DennisN
Gold Member
- 2,193
- 10,278
COVID-19 Coronavirus Containment Efforts
- Context: COVID
- Thread starter BWV
- Start date
-
- Tags
- coronavirus covid-19
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
5,481 replies · 343K views
- 29,809
- 21,637
There is definitely a shortage of food in London. The supermarket shelves are practically empty around where I live. I don't know whether it's a problem with deliveries, a few people continuing to stockpile or a lot of people buying extra.atyy said:
There's also an ominous sense of suppressed panic.
This is certainly grim already.
DennisN
Gold Member
- 2,193
- 10,278
I have got the advice to go to the store in the morning instead of later. I don't know if this is of help to you, though.PeroK said:
- 23,899
- 11,354
I keep hearing things like that. It sounds like these predictions ignore the fact that social distancing started a week and a half ago!Astronuc said:
kadiot
- 282
- 82
PRINCIPLE OF HERD IMMUNITY STRATEGY TO FIGHT THE VIRUS: consists of sacrificing some members of the herd so that the rest of the herd is protected in the future.
In simple terms, "herd immunity" is the application of the natural selection law, i.e., only the strong will survive and the weak will be eliminated.
Did I understand it correctly?
In simple terms, "herd immunity" is the application of the natural selection law, i.e., only the strong will survive and the weak will be eliminated.
Did I understand it correctly?
DennisN
Gold Member
- 2,193
- 10,278
@mfb ,
I just checked the Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases (CSSE) page, and I saw they have reported 12,327 confirmed cases and only 28 confirmed deaths in Germany. I am well aware Germany is only in the beginning of this, but it is a bit remarkable that Germany comparatively seems to have so few deaths with respect to number of infections.
Have you heard and/or have any thoughts about why this seems to be the case, e.g. has there been comparatively more tests in Germany?
A comparison between Italy, UK, US, Sweden and Germany:
Italy (2978 / 35713) = 0,083 = 8,3 %
United Kingdom (104 / 2644) = 3,9 %
US: (150 / 9415) = 1,6 %
Sweden: (10 /1301) = 0,77 %
Germany: (28 / 12327) = 0,23 %
Notes:
1. Numbers taken from Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases (CSSE) page, 19th March 2020.
2. The calculated percentages have been rounded.
3. These numbers reflect only confirmed cases. Various countries have done different number of tests, and some countries may only test persons for whom it seems more likely they may be infected.
I just checked the Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases (CSSE) page, and I saw they have reported 12,327 confirmed cases and only 28 confirmed deaths in Germany. I am well aware Germany is only in the beginning of this, but it is a bit remarkable that Germany comparatively seems to have so few deaths with respect to number of infections.
Have you heard and/or have any thoughts about why this seems to be the case, e.g. has there been comparatively more tests in Germany?
A comparison between Italy, UK, US, Sweden and Germany:
Italy (2978 / 35713) = 0,083 = 8,3 %
United Kingdom (104 / 2644) = 3,9 %
US: (150 / 9415) = 1,6 %
Sweden: (10 /1301) = 0,77 %
Germany: (28 / 12327) = 0,23 %
Notes:
1. Numbers taken from Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases (CSSE) page, 19th March 2020.
2. The calculated percentages have been rounded.
3. These numbers reflect only confirmed cases. Various countries have done different number of tests, and some countries may only test persons for whom it seems more likely they may be infected.
Last edited:
- 29,809
- 21,637
If we are locked down for any length of time, then rationing, in some shape or form, is the only fair solution.DennisN said:
- 3,380
- 2,933
No. Herd immunity is not a strategy.kadiot said:
A kind of strategy might be to stop caring so herd immunity threshold can be reached faster and order restored sooner - for the price of a completely jammed healthcare system, unnecessary loss of many lives and some really bad months/years ahead.
- 23,899
- 11,354
No. Is that a joke?kadiot said:
- 3,306
- 2,531
Dr. Courtney said:
Ygggdrasil said:
No doubt social distancing flattens the curve. The question at hand is how much social distancing is "enough" to flatten the curve, and whether steps that violate 1st Amendment rights on broad geographies (whole states or countries) are necessary. One thing the data shows is that social distancing steps that are not implemented in a specific city until the disease is confirmed IN THAT CITY are sufficient to flatten the curve. One thing that data does not show is that mandatory church closures are needed to flatten the curve in addition to school closures, restaurant and theater closures, widespread working from home, and improved hygiene measures already in place in the current crisis.
Quoting:
Announcements of school, church, and theater closures were linked in most cities, occurring within a span of ≤6 days in the majority, and this near simultaneity of implementation precludes multivariate analysis or strong inference about the relative importance of the individual NPIs. Early bans on public gatherings were also associated with lower peak excess death rates, but the statistical significance of this result depended on the test used [Table 2, CEPID at time of, and Fig. 2 a]. Of the other NPIs considered (closure of dance halls, other closures, isolation of cases, bans on public funerals, and making influenza notifiable), none showed a statistically significant association between the stage of implementation and the peak or cumulative excess death rates (Table 2, CEPID at time of, and Fig. 2).
Ygggdrasil said:
Conclusions based on data in study of social distancing in 1918 need to use the same definitions of social distancing in place in 1918, not the CDC definition in 2020. I'm sure we might all have doubts with claims of an apples to apples comparison of data dependent on Newton's definition of mass and data dependent on Einstein's definition.
A scientific colleague pointed out that the rise of social media and the "hook up" culture provide lots of avenues for the spread of COVID-19. The close physical contact of dating and sexual relationships provides lots more opportunity for transmission than maintaining a 6 ft distance, the absence of touching, handwashing, etc. We should probably be shutting down all the dating apps used for one night stands in high risk areas.
russ_watters said:
That's a good start, but it misses lots of information specific to my situation and makes a number of unjustified assumptions. There are only 3 identified cases so far in the relevant county, and none in the relevant town. The data above suggests social distancing is not necessary until the disease is known to be in a specific city. Further, many more protections are in place in the town, county, and specific church that were not in place in the South Korea case. You are assuming that the church I'll attend is like the one in South Korea where the disease was propagated and not like the churches in South Korea where it was not spread.
The fact is, about 75% of the church I plan to attend this Sunday will attend online, leaving only 25% in person. That leaves much more room in a large building to maintain a 6 foot distance. The church has also implemented a careful and well considered plan of specific steps to prevent the spread of infectious disease including insisting that symptomatic people remain home, a safe distance be maintained between attendees, and that attendees refrain from touching. This is in stark contrast to the South Korean case, where
"On 18 February, South Korea confirmed its 31st case in Daegu, a member of the Shincheonji religious organisation. The patient continued to go to gatherings of Shincheonji days after showing symptoms, which are typically held with people in very close proximity and include physical contact of the members."
Here are the CDC recommendations for churches in communities where the COVID-19 transmission is currently "none to minimal."
From: Implementation of Mitigation Strategies for Communities with Local COVID-19 Transmission, CDC, 2020.
Last edited:
kadiot
- 282
- 82
I'm serious. The opposing and distinct approach/'treatment alone by the UK and the rest of the countries is a fundamental issue. Why? because the two approaches are incongruent with each other,?in that, time will come, which is not really distant, that when the majority of the countries are done with its lock down strategies and becomes successful, and the Brits are also done with its "just let it flow and roll approach"! and has attained the so called "herd immunity", the problem will still be there because there will still be millions who are asymptomatic and they will infect anew humans and mankind's ordeal will just be repeated all over again and again until the economic engine of the world will stop running... So that itmis imperative that The world must take and pursue one direction on eradicating this deadly pathogen, in that, either all go fo the lock down strategy or let's all take the British model...russ_watters said:
- 3,380
- 2,933
I see no reason for any 'don't care' model at this point. Herd immunity can be reached through vaccination too, and the treatment for the affected is also developing fast. Just by waiting for a few month in a (partial or full) lockdown the difference will be vast - any further outbreak could be mediated far more effectively later on.kadiot said:
- 29,809
- 21,637
kadiot said:
Where did you get the idea that Britain is not on the brink of lockdown? Here's the latest:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-51632801
- 37,497
- 14,384
Yes, Germany tests a lot. I don't have numbers for tests done per day, but based on the number of test kits they produce for Germany it's a lot. At the level of South Korea in absolute numbers, or ~1/2 to ~2/3 per capita. The deaths per case ratio will go up over time - most cases are still fresh, deaths come later. Maybe it gets similar to South Korea.DennisN said:
@kadiot: I expect the UK to change its strategy after cases go up more. The latest when the hospitals reach their limits.
@Dr. Courtney: Be honest, you start with the conclusion and then try to find arguments for it. This is not a scientific approach.
Yes, it also doesn't show that mandatory theater closures are necessary in addition to all the other measures. It also doesn't show that mandatory restaurant closures are necessary in addition to all the other measures. No single measure has been shown to be necessary if you make the analysis granular enough. But that doesn't mean these measures would be useless, or that things would be fine without them. Suggesting that your church visit is more important than the theater visit of someone else is selfish.Dr. Courtney said:
- 35,014
- 21,725
kadiot said:
Not even close.
- 23,899
- 11,354
I see now that the calculation was a mismatch. The S. Korean data is backwards looking, over the entirety of their outbreak. Something like 2 months. It's the odds two months from now that you will have gotten the disease if you keep going to church throughout the outbreak. So we'll multiply the car injury rate by 60 to match: 0.0028%.Dr. Courtney said:
Does your church not have reach beyond your town? Please be clear: are you suggesting that when someone is identified as having the disease within the radius of your church, you will advocate its closure? Your previous posts did not imply that was under consideration.
The problem with your approach is that it is backwards-looking from a week+ ago. Due to the incubation period and lack of testing you are making decisions for 4 days from now based on how the outbreak looked then.
I don't know your specifics of course, but once one person in the church gets sick, it is tough to keep the others from getting sick. The only thing I really know is the obvious parallel: both yours and the South Korean church explicitly and uniquely resisted complying with containment efforts. In S. Korea their early success was due to early testing, extensive contact tracing and individual quarantine, which we don't have. We tried, but it never really had much chance of succeeding.
And you are explicitly stating your intent to violate the key recommendation!
Does logic not tell you that more=better? Particularly in the face of the unknown?
We all know that data is tough here. But what you are doing is inserting faith, instead of logic, where data is thin.
Not that I'm advocating it, but that doesn't really follow, since a "hook up" is a 1-on-1 activity, so it only has the potential to infect 1 other person at a time. But if you'd like to go after kids, go after Spring Breakers:
https://www.foxnews.com/travel/spring-break-backlash-amid-coronavirus-outbreak
- 35,014
- 21,725
russ_watters said:
kadiot said:
And wrong.
Given that you don't know what "herd immunity" even means, and didn't bother to look it up, why should we take anything you say seriously? "Looking it up" is not a crazy high burden.
You have to decide if you want to be part of the solution or part of the problem.
- 35,014
- 21,725
chirhone said:
First, how the heck can we tell? You don't seem to actually want science. You wan scientists to tell you what "truth" is.
Second, there is already a thread on this: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/coronavirus-infection-rate-outcomes-versus-bloodtypes.985717/ It would have taken you all of 5 seconds to look for it.
Third, I am skeptical of the result, for reasons expressed in that thread.
- 11,326
- 8,757
People have a right to get married, but not the right to have a big gathering for the wedding. Similarly, people can be religious without big gatherings of people in a church. Restricting religious activities is not synonymous with restricting practice of the religion. There is ample case law supporting that.
Everything in this crisis is necessarily done hastily. That applies to record keeping and data reporting also. There is not even enough time to process bodies in the morgue in some places. There is certainly no time to audit data handling practices. There is no time for journalists to double check reports before publishing. So I think all the numbers we hear from all sources anywhere in the world are less reliable than the norm.DennisN said:
- 3,753
- 4,198
russ_watters said:
It's important to remember that the https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2762808/incubation-period-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-from-publicly-reported of the virus is about 5 days, so we don't expect to see new cases subside until about a week after imposition of social distancing methods. In some locations, distancing measures (like closing schools, restaurants and theaters) were not imposed until the beginning of this week.
Edit to add: also remember that testing is becoming more available, so we should see US numbers go up just from increased testing.
Last edited:
- 3,306
- 2,531
russ_watters said:
I would advocate for their voluntary closure according to the CDC guidelines that call for that once the presence of COVID-19 in their community is "substantial." There is a very high level of voluntary church closures (I estimate 80%) in the county based simply on governmental requests. There is a significant reduction in attendance (I estimate 75%) in the churches that remain open. Due to online offerings, churches remaining open are drawing from a much smaller radius. As the virus numbers increase within the draw radius of the church, I would hope they have options which might include: 1) Reducing the draw radius - not allowing people to attend from areas where the virus has been identified. 2) Modifying the service format. A nearby church only has the pastors and worship team in physical attendance and the rest attending online. This seems like a viable approach before complete closure. I discussed how to disinfect the equipment with the worship leader there yesterday. (We're fishing buddies and both worship leaders in the county.) They have a sound plan to minimize transmission probabilities.
russ_watters said:
I am checking every day for the latest available local information. If there is a significant uptick in cases within the draw radius of the church, I can change my plans. I am capable of extrapolating the data forward to account for the incubation period and new information regarding risks of non-symptomatic carriers.
russ_watters said:
"Uniquely resisted" is an odd description in a county where 20% of the churches remain open. "Resisted" is an odd choice of words for a church that is exceeding recent CDC recommendations applicable to churches given the level of outbreak in the local community (none to minimal).
russ_watters said:
My current intent is to attend. In the recent CDC guidance for churches that I provided above, there is no recommendation to not attend given the level of outbreak in the local community.
russ_watters said:
No. There is no evidence that a 90% reduction in social contact is insufficient to flatten the curve in a local area currently experiencing the local level of outbreak. Humans are social creatures. We all have limits on how long we can maintain higher levels of isolation. The outbreak and mitigating measures may well stretch into the summer. It is wise to save our limited capacity for total isolation for the more critical time.
russ_watters said:
Was the CDC acting on faith rather than logic when they issued the above guidelines stating that church meetings need not be completely canceled until the outbreak is "substantial" in a given community? I'm not depending on faith. But yesterday I observed many more people at Walmart and similar retail outlets in closer proximity than are likely to be in church Sunday. "Cabin fever" has already set in, and people's cravings for interaction are pushing them out into the marketplace, since the level of isolation of closed schools, working from home, and only shopping when needed has not even been sustainable for a couple weeks. I'm not too worried about it in a county with minimal cases right now. But it does inform my view that stricter measures will not be sustainable for long. People need outlets for social interaction with minimal opportunity for transmission. Until an outbreak reaches a "substantial" level in a local community, churches operating within the CDC guidelines above can provide some of that. The local boat ramps, golf courses, parks, tennis courts, and shooting ranges remain open also. These provide additional opportunities to satisfy the human need for social interaction with minimal risk of transmission.
Counties in rural Georgia don't need SF Bay style lockdowns at the present time. Areas with none to minimal or minimal to moderate cases don't need to follow the CDC guidelines for higher levels.
Mondayman
- 328
- 503
Internet? Phones? People are more connected than ever.Dr. Courtney said:
Many of us want to stay safe and not get sick. There's bound to be frustration when a group doesn't go along with the precautions and puts others at risk.
Social isolation? Seems like a small price to pay. Human's can and have endured worse.
vxiaoyu18
- 93
- 13
The spread of the virus knows no borders, no principles, and in this time of emergency, the situation will get worse without more effective detection, isolation and treatment. The more you hide the virus, the more people it kills. China, Japan and other countries have controlled the epidemic through surveillance and quarantine measures. Why not learn from the successful cases and do herd immunity tests instead? This experiment needs more life. My friend in the physics forum, I suggest you prepare more food and stay at home for at least a month.
- 11,106
- 3,949
Greg Bernhardt said:
Its already developed, has been tested in animals and human trials will start soon:
It is thought those trials to ensure efficacy and safety will, with an accelerated timeline, be completed by about the end of the year - but its possible it may not - it may take 18 months or longer. What has also been done in Australia is building on work already done with drugs we currently have it has been found some malaria and HIV drugs can kill the virus in already infected patients. To test this at least 50 hospitals in Australia will be trialing them. If true it could significantly slow the spread of this thing. But I think the final answer will be a vaccine.
Thanks
Bill
kadiot
- 282
- 82
I've looked it up and explained what it means. I believe that I would be at great risk if I were in a country that decides to do "herd immunity".Vanadium 50 said:
- 22,664
- 7,744
I simply copied the title of the article and url. The important fact is that for now, the US is trending like Italy, but there is some indication that there is some slowing, but on a local or regional level. I pointed out in a previous post that while New York seems to be increasing, the Seattle area is not increasing as fast as it was, primarily because of quarantine/isolation and social distancing practices. New York state cases were lagging Washington state cases, which started earlier, but about three days ago New York cases over took Washington. However, the number of cases is also affected by the testing; the more folks are tested, the more confirmed cases. And, testing is still not available everywhere.russ_watters said:
With respect to social distancing, my place of employment implemented practices starting a month ago, two weeks before it started being implemented in different parts of the country, and three weeks before it started becoming nationwide, and as of last weekend, quarantine/isolation and social distancing practices have not been implemented uniformly across the country. I have observed this first hand while traveling last weekend.
Only this week have there been announcement of closing of stores, malls, businesses, industries, that were not closed last week. Schools and universities in New York only started closing last week.
So the virus has plenty opportunity to spread.
Last edited:
- 11,326
- 8,757
Not everyone will voluntarily comply with social distancing. We should expect more cases where force is used. For example, police breaking up a wedding gathering. That's regrettable, but necessary.
Right now in Florida, the students on spring break are ignoring the calls to social distance. The governor told them, "Don't come." They came anyhow. Closing the beaches, hotels, bars, and restaurants, and stopping sale of alcohol in stores, may convince them. If not, then use of police force may be necessary.
@Dr. Courtney take note. You can sue in Federal Court that it would violate your rights. Your case might get to trial in 2026.
Right now in Florida, the students on spring break are ignoring the calls to social distance. The governor told them, "Don't come." They came anyhow. Closing the beaches, hotels, bars, and restaurants, and stopping sale of alcohol in stores, may convince them. If not, then use of police force may be necessary.
@Dr. Courtney take note. You can sue in Federal Court that it would violate your rights. Your case might get to trial in 2026.
- 15,171
- 3,378
PeroK said:
Hmm, that's bad. Hopefully it doesn't last too long.
In Singapore we had one weekend of panic buying of toilet paper about a month ago when community spread first became evident. My brother had only a week's worth of toilet paper left, so it was time to do his normal shopping for toilet paper. But of course he couldn't get any. He tried ordering online, and it would come in only a week, as they were also completely sold out. So two days later, when he saw toilet paper in the store, he bought some. Turns out his wife independently did the same that day. And the online order came early. So he's now got several times over the toilet paper he needs.
Jarvis323
- 1,247
- 988
Regarding people defying societies efforts to mitigate, I believe it is a combination of stupidity, ignorance, and selfishness.
But what shocks me so far is that, in the US, I have received no direct emergency government messages. We have systems to send people texts, emails, interrupt television broadcasting, etc. As far as I know that hasn't happened. How do we know they even got the message?
But what shocks me so far is that, in the US, I have received no direct emergency government messages. We have systems to send people texts, emails, interrupt television broadcasting, etc. As far as I know that hasn't happened. How do we know they even got the message?