an expert. I'm just a wholly unqualified 18 year old with too much time on his hands philosophizing on the internet.

And I'm trying to temper your expectations.   

 

1 hour ago, Biscuit said:

There's a few problems with your estimation of 2-3 million dying if the economy opens. First, it's based off the assumption that the economy opens with no restrictions whatsoever

No, it's based on simple math.   It doesn't matter what we do...without a vaccine or treatment, if everyone in America gets COVID, whether it's over a period of three months or three years, 2-3 million people will die, minimum.   That's just based on the mortality rate of the virus, and doesn't factor in issues that will drive that number upwards.  If everybody in the US got COVID today, and everybody had a hospital bed, doctor, nurse and ventilator at their disposal, the best medical care and the best insurance, 2-3 million of them would die....minimum....very conservative...likely more like 4-5.

To put that in perspective, less than 3 million people in the US die in a year TOTAL.

 More people will die in a shorter period of time if we just try to burn through it with no restrictions in an attempt to get global herd immunity, simply because people won't be able to get treatment...and more other people will die of other things due to the collapse of the health care system.

That is simply response to your assessment that everybody is going to get it anyway, so we need to get there as fast as we can.  You're right, we need to assume at some point everyone will get it eventually...and that truth is more staggering than you realize.   And the governments of the world are starting to realize this...and most of them are going to try to stretch things out as much as they can, until a vaccine is found.

And you're right, we need to keep things just below health capacity and try to move on as fast as we can...what I'm talking about is what is going to be required to achieve that goal.

What is going to happen is the countries are going to try to stretch things out as long as possible, to get us to a vaccination or treatment, so that we can reduce the inherent mortality rate of the virus...OR, if history tells us anything...until the virus mutates to a less deadly strain (that's evolution...viruses that kill their hosts don't last as long as ones that don't)....they will balance that attempt to delay with a desire to open the economy, and move forward what they can...but there will be restrictions, and many of those restrictions will stretch into 2021...OR, there will be significant measures in place to quickly shutdown a region to stamp out any new outbreaks that happen here and there...if done effectively, they shouldn't have to shut down the country again...but they might shut down cities or states or counties for a few weeks here and there.   Imagine how that will wreak havoc on the NBA/NHL/NFL schedules next January.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

And I'm trying to temper your expectations.   

 

No, it's based on simple math.   It doesn't matter what we do...without a vaccine or treatment, if everyone in America gets COVID, whether it's over a period of three months or three years, 2-3 million people will die, minimum.   That's just based on the mortality rate of the virus, and doesn't factor in issues that will drive that number upwards.  If everybody in the US got COVID today, and everybody had a hospital bed, doctor, nurse and ventilator at their disposal, the best medical care and the best insurance, 2-3 million of them would die....minimum....very conservative...likely more like 4-5.

To put that in perspective, less than 3 million people in the US die in a year TOTAL.

 More people will die in a shorter period of time if we just try to burn through it with no restrictions in an attempt to get global herd immunity, simply because people won't be able to get treatment...and more other people will die of other things due to the collapse of the health care system.

That is simply response to your assessment that everybody is going to get it anyway, so we need to get there as fast as we can.  You're right, we need to assume at some point everyone will get it eventually...and that truth is more staggering than you realize.   And the governments of the world are starting to realize this...and most of them are going to try to stretch things out as much as they can, until a vaccine is found.

And you're right, we need to keep things just below health capacity and try to move on as fast as we can...what I'm talking about is what is going to be required to achieve that goal.

What is going to happen is the countries are going to try to stretch things out as long as possible, to get us to a vaccination or treatment, so that we can reduce the inherent mortality rate of the virus...OR, if history tells us anything...until the virus mutates to a less deadly strain (that's evolution...viruses that kill their hosts don't last as long as ones that don't)....they will balance that attempt to delay with a desire to open the economy, and move forward what they can...but there will be restrictions, and many of those restrictions will stretch into 2021...OR, there will be significant measures in place to quickly shutdown a region to stamp out any new outbreaks that happen here and there...if done effectively, they shouldn't have to shut down the country again...but they might shut down cities or states or counties for a few weeks here and there.   Imagine how that will wreak havoc on the NBA/NHL/NFL schedules next January.

 

Look, I understand that I am more optimistic on this situation than most, and maybe I'm wrong. Fine. I don't really feel like continuing to argue that. 

However, I do take umbrage on you taking one counter argument I made, a little out of context, and ignoring the others. Those counter arguments are not independent of each other, and they address your response. Again, I never said we should open back up with no precautions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As entertaining as this has been, imma try to bring it back to baseball, and our collective deal here.

Regardless of when we "come back online" from this, the unpopular opinion I will proffer is:  in our role as umpires, we don't have to worry about it.  Because ball won't be part of the comeback, likely for the rest of this year.  Why?  There is NO way to play the game in a social distancing way.  You work the plate, you are now well within the transmission range of every player that bats - so, minimum of 18 players.  And really, any of their teammates/coaches, thanks to the transitive property.

To me, THAT'S what keeps us from coming back, at our collective amateur level.  That people will look at that risk/reward and nope the [redacted] out of it.

If decision makers just blow that off, well, you guys have a good 2020 season.  THIS guy won't be with you, other than in spirit and/or the internet.  I love this gig, but not enough to shave off what years I have left.  The reality is, I'm not all that many years away from being the kindly older umpire doing just the little dudes - and I don't think I plan to be THAT guy, either.  So, yeah, while it's killing me to take the rest of the year off, that's likely what I'm doing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, HokieUmp said:

As entertaining as this has been, imma try to bring it back to baseball, and our collective deal here.

Regardless of when we "come back online" from this, the unpopular opinion I will proffer is:  in our role as umpires, we don't have to worry about it.  Because ball won't be part of the comeback, likely for the rest of this year.  Why?  There is NO way to play the game in a social distancing way.  You work the plate, you are now well within the transmission range of every player that bats - so, minimum of 18 players.  And really, any of their teammates/coaches, thanks to the transitive property.

To me, THAT'S what keeps us from coming back, at our collective amateur level.  That people will look at that risk/reward and nope the [redacted] out of it.

If decision makers just blow that off, well, you guys have a good 2020 season.  THIS guy won't be with you, other than in spirit and/or the internet.  I love this gig, but not enough to shave off what years I have left.  The reality is, I'm not all that many years away from being the kindly older umpire doing just the little dudes - and I don't think I plan to be THAT guy, either.  So, yeah, while it's killing me to take the rest of the year off, that's likely what I'm doing.

If baseball happens in our state, as being planned for, maybe more hopefully than realistically, we will have to judge the risks for us but if it happens the people making the decisions have the health of a bunch of youth to consider. I would assume they would do due diligence before starting up again. But in regard to social distance I had a thought on my run a few days ago. I do pickups at the end of my run to remind my fast twitch,  no that would be the few medium twitch muscles left and my heart that they are not yet in retirement. With that kind of exertion I wondered if I was aerosolizing and leaving a trail behind me. Today my city required oral/nasal covers on people outside their homestead including runners/walkers. I can't argue with that. The Dutch have a study that shows a 10 to 20 meter trail behind runners/bikers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now everyone knows i am as dumb as a rock, but my mental midget mind just starts going all to hell with the thought of what if "everyone" just shelters in place for 8-12 weeks (like some get to) for maximum personal safety from exposure for themselves and others, rather than some get to and some do not.

that sends me to what if, knowing what we do now, some umpires were forced to always work straight over the catcher and always over the kill zone, while others were allowed to be able to not work over the kill zone.

And in one of the posts above with numbers of everyone in U.S. getting the virus today, that would be 330 million people, and if the early 1.3% death rate were to hold that would be 4.3 million deaths in the US. However, as of today with 468,598 cases, the death rate is at 16,691 deaths or roughly 3.55%, so that would be 11,550,000 US deaths if everyone got the virus today. That does not include those who come out of it totally messed up with permanent disabilities/health issues that run the gambit from mild to severe.

If that were the regular flu that does not transmit as readily, nor present as many critical ventilator situations, and only has a .1% death rate, that would be 330,000 deaths out of the whole population. Since 2010 annually there were between a  low of 9 million flu cases to a high of 45 million. 140,000 to 810,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 to 61,000 deaths per year in the US.

Ps--and yes, none of the stats include those who did not get tested for whatever reason just like for regular flu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

Now everyone knows i am as dumb as a rock, but my mental midget mind just starts going all to hell with the thought of what if "everyone" just shelters in place for 8-12 weeks (like some get to) for maximum personal safety from exposure for themselves and others, rather than some get to and some do not.

that sends me to what if, knowing what we do now, some umpires were forced to always work straight over the catcher and always over the kill zone, while others were allowed to be able to not work over the kill zone.

And in one of the posts above with numbers of everyone in U.S. getting the virus today, that would be 330 million people, and if the early 1.3% death rate were to hold that would be 4.3 million deaths in the US. However, as of today with 468,598 cases, the death rate is at 16,691 deaths or roughly 3.55%, so that would be 11,550,000 US deaths if everyone got the virus today. That does not include those who come out of it totally messed up with permanent disabilities/health issues that run the gambit from mild to severe.

If that were the regular flu that does not transmit as readily, nor present as many critical ventilator situations, and only has a .1% death rate, that would be 330,000 deaths out of the whole population. Since 2010 annually there were between a  low of 9 million flu cases to a high of 45 million. 140,000 to 810,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 to 61,000 deaths per year in the US.

 

Just heard that today an American died every 47 seconds from the coronavirus.  We need to throw out the sports for this year and come down on the side of caution.  We are not invincible.  We need to stop downplaying this virus.  We need to stop giving people false hope.  Tell it straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this back and forth and speculation about how many will get infected and why we should or shouldn't be back on the field strikes me (pun intended) as having many parallels to the conversations and squawking that occurs outside the fence when fans disagree or agree with a call or play based on a baseball rule they were unfamiliar with.

Many of us have offered our views on the silly comments we have heard coming from their relatively uninformed perspectives and chuckled or become incensed while trying to keep the game moving towards its end.

Ironic? 

Just saying is all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

And in one of the posts above with numbers of everyone in U.S. getting the virus today, that would be 330 million people, and if the early 1.3% death rate were to hold that would be 4.3 million deaths in the US. However, as of today with 468,598 cases, the death rate is at 16,691 deaths or roughly 3.55%, so that would be 11,550,000 US deaths if everyone got the virus today. That does not include those who come out of it totally messed up with permanent disabilities/health issues that run the gambit from mild to severe.

The most disturbing element of this data is most experts estimate that only 1-5% of all Americans have been infected...and most of them agree its more likely 1 than 5.  It's quite possible the chaos we're seeing today is the result of only 1% of Americans getting the virus.   So, 95-99% of Americans haven't caught it yet, and don't have anti-bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2020 at 11:11 PM, umpstu said:

Just heard that today an American died every 47 seconds from the coronavirus.  We need to throw out the sports for this year and come down on the side of caution.  We are not invincible.  We need to stop downplaying this virus.  We need to stop giving people false hope.  Tell it straight.


Whoa, whoa, whoa ... you can time that but you can’t figure out the 20 seconds to deliver a pitch or 60 seconds between innings?!  
 

:sarcasm:
 

(Not YOU, @umpstu ... generic “you” in a poor attempt at dark humor.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

The most disturbing element of this data is most experts estimate that only 1-5% of all Americans have been infected...and most of them agree its more likely 1 than 5.  It's quite possible the chaos we're seeing today is the result of only 1% of Americans getting the virus.   So, 95-99% of Americans haven't caught it yet, and don't have anti-bodies.


I’m going to agree with you ... the data we have is inadequate for reasonable projections.  First, our national numbers are very heavily skewed by New York.  Not knocking New York, just saying despite their large population, the numbers are still overwhelmingly being disproportionally influenced by that one location.

Second, testing for the virus has not been done in a controlled random sampling, so we cannot extrapolate it out to the general population.  It also only tells us where the virus is at the moment.  From that we can do some guessing at where it has been and where it can go, but the antibodies testing will vastly help as we will have a way of knowing where the virus has already been.  We know undetected mild cases and cases before “the alarm” occurred ... we don’t know to what extent.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...