Coronavirus

[Stockmann]

The reopenings wouldn't be happening if there wasn't a great deal of public pressure for them to.  We've gone so many years without a truly terrible epidemic in our country that society as a whole just can't wrap their heads around what it takes to deal with one.

I am hugely in favor of the cautious, data-based, phased approach to re-opening, closing, re-opening.
That said, I am trying to understand how others feel.  Many people are really struggling economically and mentally at this point.  I don't want to think about what it's like to see your own business that you spent a lifetime building have to close, for good, and desperately wondering how you will support yourself/family going forward.

+1. Lockdowns can't be continued indefinitely. I get wanting to re-open with suitable precautions. The people I have no patience for are people who refuse to do things like wear a facemask in public - wearing a facemask protects you, protects others, is risk-free and could be continued as long as necessary.
I've just returned from driving - most of the pedestrians I saw who weren't wearing facemasks were old men. Yeah, I totally don't get why this place is a hotspot. \s

[Caracal]

[

Conclusion - all those youngun's who insist they just GOTTA go for a beer with their friends or they'll just lose their minds are not not likely to die, but they are likely to get symptoms, and they pose a genuine risk to their families, co-workers, etc. who may be older or in poor health.   

Yes, and especially when it is perfectly easy to go have a beer with friends in a relatively safe fashion. Go sit on your deck, or your stoop, stay six feet apart and it becomes a pretty low risk activity. That said, we shouldn't lose track of where the blame really lies. People shouldn't go to bars or sit inside at restaurants, so why are those places open for indoor seating?

Becuz the eijit in the White House sez it's OK.....

M.

Exactly. I am so tired of family telling me that 'it's just the flu' and that it should be gone in the fall. Frustrating. And, of course, none of them have a medical degree...

The man in the White House has a lot to answer for, but this goes so far beyond that.  The reopenings wouldn't be happening if there wasn't a great deal of public pressure for them to.  We've gone so many years without a truly terrible epidemic in our country that society as a whole just can't wrap their heads around what it takes to deal with one.

I don't agree. First of all, polling has pretty consistently indicated that most people approved of, and continue to approve of, measures to limit spread. But, also, the whole "reopening" debate is basically nonsense promoted by Trump. I really detest the term "lockdown" because it makes it seem like we would be going back to March. That isn't actually necessary. We know a lot more about the spread of the virus now than we did then. There's no need to close beaches, parks and the like, or even restaurants with outdoor seating. Some workplaces that weren't considered essential at the beginning have figured out ways to reopen relatively safely. The issue is things that aren't safe until you can really get numbers down, which is bars, gyms and probably most indoor dining.

Also, of course people are tired of restrictions. People got tired of them in other countries too. The difference is that most other wealthy countries had a big surge of cases and were then able to roll out large scale testing and contract tracing to keep things under control after the numbers went down. Now, they have been able to lift more restrictions in a safe way. Again, I really think the focus on "reopening" as a binary issue came straight from the top and has screwed up the debate.  It isn't that Americans somehow failed to handle this because of our ingrained selfishness, it is that our federal government has completely failed to function in the face of a crisis and states have basically been on their own. 

[apl68]

I'm inclined to think that it's a combination of what cheerful and pgher point to.  I suspect that mamselle is also correct in suggesting that many think that they are somehow too special to need to worry about taking precautions, but am inclined to think that it has less to do with race than with a sense of invincibility brought on by youth, or with a general lack of concern for society.  From what I've seen, the old folks are more likely overall to take precautions seriously, not less.  Although the occasional believers in conspiracy theories do seem to be mostly old folks.

I can't help detecting a sense of being "more special/entitled than you" on the part of some who take the epidemic very seriously as well.  People who can afford to hole up in their homes and have everything delivered to their doorstep are unabashedly using privilege to keep themselves safe, while relying on others to take the risks needed to keep society and the economy running.

[clean]

My county is using some data source (or more likely they provide the data, and some entity updates the website).  The data USED to include a breakdown of infections by age, and another by gender.  But that stopped some time ago.  Are you seeing, in your local or state numbers, a breakdown of the infection cases by age?

When the reports stopped, the 20-30s were the highest percentage of positive cases. 

As that is the age group I most worry about infecting ME, Id like to know just how much danger I am in IF I am unable to not be 100% online.  (So far, I am 84% online so i am required to meet 'everyone' no fewer than 5 face to face meetings.  )

Anyone got the 'good data' Im looking for?

[secundem_artem]

And there's also a kind-of racist element in some peoples' thinking:

"That's something that happens to...take your pick....SE Asian places, African places, South American hotspots, etc...."

"THEY" get the Ebolas, the MERS's the SARS's (first time around: which taught 'them' how important it is to let your brain tell your feet and hands what to do...), etc....we don't. It goes away when it gets to us: we're special...must be that.

/quote]

Yup - American exceptionalism. Reminds me of an apocryphal newspaper headline from way back when that read, "Typhoon Hits Bangladesh - 1 Million Killed, No Americans Injured"

[nebo113]

The reopenings wouldn't be happening if there wasn't a great deal of public pressure for them to.  We've gone so many years without a truly terrible epidemic in our country that society as a whole just can't wrap their heads around what it takes to deal with one.

I am hugely in favor of the cautious, data-based, phased approach to re-opening, closing, re-opening.
That said, I am trying to understand how others feel.  Many people are really struggling economically and mentally at this point.  I don't want to think about what it's like to see your own business that you spent a lifetime building have to close, for good, and desperately wondering how you will support yourself/family going forward.

I think what we're seeing is the dark side of individualism. The healthy way to view individualism is that we are part of a society that enables us to be free, so long as we do the minimum to maintain that society. Instead what we're seeing is "freedom" used as a code word for devolving responsibility. Various federal agencies give guidance, which is then undercut by the White House, but neither resources nor firm rules. States then are left to do what they think is appropriate. In many cases, that means "empowering" local entities to fix the problem with limited guidance and no resources. Many universities and schools are "empowering" faculty to fix the problem. That is, the language of freedom and autonomy is being used to abdicate responsibility. I don't know if it's because the higher levels don't want to assume responsibility, or that they don't have the language or political theory to do more.

Thank you, pgher.

[Caracal]

My county is using some data source (or more likely they provide the data, and some entity updates the website).  The data USED to include a breakdown of infections by age, and another by gender.  But that stopped some time ago.  Are you seeing, in your local or state numbers, a breakdown of the infection cases by age?

When the reports stopped, the 20-30s were the highest percentage of positive cases. 

As that is the age group I most worry about infecting ME, Id like to know just how much danger I am in IF I am unable to not be 100% online.  (So far, I am 84% online so i am required to meet 'everyone' no fewer than 5 face to face meetings.  )

Anyone got the 'good data' Im looking for?

Do you mean that you want to know what percentage of people in their 20s and 30s are infected, or what your personal risk of infection is? Or what your risks are if you are infected?

[clean]

Of those infected, what is the breakdown by age.
If 1000 people are infected in my county, I want to know the percentage that are 20-29, the percentage 30-39, ....

This breakdown was last reported in May. At that time the 20-29 age group was the highest group.  Given that IF I am expected to work face to face, and that the typical college age group is in the 'indestructible' mind set, .... and the local news yesterday showed a camera phone video of a  bar fight where the bar's liqueur license  was subsequently suspended for 30 days because of social distancing/overcrowding violations, ... The crowd certainly looked to be in the 20-29 group!

Given that I am at risk, I d like to be able to see those numbers in the hopes of influencing the administration .... well, that is futile, i suppose.

[ab_grp]

Clean, my state has a dashboard that provides demographic (age, gender) breakdowns of cases by county (or other level of detail).  It doesn't report percentages, but the numbers are there in tables and bar charts and easy enough to calculate from.   Looks like 20-29 has the highest incidence here, too.   The dashboard is on the state department of health site.  I just googled "[county] covid cases by age" and found this.  Hopefully there is similar info available for your area.

[arcturus]

Clean, my state also has a dashboard that provides demographic information. The positive cases are peaked around middle age (16-17% in each of the age bins between 20-29 and 50-59, whereas 70-79 and 80+ are both ~8%).  The deaths are strongly skewed towards the elderly (70-79 are 25% of the deaths; 80+ are 52% of the deaths). I get to the dashboard by googling "mystate coronavirus news" and this gets the state department of health site near the top of the list. From the state map, I can also select my county to get the local demographics.

My state had been on a downward trajectory, but I see that we are now on the upswing both in statewide covid cases and in hospitalizations. My county had been flat (almost no cases) until the end of June. We are now on an exponential upswing. Not a good sign.

[Cheerful]

As that is the age group I most worry about infecting ME, Id like to know just how much danger I am in IF I am unable to not be 100% online.  (So far, I am 84% online so i am required to meet 'everyone' no fewer than 5 face to face meetings.  )

I'm sorry you're still having to worry about this, clean.  You should be given permission to teach fully online and be able to live free from stress about that.  Who decided on the quota of required in-person meetings?

[apl68]

Our governor has just mandated wearing of masks in public!  Belated, but at least it's happening now.  And I don't anticipate his being sabotaged by the legislature as has happened elsewhere.

Now we'll see how much the measure actually helps.  Masks are a really good idea, but they're not a cure-all.

[clean]

Quote from: clean on July 15, 2020, 05:02:42 PM
As that is the age group I most worry about infecting ME, Id like to know just how much danger I am in IF I am unable to not be 100% online.  (So far, I am 84% online so i am required to meet 'everyone' no fewer than 5 face to face meetings.  )

I'm sorry you're still having to worry about this, clean.  You should be given permission to teach fully online and be able to live free from stress about that.  Who decided on the quota of required in-person meetings?

Classes here are one of four types: 0-24% online, 25-49%, 50 -84% or fully online. There are varying fees associated with the different classes.  I have no idea who, or even when this breakdown was created.

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

Our governor has just mandated wearing of masks in public!  Belated, but at least it's happening now.  And I don't anticipate his being sabotaged by the legislature as has happened elsewhere.

Now we'll see how much the measure actually helps.  Masks are a really good idea, but they're not a cure-all.

Our governor is a dumb ass.

[Economizer]

Re: Masks

I am really good about wearing masks. My loved one insists that I do and supplied me well. As things are, I do not stay out more than 4-5 hours a day, in the daylight time exclusively. Do I need to wear a new mask each day? Do they dry out or air out due a period of time and become refreshed, and thus safe to reuse, maybe?

While within range of the subject of oscular activity, should we? Other related possibilities?