Why You Must Act Now

Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in news:7vObG.747741
$7i5.123992@fx35.am4:

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing
for something if the answer won't change subsequent actions.
Better to concentrate limited efforts where the effort might
change subsequent actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.

True. It does not change the fact that a lot of ineptitude was (and
still is) involved at the "management level".

We got saddled a while ago, why 'examine' it? That is the 'logic'?

Well, so we can actually get numbers on spread vectors. Remember, it
will happen again. So despite the fact that it will change little, it
WILL provide useable data.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:42:21 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
<BobEngelhardt@comcast.net> wrote:

On 3/16/2020 10:23 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
The US press, and TV news, and internet, are hyperbolic on this. There
was Climate Change, then the Mueller/Russia thing, then impeachment,
now this. Single-subject hysterical monoculture.

Do you believe that the situation in Italy is just hyperbole? If you
accept that it's real, do you have any reason to think that the US will
be any different?

It is interesting that some countries are so different from others.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:57:42 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 16/03/20 17:46, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:15:53 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 16:04, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:44:50 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 14:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

What's also increasing exponentially is the availability of testing
kits.

In the US that wouldn't be difficult!

In the UK we are scaling back testing of people with cough or fever in
the community, reserving testing for those in hospital.

And that is part of the problem. People don't universally end up in the
hospital with this disease. They live their lives and infect others.
Without widespread testing many don't know they are infected and the
problem appears better than it really is.

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing for something
if the answer won't change subsequent actions. Better to concentrate
limited efforts where the effort might change subsequent actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.

It sounds rational, but the devil is in the details. What does it mean
exactly "might change subsequent actions"? Anyone who tests positive will be
treated for the disease even if this only means self quarantine at home.. But
if many are not tested, many infected won't know to be quarantined.

It is sufficient detail in the context of the UK recommended
actions, which I'm not going to repeat in full here.
Summary: new persistent cough or temp >37.8 and you and your
family should self isolate for 7 days - and not go to a GP
or hospital unless you get significantly worse.

That is too little, too late. By the time you show symptoms, you have likely been infecting people for the better part of a week. That was my point. In the early stages of the pandemic the testing should be much more aggressive in order to identify as many patients for quarantine as possible. Once it gets past the stage where the large numbers of infections make it impractical to test widely nothing can be done about that first week of being infectious other than social distancing. In China social distancing is the law and enforced by authorities. Here it is voluntary and much less effective.

Yesterday somebody from the town 4 miles in one direction died
in the hospital 4 miles in the other direction.

Not sure what that is supposed to mean. What is the context?

This is going to be long and painful. I have no idea what I am going to do
with myself over the next few weeks. That is assuming I don't catch this
bug.

The assumption here is that "everybody" (i.e. 60-80% depending
on who you listen to) will catch it sooner or later. In the
absence of other information, that seems likely.

It would seem you didn't read the link Win posted. China currently has a cumulative infection level that is far, far below 80% and it is rising very, very slowly, slower than in the US or the UK. So clearly widespread infection is not inevitable. But it takes extreme measures to deal with it.

Who do you listen to?

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 16/03/20 17:46, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:15:53 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 16:04, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:44:50 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 14:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

What's also increasing exponentially is the availability of testing
kits.

In the US that wouldn't be difficult!

In the UK we are scaling back testing of people with cough or fever in
the community, reserving testing for those in hospital.

And that is part of the problem. People don't universally end up in the
hospital with this disease. They live their lives and infect others.
Without widespread testing many don't know they are infected and the
problem appears better than it really is.

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing for something
if the answer won't change subsequent actions. Better to concentrate
limited efforts where the effort might change subsequent actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.

It sounds rational, but the devil is in the details. What does it mean
exactly "might change subsequent actions"? Anyone who tests positive will be
treated for the disease even if this only means self quarantine at home. But
if many are not tested, many infected won't know to be quarantined.

It is sufficient detail in the context of the UK recommended
actions, which I'm not going to repeat in full here.
Summary: new persistent cough or temp >37.8 and you and your
family should self isolate for 7 days - and not go to a GP
or hospital unless you get significantly worse.

Yesterday somebody from the town 4 miles in one direction died
in the hospital 4 miles in the other direction.

This is going to be long and painful. I have no idea what I am going to do
with myself over the next few weeks. That is assuming I don't catch this
bug.

The assumption here is that "everybody" (i.e. 60-80% depending
on who you listen to) will catch it sooner or later. In the
absence of other information, that seems likely.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:23:58 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 17:15:47 +0000, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/03/20 16:04, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:44:50 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 14:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

What's also increasing exponentially is the availability of testing
kits.

In the US that wouldn't be difficult!

In the UK we are scaling back testing of people with cough or fever in the
community, reserving testing for those in hospital.

And that is part of the problem. People don't universally end up in the
hospital with this disease. They live their lives and infect others.
Without widespread testing many don't know they are infected and the problem
appears better than it really is.

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing
for something if the answer won't change subsequent actions.
Better to concentrate limited efforts where the effort might
change subsequent actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.


If they lock down for a year, people will starve to death.

That's alarmist, and depends on what "lockdown" actually consists of.
"Lockdown" isn't binary; it is shades of grey.

You are talking to someone who is calling anyone concerned about this disease
"alarmist". Do you really think they are going to pay any attention to what
you say as opposed to what they hear?

The irony had not escaped me. That's why I used "alarmist"

You used that term. I didn't.

No, you haven't said anything of value. I especially like your comment about the exponential growth of the test kits. Do test kits make more test kits? Is that how it works?

What utter BS!

--

Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:15:53 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 16/03/20 16:04, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:44:50 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 14:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

What's also increasing exponentially is the availability of testing
kits.

In the US that wouldn't be difficult!

In the UK we are scaling back testing of people with cough or fever in the
community, reserving testing for those in hospital.

And that is part of the problem. People don't universally end up in the
hospital with this disease. They live their lives and infect others.
Without widespread testing many don't know they are infected and the problem
appears better than it really is.

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing
for something if the answer won't change subsequent actions.
Better to concentrate limited efforts where the effort might
change subsequent actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.

It sounds rational, but the devil is in the details. What does it mean exactly "might change subsequent actions"? Anyone who tests positive will be treated for the disease even if this only means self quarantine at home. But if many are not tested, many infected won't know to be quarantined.

If they lock down for a year, people will starve to death.

That's alarmist, and depends on what "lockdown" actually consists of.
"Lockdown" isn't binary; it is shades of grey.

You are talking to someone who is calling anyone concerned about this disease
"alarmist". Do you really think they are going to pay any attention to what
you say as opposed to what they hear?

The irony had not escaped me. That's why I used "alarmist"



The US press, and TV news, and internet, are hyperbolic on this. There
was Climate Change, then the Mueller/Russia thing, then impeachment, now
this. Single-subject hysterical monoculture.

Well, it does sell newspapers and adverts, so of course the good
capitalists will jump on board.

But that indicates /nothing/ about the seriousness of the situation.

This thread was started with a link to an excellent web site. Of course the
denialists are going to say the author is an alarmist even though he is clear
in his reasoning and math. But then JL will acknowledge that math is not his
strong suit. So instead he focuses on a sentence or two in the whole article
trying to prove it all wrong.

This is a serious disease and the US is ill prepared to deal with it. I hope
I am proven wrong, but so far not many here are acting like they understand
the severity. Yes, drop interest rates. That will deal with the real
problem!

Agreed.

I made a post in a very active Meetup group with a link to Win's web page. The head organizer was on the same page and was in the process of canceling all remaining indoor activities. They had over a dozen people headed for a St Patrick's day bar! The Governor has shut all the bars.

This is going to be long and painful. I have no idea what I am going to do with myself over the next few weeks. That is assuming I don't catch this bug.

--

Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 2:24:20 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 11:42:21 -0400, Bob Engelhardt
BobEngelhardt@comcast.net> wrote:

On 3/16/2020 10:23 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
The US press, and TV news, and internet, are hyperbolic on this. There
was Climate Change, then the Mueller/Russia thing, then impeachment,
now this. Single-subject hysterical monoculture.

Do you believe that the situation in Italy is just hyperbole? If you
accept that it's real, do you have any reason to think that the US will
be any different?

It is interesting that some countries are so different from others.

Please, tell us about it. What is so different between countries? What do you make of this?

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:47:13 +0000, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/03/20 14:36, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:05:27 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org
wrote:

On 3/15/2020 9:26 PM, Winfield Hill wrote:
Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca



Thanks for that Win. Excellent article, and I like the fact that he
applied math to make sensible approximations rather than just hand waving.

Computer models are wonderful. Just tweak a few parameters and get
something to publish.

There's some validity to that, but:
- all models are wrong - but they can still be *useful*
- you use LTSpice to model a circuit

Sure, but circuits are simple. Even then, I don't always trust Spice.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 16/03/20 18:16, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:57:42 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 17:46, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:15:53 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 16:04, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:44:50 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 16/03/20 14:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

What's also increasing exponentially is the availability of
testing kits.

In the US that wouldn't be difficult!

In the UK we are scaling back testing of people with cough or fever
in the community, reserving testing for those in hospital.

And that is part of the problem. People don't universally end up in
the hospital with this disease. They live their lives and infect
others. Without widespread testing many don't know they are infected
and the problem appears better than it really is.

Agreed.

The counter-point would be that there's no point in testing for
something if the answer won't change subsequent actions. Better to
concentrate limited efforts where the effort might change subsequent
actions.

I don't like that, but it is rational.

It sounds rational, but the devil is in the details. What does it mean
exactly "might change subsequent actions"? Anyone who tests positive
will be treated for the disease even if this only means self quarantine
at home. But if many are not tested, many infected won't know to be
quarantined.

It is sufficient detail in the context of the UK recommended actions, which
I'm not going to repeat in full here. Summary: new persistent cough or temp
37.8 and you and your family should self isolate for 7 days - and not go
to a GP or hospital unless you get significantly worse.

That is too little, too late. By the time you show symptoms, you have likely
been infecting people for the better part of a week. That was my point. In
the early stages of the pandemic the testing should be much more aggressive
in order to identify as many patients for quarantine as possible.

In an early stage that is impractical.

Once it
gets past the stage where the large numbers of infections make it impractical
to test widely nothing can be done about that first week of being infectious
other than social distancing. In China social distancing is the law and
enforced by authorities. Here it is voluntary and much less effective.

Agreed.

Yesterday somebody from the town 4 miles in one direction died in the
hospital 4 miles in the other direction.

Not sure what that is supposed to mean. What is the context?

Nothing more than that this is becoming closer and more
personal. Some people here need to realise that will happen.

This is going to be long and painful. I have no idea what I am going to
do with myself over the next few weeks. That is assuming I don't catch
this bug.

The assumption here is that "everybody" (i.e. 60-80% depending on who you
listen to) will catch it sooner or later. In the absence of other
information, that seems likely.

It would seem you didn't read the link Win posted. China currently has a
cumulative infection level that is far, far below 80% and it is rising very,
very slowly, slower than in the US or the UK. So clearly widespread
infection is not inevitable. But it takes extreme measures to deal with it.

I am well aware of all that.


> Who do you listen to?

Good question, but one without an easy answer.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 16/03/20 19:00, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 14:47:13 +0000, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 16/03/20 14:36, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:05:27 -0500, John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org
wrote:

On 3/15/2020 9:26 PM, Winfield Hill wrote:
Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca



Thanks for that Win. Excellent article, and I like the fact that he
applied math to make sensible approximations rather than just hand waving.

Computer models are wonderful. Just tweak a few parameters and get
something to publish.

There's some validity to that, but:
- all models are wrong - but they can still be *useful*
- you use LTSpice to model a circuit

Sure, but circuits are simple. Even then, I don't always trust Spice.

Of course. But many models and simulations are useful,
even though they are incorrect.

Consider the models of resistance/resistors, or "ground" or...

All are convenient fictions with limited correspondence
with reality. Knowing the /limits/ of where they are /useful/
is rather important!

 

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 12:16:26 PM UTC-4, legg wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 10:52:52 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca


--
Thanks,
- Win

Hysterical nonsense - he's using the sitting duck theory wherein people are oblivious to the danger and go on about life as usual, and that's certainly NOT the case. The virus has been circulating in the U.S. since at least October, and any deaths have been attributed to influenza. Suddenly, when the test kit becomes available, people are dying of corona left and right.. Speaking of tests, someone needs to get on the ball and develop an ELISA for this virus. This testing methodology is about 10-25 % the cost of a PCR, the type they're now using, and it doesn't require a sophisticated lab to process the results. Sampling is a pin prick and they can really go to town assaying the entire population of the world if they want to. Singapore is about 90% of the way there but haven't developed anything scalable to commercial yet.

The US failure to produce effective test kits in volume is a disgrace.
CDC budget cuts occurred at roughly the same time as those to EPA etc.
New heads appointed at roughly the same time.

Space Force !

RL

Budget? What's that? These federal agencies have any number of emergency funds they can tap into if they need money. The stuff about Trump budget cuts is all political and has nothing to do with CDC mismanagement.
And you know what the test kits were originally intended for? It wasn't a medical diagnostic, it was case confirmation. And then they were going to assign investigators to each confirmation to hunt down all the contacts and try to determine the source of the infection. That's an idiotic idea and it became apparent within a week there aren't enough resources in the world to make that work. Now they've completely flip-flopped on the individual-centric treatment to locking down the whole country. They don't need test kits.

 

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 11:36:58 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 11:20:58 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On 15 Mar 2020 19:26:36 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca

"It’s a matter of days. Maybe a week or two.
When it does, your healthcare system will be overwhelmed."

There was a piece in the NY Times this morning projecting that 100
million, or maybe 200 million, Americans will catch this virus. So
far, the number is reported around 4K, about 13 PPM. The chart on your
link shows only 400 cases in the US, about 1 PPM.

In China, the official infection count is about 80K, out of a
population of 1.4 billion.

Why is it that Larkin posts disconnected facts and says nothing about them?

You mean why do smart people sometimes post salient points and
assume their audience can fill in the rest?

Because it saves time, and it's an efficient way to communicate
when the audience is well-matched.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 4:02:48 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 16/03/20 18:16, Rick C wrote:

That is too little, too late. By the time you show symptoms, you have likely
been infecting people for the better part of a week. That was my point.. In
the early stages of the pandemic the testing should be much more aggressive
in order to identify as many patients for quarantine as possible.

In an early stage that is impractical.

Exactly the opposite. The early stages are the only time you can get a grip on the problem. Once it starts to take off it's too late and the problem is not just larger but hugely different.

Once it
gets past the stage where the large numbers of infections make it impractical
to test widely nothing can be done about that first week of being infectious
other than social distancing. In China social distancing is the law and
enforced by authorities. Here it is voluntary and much less effective.

Agreed.


Yesterday somebody from the town 4 miles in one direction died in the
hospital 4 miles in the other direction.

Not sure what that is supposed to mean. What is the context?

Nothing more than that this is becoming closer and more
personal. Some people here need to realise that will happen.

I lurk in a UK ham group and early on one guy was talking about infections from Chinese packages and another guy talked that it "hadn't reached the UK and probably wouldn't".

Much as Edward tried to impress on us, there was no point where the epidemiologists didn't think it would be a world wide pandemic even if they wouldn't use that term. Back in January I know I was still waiting to see how effective the isolation would be. Now we know that if you think your country has a few hundred infections, there are likely 10,000 infected people. I saw a report that said 80 people were infected at a conference where there were no people with any symptoms.

The assumption here is that "everybody" (i.e. 60-80% depending on who you
listen to) will catch it sooner or later. In the absence of other
information, that seems likely.

It would seem you didn't read the link Win posted. China currently has a
cumulative infection level that is far, far below 80% and it is rising very,
very slowly, slower than in the US or the UK. So clearly widespread
infection is not inevitable. But it takes extreme measures to deal with it.

I am well aware of all that.


Who do you listen to?

Good question, but one without an easy answer.

I'm asking who YOU listen to. Obviously you are getting your information somewhere.

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 4:06:43 PM UTC-4, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:

Budget? What's that? These federal agencies have any number of emergency funds they can tap into if they need money. The stuff about Trump budget cuts is all political and has nothing to do with CDC mismanagement.

Perhaps, but the matter of disbanding the NSC directorate for global health and security and bio-defense was all on Trump. No, it isn't a catastrophy that we didn't have that group for this crisis. But in the words of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institute of Health, "It would be nice if the office was still there... we worked very well with that office.”

Instead we have Pence.


> And you know what the test kits were originally intended for? It wasn't a medical diagnostic, it was case confirmation. And then they were going to assign investigators to each confirmation to hunt down all the contacts and try to determine the source of the infection. That's an idiotic idea and it became apparent within a week there aren't enough resources in the world to make that work. Now they've completely flip-flopped on the individual-centric treatment to locking down the whole country. They don't need test kits.

Of course they need test kits. They still need to confirm diagnoses for treatment and isolation. At this point we don't need to be lumping colds in with COVID-19. It is also important to track the disease to tell which measures work and which measures don't.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 4:14:18 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 11:36:58 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 11:20:58 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On 15 Mar 2020 19:26:36 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca

"It’s a matter of days. Maybe a week or two.
When it does, your healthcare system will be overwhelmed."

There was a piece in the NY Times this morning projecting that 100
million, or maybe 200 million, Americans will catch this virus. So
far, the number is reported around 4K, about 13 PPM. The chart on your
link shows only 400 cases in the US, about 1 PPM.

In China, the official infection count is about 80K, out of a
population of 1.4 billion.

Why is it that Larkin posts disconnected facts and says nothing about them?

You mean why do smart people sometimes post salient points and
assume their audience can fill in the rest?

Because it saves time, and it's an efficient way to communicate
when the audience is well-matched.

You mean he has nothing worth saying so why say it? Yes, I agree.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 7:36:28 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> Computer models are wonderful.

True.

Just tweak a few parameters and get
something to publish.

Unimportant. What you need to do, is figure how the 'few parameters' help you survive
or die, especially when those parameters are adjustable. Sometimes, don't you find
a circuit works better with different component values? And don't you try to predict where
those gains can be found?

 

[mpm]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 1:46:12 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

> It sounds rational, but the devil is in the details. What does it mean exactly "might change subsequent actions"? Anyone who tests positive will be treated for the disease even if this only means self quarantine at home. But if many are not tested, many infected won't know to be quarantined.

Rick,
Have you considered that there might not be that much difference between social distancing and self-quarantine at home?

How many people (really!) are going to STAY HOME on quarantine, especially on an honor-system basis? I can almost hear the rationalizations pouring in.. "It's only a quick run to the corner store. I'll be quick." Etc...

We have instances of criminals with ankle bracelets breaking house arrest! (Of course, one could argue that criminals are stupid.)

I believe "the masses" will mostly put up with slight inconveniences for a while, out of novelty it nothing else. But I have to wonder how much cooperation there'll really be in the long term (meaning months), if it comes to that.

 

[whit3rd]

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 7:23:51 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

The US press, and TV news, and internet, are hyperbolic on this. There
was Climate Change, then the Mueller/Russia thing, then impeachment,
now this. Single-subject hysterical monoculture.

The press reports the news of the day, and this is news. Nothing
about the press response is out-of-line, that I can tell.

Perhaps it's just the scabrous news feeds are you grazing on?

Press coverage is not a problem, compared with deaths from a new disease.
There's not an Italian death every five minutes because of news
announcements.

The press coverage is useful, because of the services/venues being impacted.
A library visit, or dinner out with friends? Not this week. Ask again in a month.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-16 11:50, Rick C wrote:

On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 9:41:32 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, March 16, 2020 at 10:18:34 PM UTC+11, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 16/03/2020 03:20, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On 15 Mar 2020 19:26:36 -0700, Winfield Hill
winfieldhill@yahoo.com> wrote:

Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-


f4d3d9cd99ca

"It’s a matter of days. Maybe a week or two. When it does, your
healthcare system will be overwhelmed."

He is being overly pessimistic there (although the US is actually
blind to its true infection levels due to inadequate testing
capability).

If the infection growth rate remains at the present daily value
then the daily case count increases with day number N like 1.4^N
going forward.

That means a roughly a million times more cases in about 40 days
time.

If we can use social distancing to get the daily growth factor
down to 1.2 or 1.3 then the corresponding figures are much
better. Tens of thousands in the best case and a much more
manageable broad hump.

Social distancing can do better than that, and seems to have done
so in Hubei Province.

"Social distancing" in Hubei??? I don't think that is the right term
for it and that is the problem. China seems to be the only country
that has its infection rate under anything like control. They did it
by draconian measures that are far beyond "social distancing".

Taiwan has done an excellent job with far less heavy-handed measures.
The SARS experience was an excellent dry-run. A pity the rest of the
world didn't take heed.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

(Who has made very few changes so far, because he works 1.7 miles from
home, with one family member and nobody else around.)

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-03-16 12:21, legg wrote:

On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, March 15, 2020 at 10:52:52 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
Coronavirus: Why You Must Act Now - Tomas Pueyo

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-
f4d3d9cd99ca


--
Thanks,
- Win

Hysterical nonsense - he's using the sitting duck theory wherein people are oblivious to the danger and go on about life as usual, and that's certainly NOT the case. The virus has been circulating in the U.S. since at least October, and any deaths have been attributed to influenza. Suddenly, when the test kit becomes available, people are dying of corona left and right. Speaking of tests, someone needs to get on the ball and develop an ELISA for this virus. This testing methodology is about 10-25 % the cost of a PCR, the type they're now using, and it doesn't require a sophisticated lab to process the results. Sampling is a pin prick and they can really go to town assaying the entire population of the world if they want to. Singapore is about 90% of the way there but haven't developed anything scalable to commercial yet.

The US failure to produce effective test kits in volume is a disgrace.
CDC budget cuts occurred at roughly the same time as those to EPA etc.
New heads appointed at roughly the same time.

Space Force !

RL

The CDC has been a hot mess from day 1--they're the medical equivalent
of the Army Corps of Engineers.

They did have a point about the WHO test kits though--IIRC they have/had
a 42% false negative rate.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com