It's time to end the consensual hallucination of fall in-person classes

[Hegemony]

There are a lot of countries with a lot more consensus on what should be done than we have. For instance, Canada, which has both old and young people, ill people and healthy people, city people and rural people ... in fact I believe every country has those. But our disagreements are not between those groups, but mainly between political parties, with a good dose of conspiracy theorists and the "You can't take my freedom, you Commie!" crowd.  Trust in the state (nation) and the government is much lower in the U.S. than in the places that have done things better — New Zealand, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Germany, South Korea, to name a few. And it's not just a distrust of government that may be corrupt, such as you find in, well, notoriously corrupt countries. It's distrust in any idea of cooperation on a larger scale at all. Individualism magnified into a pathogen. Which is why you get even the non-shouty ones responding to the idea of eliminating non-essential errands, not having parties, wearing masks, social distancing, etc. with "You do you — and I'll do me." Of course unless everybody thinks of the big picture, instead of their own particular desires, "You do you" will mean that the more vulnerable people can't trust other folk not to go out while waiting on their virus test results (as many have), not to cough on them, sometimes deliberately (as has happened), not to take any precautions against other people getting it at all. It's Every Man For Himself in the Land of the Free.

[dismalist]

I was largely agreeing, Hegemony. :-)

But it ain't that simple: Homogeneous Sweden has a high death rate from this garbage. Across the bridge, homogeneous Denmark has a low death rate from the garbage. Heterogeneous UK has a high death rate, and heterogeneous Germany has a low death rate.

There are more examples. But the point is that consensus at the level of nation states cannot be the point. Leaves groups smaller than nation states that could work.

[kaysixteen]

The Swedes obviously made a very poor decision to embrace the dumb-dumb notion of trying to foster herd immunity without access to a vaccine.  Anyone know if the Swedish government will be in danger of falling/ losing the next election, due to this, esp with, as you say, their Danish cousins just across that brand-spanking new bridge, having made the right policy call, obviously doing much much better, for all to see?

[downer]

The Swedes obviously made a very poor decision to embrace the dumb-dumb notion of trying to foster herd immunity without access to a vaccine.  Anyone know if the Swedish government will be in danger of falling/ losing the next election, due to this, esp with, as you say, their Danish cousins just across that brand-spanking new bridge, having made the right policy call, obviously doing much much better, for all to see?

I thought I saw something about it actually being very difficult in Sweden for any government to impose a lockdown -- their laws prioritize personal freedom.

[Stockmann]

I was largely agreeing, Hegemony. :-)

But it ain't that simple: Homogeneous Sweden has a high death rate from this garbage. Across the bridge, homogeneous Denmark has a low death rate from the garbage. Heterogeneous UK has a high death rate, and heterogeneous Germany has a low death rate.

There are more examples. But the point is that consensus at the level of nation states cannot be the point. Leaves groups smaller than nation states that could work.

It can't be reduced to a single factor. But clearly, policy and local culture matter. In Confucianist societies, a sense of collective responsibility for the whole of society's welfare perhaps made people more willing to comply with facemasks, etc. Confucianist societies, including democracies like Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, have been extraordinarily successful, whereas Western societies, except for New Zealand, have had a pretty dismal performance in comparison. Preparedness makes a difference, as Taiwan and Vietnam, perhaps the most successful places on the planet in dealing with the pandemic, had prepared extensively for a pandemic. A good healthcare system matters, and that seems to be a big part of what has helped Germany have some of the least dismal numbers in Europe.
Policy matters, but so does actual compliance and enforcement. Sweden and Brazil have essentially the same policy (or lack thereof), in both cases with disastrous results (Sweden, in deaths per million inhabitants, is in the same ballpark as Italy and significantly worse than the US or Brazil). But Peru theoretically took Draconian measures early, but compliance and enforcement were a disaster, with disastrous results. Costa Rica, perhaps Latin America's most serious country, didn't take particularly Draconian measures, but there was widespread compliance, and it's been more successful than a lot of wealthy Western countries.
Geography seems to matter remarkably little - sure, it helped New Zealand, but Britain is also an island and, well, enough said. On the other hand, Vietnam is a continental country bordering on the epidemic's country of origin, yet it's been more successful than even New Zealand.

[Hegemony]

I was living in Britain when SARS hit, and I remember a much more organized approach to it — even though it turned out not to be a serious threat in Britain. Similarly, apparent the U.S. did have a plan, which was dismantled and ignored when Trump came into office. One of the most worrisome things among many worrisome things is that the countries that are faring badly (with the possible exception of Sweden) don't show any sign whatsoever of learning from the disaster. No one in the upper reaches of the U.S. government right now is saying, "Oh no, this is heading in completely the wrong direction — we must start planning better immediately, and we must make sure a disease getting away from us like this never happens again."  Instead, it's "La la la, everything's great, la la la, I have my fingers in my ears and I can't hear you!"

Small humorous side note: when I started a small extra administrative gig at the beginning of this past academic year, I was given a sheet of paper with a list of things that needed to be accomplished at some point. One was something like "PPA." At each monthly meeting we'd get halfway down the list and the dean would say, "Let's table the rest for next time, none of it's urgent." At our last meeting, in June, when we'd tabled half the list again, I said, "What is PPA?"  He said, "Pandemic Preparedness Arrangements. That's setting up a plan in case a pandemic hits."  Then we both laughed ruefully. 

I sort of wish we'd gotten to it earlier, as I would have liked to have seen just how incredibly off the mark our plans would have been.

[spork]

^ You might enjoy the section on premortems in Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.

[polly_mer]

My employer has a pandemic plan that articulates with a regional pandemic plan.

It's been pretty impressive to just watch that roll since mid-March and have minor adjustments being made for this particular situation (whoo, local breweries and seamstresses that got unexpected contracts).

What we've done that includes still having a thousand summer interns (almost all working remotely) and still hiring regular hires at nearly the same rate as planned while every job that can be done from home is being done from home is one reason I'm skeptical about success for those institutions who are just doing thing on the fly while refusing to accept the current reality.

[Stockmann]

One of the most worrisome things among many worrisome things is that the countries that are faring badly (with the possible exception of Sweden) don't show any sign whatsoever of learning from the disaster. No one in the upper reaches of the U.S. government right now is saying, "Oh no, this is heading in completely the wrong direction — we must start planning better immediately, and we must make sure a disease getting away from us like this never happens again."  Instead, it's "La la la, everything's great, la la la, I have my fingers in my ears and I can't hear you!"

But the US federal government did change policy on testing, etc. Likewise at a state level governments have shown willingness to change policy in the face of overwhelming circumstances. This contrasts with Brazil, where the federal government has held the course of denial. Dr. Fauci makes fact-based statements; the Brazilian president fired health ministers until he found one that toes the party line. I don't see Sweden learning anything; at least, in practice they've not changed anything of what they're doing - there's been a vague recognition that fewer people should've died, but not that they've enacted the wrong policies. It's not just that there were never any lockdowns - they didn't do mass testing and contact-tracing, either, which South Korea has shown to be effective.
We know how to stop the pandemic - we know mass testing and contact-tracing works, we know that mass compliance (whether enforced or voluntary) with wearing facemasks and hygiene measures works, and we know drastic lockdowns, if consistently enforced, work. That's what the evidence tells us. But that's precisely the issue in some places, a refusal to care about the evidence if it goes against ideology, and Mexico and, above all, Brazil, are the poster children for this. The US response has been far more evidence-based than that of either. On the other hand, Sweden's response to me reeks of hubris - an epidemic being seen as a medieval medieval fit for Third World countries, not for a modern social democracy. King Canute ordering the tide to not dare rise and stain his regal garments comes to mind (but King Canute was mocking his courtiers, modern Sweden seems to have been in earnest).

[marshwiggle]

One of the most worrisome things among many worrisome things is that the countries that are faring badly (with the possible exception of Sweden) don't show any sign whatsoever of learning from the disaster. No one in the upper reaches of the U.S. government right now is saying, "Oh no, this is heading in completely the wrong direction — we must start planning better immediately, and we must make sure a disease getting away from us like this never happens again."  Instead, it's "La la la, everything's great, la la la, I have my fingers in my ears and I can't hear you!"

But the US federal government did change policy on testing, etc.

Definitely. On almost a daily basis. "Lockdown!"  "Get the economy going!"

Likewise at a state level governments have shown willingness to change policy in the face of overwhelming circumstances.

Not scientific evidence; massive hospitalizations during outbreaks. That's hardly something to be proud of. Lots of people will "show willingnes" to swim  when they get thrown in the ocean. That doesn't make them role models for adaptability.

We know how to stop the pandemic - we know mass testing and contact-tracing works, we know that mass compliance (whether enforced or voluntary) with wearing facemasks and hygiene measures works, and we know drastic lockdowns, if consistently enforced, work. That's what the evidence tells us. But that's precisely the issue in some places, a refusal to care about the evidence if it goes against ideology, and Mexico and, above all, Brazil, are the poster children for this. The US response has been far more evidence-based than that of either.

Not exactly a high bar.  Compare to Canada, which is culturally similar. Since the US has a population about 10x that of Canada, there should be about 10x the number of cases and deaths, but it's much higher on both counts.

[Stockmann]

Likewise at a state level governments have shown willingness to change policy in the face of overwhelming circumstances.

Not scientific evidence; massive hospitalizations during outbreaks. That's hardly something to be proud of. Lots of people will "show willingnes" to swim  when they get thrown in the ocean. That doesn't make them role models for adaptability.

Well, yes, but the Brazilian equivalent is for the person thrown into the ocean to deny that water causes drowning even as they sink below the waves. I'm not saying the US has handled it well, but the US has been neither among the worst performers in the Americas, nor among the worst performers among Western countries. In terms of deaths per million inhabitants, the UK has done far worse, for example. With a few exceptions, Latin America has done so little testing that it's hard to even make a comparison to start with.

[spork]

All departments at my university are being asked to submit a spreadsheet of which department members will act as back-up instructors for sick colleagues. Contractual teaching load here is seven courses per academic year. Many of us already regularly teach overloads.

The state government has apparently recognized that there will be Covid-19 cases on campuses this fall, but as long as the number of cases isn't spiraling "out of control" with spillover into surrounding communities, campuses will be allowed to stay open.

[Parasaurolophus]

Well, yes, but the Brazilian equivalent is for the person thrown into the ocean to deny that water causes drowning even as they sink below the waves. I'm not saying the US has handled it well, but the US has been neither among the worst performers in the Americas, nor among the worst performers among Western countries. In terms of deaths per million inhabitants, the UK has done far worse, for example. With a few exceptions, Latin America has done so little testing that it's hard to even make a comparison to start with.

Is that really an apt comparison? The UK has its outbreak under control. The US most emphatically doesn't.

And if that really were the most apt metric, then Brazil is actually doing better than the US: 331 vs 405). In fact, by that metric, the US absolutely is the worst performer in the Americas. But, again, it seems odd to me to compare outbreaks which are under control with those which are still running rampant.

[Stockmann]

Well, yes, but the Brazilian equivalent is for the person thrown into the ocean to deny that water causes drowning even as they sink below the waves. I'm not saying the US has handled it well, but the US has been neither among the worst performers in the Americas, nor among the worst performers among Western countries. In terms of deaths per million inhabitants, the UK has done far worse, for example. With a few exceptions, Latin America has done so little testing that it's hard to even make a comparison to start with.

Is that really an apt comparison? The UK has its outbreak under control. The US most emphatically doesn't.

And if that really were the most apt metric, then Brazil is actually doing better than the US: 331 vs 405). In fact, by that metric, the US absolutely is the worst performer in the Americas. But, again, it seems odd to me to compare outbreaks which are under control with those which are still running rampant.

Real numbers are probably much worse in many places in Latin America than in the US. Again, with little testing carried out in many places, it's not really possible to make meaningful comparisons using official figures. The healthcare system was overwhelmed in Ecuador at one point, with literally corpses rotting in the streets in some places. Venezuelan hospitals often lack running water and/or electricity, so I doubt much testing is taking place. Mexico has carried out over an order of magnitude fewer tests per million inhabitants than the US.
The UK is indeed at a different stage than the US (then again, Brazil is also at an earlier stage of the pandemic than the US), and of course the US could eventually overtake the UK in deaths per million inhabitants. But the death toll relative to population isn't rising that fast in the US, at least not now, and UK figures are something like 50% worse.

[polly_mer]

Tenure saved Mike Adams plenty. And he got to retire early with $500,000.

http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2020/07/02/pw-exclusive-prof-mike-adams-wild-ride-finally-comes-to-an-end/

The ride really came to end since Mike Adams is now dead.