Coronavirus

Quarantine Fatigue and the Social End to the Coronavirus Pandemic

What might learning to live with COVID-19 look like?

|

"If 18 months of extreme social distancing is what it takes to stop coronavirus, we're doomed," declared my Reason colleague Robby Soave way back on March 18. The 18-month timeline was based on speculations about how long it would take to develop and deploy an effective vaccine. On March 18, only some 7,000 cases and 141 deaths in the U.S. had been attributed to COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. As of today, the toll stands at about 1.4 million cases and over 82,000 deaths.

The Trump administration had released its social distancing guidelines two days earlier on March 16 partially in response to dire worst-case projections that as many as 2.2 million Americans could die of the disease made by Neil Ferguson's modeling group at the Imperial College in London. In mid-March I asked, "Are we battling an unprecedented pandemic or panicking at a computer-generated mirage?" It turns out that significant flaws were identified by other researchers once Ferguson's group finally got around to releasing their model's computer code.

Over at The New York Times, science reporter Gina Kolata asks, "When will the Covid-19 pandemic end? And how?" She observes that epidemics medically end when disease incidence and death rates plummet as herd immunity is achieved through either mass infection or mass vaccination. On the other hand, epidemics socially end when people grow tired of panic mode and learn to live with a disease.

"People may grow so tired of the restrictions that they declare the pandemic over, even as the virus continues to smolder in the population and before a vaccine or effective treatment is found," suggests Kolata.

And smolder it might. The lockdowns aimed to flatten the curve of the epidemic—that is, slow down the rate of infection. And it worked. Nationally, the daily number of new confirmed cases peaked at over 36,000 on April 24 and has dropped to under 20,000 as of yesterday. The goal is to spread out the infections over time in order to avoid overtaxing the health care system with a flood of cases; however, the number of people who become eventually infected will not necessarily be lower.

As their fears about exponential increases in infections and deaths abate, more and more Americans are easing themselves out of lockdown. For example, a Monmouth University poll reported earlier this week that 30 percent of respondents are not too concerned or not at all concerned that someone in their family might become seriously ill from the coronavirus outbreak, up from 16 percent a month ago.

"Lockdown is ending, whether governments approve or not," declared my Reason colleague Eric Boehm. Rising quarantine fatigue and the greater acceptance of disease risk by the public is behind the moves by a majority of U.S. states to at least partially reopen their economies by loosening social distancing guidelines. Anonymized cell phone data already reveals that many residents in 20 states have increased their mobility by 15 to 20 percent in the last few weeks.

So what might learning to live with COVID-19 look like? Keeping firmly in mind that all models are imperfect, the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's (IHME) model recently raised its projection of U.S. COVID-19 deaths to 137,000 by the beginning of August. In comparison, the model developed by Youyang Gu and his colleagues projects a central estimate of 188,000 deaths by then.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported in 2017 that deaths from all causes in the U.S. averaged around 7,700 per day. The summer trajectories of the two models suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. would add something like 666 and 1,273 deaths respectively to the daily toll. If the Gu model turns out to be more prescient, the daily death rate of 8,973 that it projects would be a bit above the average of 8,478 deaths per day in January 2017. This level of increased mortality is unlikely to overwhelm our health care system.

Another factor to keep in mind is who is at greatest risk of dying of the disease. About 75 percent of deaths from all causes—that is, about 5,750 per day—already occur in Americans over the age of 65. Since around 80 percent of Americans who die of COVID-19 are over the age of 65, that would boost the over-65 average by between 500 to 1,000 deaths per day respectively in these models' projections. If these estimates are anywhere near ballpark accurate, the steady tragic toll of COVID-19 deaths will no longer inspire panic and most Americans will resignedly learn to live with the disease.

As Americans exit lockdown and quarantine in their hopeful search for normalcy, some public health officials fear that the rates of coronavirus infection and death could begin to rise again. According to The New York Times, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Trump administration pandemic adviser, is expected later today at a Senate hearing to warn against "the danger of trying to open the country prematurely." In his response to the Times, Fauci adds, "If we skip over the checkpoints in the guidelines to 'Open America Again,' then we risk the danger of multiple outbreaks throughout the country. This will not only result in needless suffering and death, but would actually set us back on our quest to return to normal."

How far back? Perhaps Sweden's relatively lax public health response to the pandemic may provide some hints as to how loosening restrictions might play out here. It is worth noting that Sweden's coronavirus death rate currently stands at 328 per million residents compared to 248 per million in the U.S. Sweden's death rate scaled up to match the U.S. population would suggest that 108,000 Americans would be dead by now instead of 82,000. On the other hand, if the IHME and Gu models are correct, that number of Americans will likely die of coronavirus infections before the end of this month. In any case, it is not at all clear that Sweden's economy will fare substantially better than those of other countries that implemented more comprehensive lockdowns.

All the signs indicate that the social end of the coronavirus pandemic in the U.S. is nigh.

A couple of caveats beyond due skepticism with respect to models should be noted. First, these projections presume that at least some moderate social distancing practices will be maintained through the summer. If not, the number of cases and deaths will concomitantly rise beyond these projections. Second, the projections also assume that test, track, and voluntary self-isolation programs that aim to contain the epidemic will remain somewhat hit-or-miss. And thirdly, they presuppose that no widely effective treatments will emerge in the next few months.

Advertisement

NEXT: Is There Any Limit on the Congressional Subpoena Power?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “What might learning to live with COVID-19 look like?”

    Like 2019? That’s what it ought to look like.
    Just another damn bug.

    1. With bugs there is no “ought”.

      We are already learning for better or worse what living with Covid-19 is like. It is messy and unpredictable like nature herself. There are more unknowns than knowns. New information happens on a daily basis. Any student of nature learns that what is true today may be false tomorrow.

      Bottom line and libertarian types know this is the government has less power and influence than most people think. Life will go on because it has to.

      1. Shut the fuck up with your panic mongering.
        Living with ChiRona OUGHT not be any different than living without out it.
        It’s merely the reaction of pussies like you who allow the assholes to shit all over everything.
        Emigrate, you piece of fucking trash

        1. “Emigrate, you piece of fucking trash”

          Not a bad piece of advice. America is on a one way trip to Palookaville.

        2. I am now aas making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online. You can join without any investment and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on this website……………………………..Read More

      2. “…It is messy and unpredictable like nature herself. There are more unknowns than knowns. New information happens on a daily basis. Any student of nature learns that what is true today may be false tomorrow…”

        Cliche’ and bullshit besides.

        1. Make money online from home extra cash more than $18k to $21k. Start getting paid every month Thousands Dollars online. I have received $26K in this month by just working online from home in my part time.every person easily do this job by just open this link and follow details on this page to get started… Read More About Articles

  2. Until the 1940s there were no treatments for things like strep throat or really any sicknesses. The best there was was vaccines that kept you from getting sick. But once you were sick, your body either fought it off and cleared it out of your system or you died.

    We somehow managed to build all of civilization under those conditions. I think we can adjust to a virus that kills maybe one percent of the people it infects. I think I hate the “things will never be the same after this” people even more than I hate the “lockdown until there is a vaccine” people. I am not giving up living a normal life and going to movies and ball games and running around with a fucking mask on like its some kind of science fiction dystopia over a virus. I would rather get the crap and die than live like that. That is not living. And people need to come to terms with their own mortality and stop expecting the world to be risk free. Grow up and understand you are going to die at some point.

    1. So why bitch about anything? Taxes are hardly as burdensome as death (equally inevitable as both may be), yet you’re here, bitching about it day in and day out. Just don’t worry or complain about anything. And make sure to cough on some kid while you’re out being manly.

      1. Coughing on the kid could actually be beneficial for the kid, because mortality is very low in children (almost 0%) and it provides them with at least some immunity. How fucking stupid are you to make that asinine comment?

        1. Do it in front of his father and then explain that you’re actually helping.

          1. Being stupid doesn’t make his dad right Tony. That you offer it as reasoning is why people laugh at you.

          2. That isn’t the point. The point is your example is pure unadulterated, unscientific hyperbole. Coughing on a kid carries almost no risk. And as a father I would do nothing because I understand the risk is almost zero. Because unlike you I actually understand the science not just the scaremongering.

            1. But see you don’t know that. Relevant experts are quick to characterize our collective knowledge about this virus as woefully incomplete. Rushing head-first into normal social life is one way to handle such uncertainty, but perhaps not the most advisable.

              1. You’re a coward who believes idiots, we get it already.

              2. Rushing headfirst into economic disaster seems like an even worse idea. Yet here we are. We don’t know much about the virus, other than that it is a lot less deadly than initially suspected. We knew exactly what the consequences of closing down a huge chunk of hte economy would do. I think it is a lot wiser to avoid the well known danger that will definitely fuck up the lives of billions of people.

                1. Unfortunately it’s not either/or. My state has partially reopened and people are choosing not to participate. If deaths start surging as a result of opening, people will clench up even more and policies will have to be more draconian, meaning the economy will crater all the same. Just because Trump doesn’t understand this doesn’t mean you can’t as well.

                  1. Georgia reopened faster than was advised and infection rates and death continue to decline.

                  2. If deaths start surging as a result of opening, people will clench up even more and policies will have to be more draconian

                    This right here is exactly why I believe nothing from any so-called ‘public health expert’. Public fear gives them very real power and they have all the incentive in the world to conflate, prevaricate, and outright lie. The media promotes the false science and bad statistics to get ratings.

                    For Tony, the fearmongering gets others to pause and consider his brain-diarrhea. It is going to come down to freedom loving citizens being forced to shoot people like Tony in the head to stop their insistent shitting in the public well of knowledge. The media and the experts will get the message once they are in the cross-hairs.

                    1. I love it when these comments happen. It’s a thing of beauty. “You’re just scaremongering! Now listen to my conspiracy theory about the Lizard People…”

                      Or, run for the hills, the alarmists are coming!

                    2. Pointing out that ‘public experts’ have every incentive to exaggerate the importance of their field is not a conspiracy theory. It is common sense. Their earning potential literally depends on it.

                      Your insistence on shitting in the public well, while screaming “PANIC, THE WATER IS POISONED” will surely get you thrown down the well at some point. I will then happily volunteer to provide materials and labor to seal you in and quiet your pathetic bleating.

              3. You really don’t understand how math, science, statistics work do you Tony. The death rate for children is so close to zero it is assumed to be zero. We don’t ban Tylenol from kids because 1 in 100k have an allergic reaction.

                You are really really ignorant.

                1. We don’t ban Tylenol from kids because 1 in 100k have an allergic reaction.

                  And more than than 1 in 100k children die from untreated fevers. Promoting the idea that Tylenol should be banned for them will kill far more than it would ever save.

                  TONY KILLS CHILDREN!

              4. By your logic, which actually is fairly sound in this post, doing something as full lockdown in the first place and continuing them, is just as I’ll advised because we don’t have enough data (although we have a lot more now then we did at the beginning when we went full lockdown without adequate data).

              5. Also, based upon all the available dates so far, mortality and age of mortality, the mortality rate for children under 18 approaches absolute zero.

                1. Soldiermedic, just because a kid has a low risk of severe illness, it doesn’t mean that inoculating him in a completely disordered way is a good idea. Once inoculated, a kid could spread it to a 60-year-old grandparent and multiple others. You’re making derogatory attacks when your own reasoning doesn’t envision anything past the most rudimentary consequences of coughing on someone.

                  1. This is true for every communicable disease we face every year. The death rate for flu is orders of magnitude higher for elderly than it is for younger populations and yet we manage to live with it. Despite 10’s of thousandths of deaths every year.

                    We’ve gone on nearly full lock down, and large swaths of the population believing them necessary on the off chance that death rate ticks up slightly. And along with that belief are condemnations of wanting people to die so people can get a hair cut just for saying such lock downs are unnecessary and counterproductive.

                    1. I’m not defending the government-ordered lockdowns at all. I guess my overarching point is — this comment section has devolved into a mob of personal attacks on anyone who puts out a nonconforming opinion. It’s disappointing to see, because this publication used to prompt real discourse.

                      On the flu comparison that you brought up, I don’t think the two should be equated. The total number of deaths in New York doubled in one month — that’s double the amount of dead people even compared to the worst flu season in recent history. Reason.com covered a studies revising the death rate down — but it was still an estimated .8 percent, which is still 10 times higher than the flu death rate…. Again, you don’t have to create a false choice between maintaining civil liberty and downplaying the virus’ virulence. You can believe the lockdowns were a bad idea and still respect how dangerous the virus is. That’s my stance at least – especially given that people in my area were staying home before being ordered to stay home. Nonetheless, it’s not honest to pretend this is just an average pathogen — the weekly U.S. death toll (for all causes) just hit the highest it’s been in recent history (more than 71,000 — nevermind the anonymous “toptradeguru” report that used the incomplete death counts and then refused to remove the post).

                  2. Where did I make a derogatory attack?
                    Also, inoculation parties were a common way, even supported by medical doctors before vaccines became widely available. And for that case many vaccines are weakened pathogens. They do carry some risk of the vaccine turning into full blown infections. So, I am not certain if you understand the implications of your post.

          3. Tony, is that what you do with young teenage boys?

      2. I thought you “believed” in science. Apparently not.

        1. Tony has but a passing acquaintance to many subjects on which he comments.

        2. I attempt to proportion my belief to the evidence. What do you do?

          1. Still with the stupid belief shit, huh Tony?

            You do not “believe” in evidence. You “believe” in what the nice bias-confirming NPR reporter tells you.

            1. So nobody is permitted to believe anything and be rational. So you, presumably fancying yourself a rational person, do not believe anything?

              1. So my trying to get you to understand that belief has no place in science somehow translates to “nobody is permitted to believe anything”? WTF dude, do you think at all? Or are you just the sum of your myriad irrational fears?

                1. I simply expect a higher level of discourse than middle-school factoids and disingenuous pedantry. Do you believe the Milky Way is not the entirety of the universe but one of many billions of other galaxies? Your belief on this matter was determined by the work of scientists working relatively recently. What is the problem with saying it that way? How would you like me to say that I proportion belief to evidence?

                  Or would you prefer I throw out all standards of evidence and simply take Ayn Rand’s insane ramblings as gospel?

                  1. I would like you to use any standard of evidence that isn’t partisan in nature. Stop with your scientism, because that is all it is. This is evidenced by your rather puerile example of coughing on a kid. Pure scientism and scaremongering.

                    1. In this context I’m getting my info from a Republican administration. Have I switched teams and didn’t even realize it?

                      I’ve told you where I get my info. Where do you get yours? Why do you people never answer this fucking question? It’s because it’s some carnival barker with a blog, isn’t it?

                    2. It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t change the fact that it is an appeal to authority. And as all appeal to authorities you are cherry picking the authorities that agree with you, even if they are Republicans. That doesn’t change what you are doing.

                    3. What information specifically do you actually think you are getting Tony.

                  2. “I simply expect a higher level of discourse ”

                    Why would people talk over your head?

                  3. “I simply expect a higher level of discourse”

                    The fuck you do. And not a single person here believes this. Including you, you lying piece of shit.

                  4. “Do you believe the Milky Way is not the entirety of the universe but one of many billions of other galaxies? Your belief on this matter was determined by the work of scientists working relatively recently”

                    Who made the scientists who came, before and thought the entirety of the universe was the milky way, look like bitches.
                    Just like they had made the scientists who believed in a heliocentric universe before them look like bitches.
                    And the scientists you believe in will one day be made to look like bitches.
                    *see Always Sunny for the proper visual aids

              2. Science isn’t about belief but about data and interpreting the data. Your hyperbole about coughing on a kid demonstrates you have little understanding of the data. Now if you substituted ailed, elderly Grandma you might have more of a point. But instead you chose the group least likely to be harmed by the virus. The group that has a near zero percent chance of harm.

                1. Because the kiddo, bless their hearts, becomes a vector.

                  1. Everyone becomes vectors if they are infected. That was a stupid fucking statement.

                    1. It was, but people like echo need everyone else to be a pussy too

                    2. Because silent vectors are different. It is not the same thing as morbidity and mortality. Because children are less likely to demonstrate significant symptoms they are more likely to spread the disease. Also children, as we know do not follow rules very well.

                      You do not need me to explain.

                      So we need to open up schools and get the kiddos back to where they should be. I am not arguing differently. It may be just one of those things.

                      Also did you get a chance to review the case reports I linked to about this Kawasaki type syndrome reported lately? More systemic effects are coming out in the literature.

                    3. So far the cases are few an isolated. And could be quite likely related to underlying conditions. This is quite common in pediatric medicine, underlying conditions are diagnosed until another illness exacerbates the issue. Even the annual flu and cold leads to the exacerberbations of underlying conditions annually.

                    4. “You do not need me to explain.”

                      Stopped clock and cowardly piece of shit.

                2. soldiermedic76, I agree re: your point on using science and data. Tell me, when have you ever seen a virus spread to 180+ countries in ~30-45 days (early March to mid-April)? A single strain of influenza doesn’t. At least, not in my lifetime. And require tens of thousands of patients to be put on respirators? I have never seen that, have you?

                  It is not wrong to say that state government response has gone overboard in several areas…and…simultaneously acknowledge that this pandemic is truly outside the norm.

          2. Look at all the evidence not just what agrees with my point of view. You only agree with the evidence that supports your point of view. What you do is what we scientist call scientism, e.g. worshipping science without actually understanding how it works.

            1. No, that’s what you people do. If 97% of relevant experts say one thing and 3% say another thing, you are the ones who go with the 3% because… well god knows why. You decide with no justification or credential that they are right and the vast majority are wrong because you prefer their results. So be specific. What do you think I should believe with respect to the topic at hand, and what reliable sources did you consult to reach that opinion?

              1. “If 97% of relevant experts say one thing and 3% say another thing”

                HE STILL BELEIVES IN MODELING

                AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

                AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
                AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

                AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

                1. Tulpa, stick to what you’re good at, which is presumably drawing penises on walls.

                  1. AAHAHAHAH LOOK HOW UPSET YOU ARE

                    HE STILL BELEIVES IN MODELING

                    AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

                    AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
                    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                    AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

                    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                    HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

              2. No, science is not about going with the consensus either. Again you aren’t understanding how science works. The 97% were based upon untested hypothetical models. Real world data has shown those models were wrong. Therefore the scientific approach is to re-examine the data and draw a new hypothesis to test. When Lister proposed his germ theory, 99% of scientist rejected it in favor of the mal air theory. If we did science by your definition, we would still be believing that disease was caused by bad air and unbalanced humors. We would be treating diseases by bleeding. So, your statement once again demonstrates my point, your science is actually scientism. The models were wrong and vastly wrong. The data overwhelmingly demonstrates this. And your percentages of agree disagree are vastly off as well. It is now closed to 50-50 as to rather lockdowns/quarantines were/are necessary. In fact it is starting to tilt against lockdowns.

                1. If we’re talking about climate change, the models are constantly updated to respond to real-world data, and unfortunately when the models are wrong, they tend to be too optimistic. You’d know that if you got your information from somewhere besides some non-scientist right-wing asshole with a blog.

                  1. HE STILL BELEIVES IN MODELING

                    AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

                    AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
                    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                    AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

                    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                    HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

                    1. I know it’s pointless to ask, but what the fuck are you talking about? Who doesn’t “believe” in modeling? Are you suggesting that models don’t actually exist, or that none are useful in science?

                    2. HE STILL BELEIVES IN MODELING

                      AHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA

                      AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAH
                      AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                      AHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

                      AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

                      HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH

                  2. I never mentioned climate change, which I accept that basic theory but do question how accurate the models are. And as they are being constantly updated, so do the scientist who make the models. I was referring to projection modeling that is not based on data or very limited data. Oxford statitacians did a review of pandemic modeling a few years ago, and even controlled for mitigation strategies, and found no statistical similarity between modeling and actual outcomes. In fact, they found in every single case that pandemic and epidemic modeling always vastly overrated the lethality and infection rates. Many epidemiologist have admitted their modeling is to biased to the right and that it is less than useful because of this. A number, back on January, even warned against basing policy on inaccurate modeling. Even Ferguson admitted his models probably were to biased to the right.

                  3. Also, you seem to think modeling is adequate to dismiss real world data in your defense of modeling. The very reason Climatologists adjust their models is to attempt to get their models more in agreement with real world data. Most Climatologists will tell you their models still tend to be very inaccurate but accuracy is improving. This is what a good scientist does. They adjust to new data. It isn’t about believing or not believing in climate change. It is about accepting the theory whole continuing to refine our knowledge. Science is not a single endpoint but a journey. We don’t stop testing a theory once it becomes a theory. Most science is actually performed refining theories by testing them further to see if they underlying presumptions are still more likely to be correct than not (this is what is called a statistical probability and is stated as a p-value).

                  4. ” and unfortunately when the models are wrong, they tend to be too optimistic. ”

                    Umm… EVERY SINGLE CLIMATE MODEL runs hot. Most run almost 2-3x hotter than reality when projected out just 10 years.

                    You know nothing Tony. Absolutely nothing.

              3. “If 97% of relevant experts say one thing and 3% say another thing”

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

                Scientific Appeal to majorities rarely work.

              4. There you go again. Science has nothing to do with building consensus. You’re confused about this because you are in thrall to a hive mind. You’re also not very bright.

          3. “apportion” is what you wanted there

        3. LOL. Do not question Tony’s science “belief”; it remains unshaken and unsullied by mere facts.

      3. Because consistent, sustained pushback against taxes (a creation of government, led mostly by elected officials who occasionally respond to the desires of their constituency) is significantly more likely to achieve the desired result (lower taxes) than is frantic panic over a natural disaster/disease—freaking out about the latter isn’t helpful—it will be fixed (or not) with science, not emotional reaction.

        1. But we’re all gonna be dead at some point, so why waste time crying about taxes? Or putting your kids in seatbelts for that matter?

          1. Because those are basic, self protections. By positing this as a counter argument, you again demonstrate your propensity for scientism and authority appealation rather than actual critical thinking.

          2. Because his argument isn’t “nothing matters because we’re all gonna die.”

            It is “don’t freak the fuck out over shit you can’t control.”

            This isn’t that difficult.

          3. Cost-benefit analysis, on the seatbelt thing. Cost is very little; the car is already equipped with them, and the discomfort is minimal and quickly adjusted to. The benefit, greater ability to survive an accident, is worth the cost.

            The lockdown has massive costs that way too many people choose to ignore. It’s destroyed the economy, thrown millions out of work, added trillions to the national debt, driven millions of people to the brink of madness. We’ll hear someday about how many suicides it has caused by cutting people off from their support structure and throwing massive stress on them, not to mention those struggling with substance abuse. All of the many reasons people go to the doctor that aren’t about COVID are on hold, and that’s going to kill more through heart disease and cancer and many other things that are far bigger killers than COVID could ever be. Thousands of small businesses will be no more, with many lives’ work wiped out almost in an instant. Millions of children have had their educations interrupted.

            Not to mention, of course, that we’ve enabled thousands of petty tyrants to stomp all over the Bill of Rights, and that in itself is unforgivable.

            And for what have we done all this? Flattening the curve was achieved some time ago in the northeast US, and never needed to be elsewhere. We’ve locked down the entire country as if it’s all New York. I know New Yorkers think their city is the entire country, but it’s not actually so.

            The goal was never to “save lives” as far as the disease itself. The lives that would be saved are those of people who need emergency medical services (from COVID or not) but can’t get them because the COVID patients have overwhelmed the emergency rooms, ICUs, and hospital wards.

            The idea of trying to stop people from getting sick at all was never part of it, and it shouldn’t be now. It’s a fool’s errand… as long as the pandemic is still going (and recall that the whole point of quarantining is to make the pandemic last longer but have a lower peak intensity), we all are going to have our time at the plate. Those who would have died without the distancing will still die with it, just later than they would have. Social distancing, masks, quarantines, etc., can only reduce the odds of transmission of the virus at any given contact, but they don’t reduce it to zero.

            In the cost/benefit analysis, the benefits of lockdowns are/were very questionable outside of New York City and the surrounding area in March, but the costs are staggering and very much real. And they’re not over.

            1. The lockdown has also proven that this country can’t continue to tolerate the democrat party, or it’s progressive members. They have to go if America is to survive.

      4. Jesus Christ. This isn’t fucking taxes! Taxes are something consciously put upon someone by someone else. A virus is a fact of fucking nature!! We live with risks. We do not have to live with violence from an aggressor. Read a friggin’ book, learn to think, something.

    2. Yup first concert or ball game I can go to I’ll be there. Was out golfing this weekend even though I don’t care for that activity just to get out and bullshit with friends on a beautiful day.

    3. Absolutely agree, John. This is no way to live. It’s just plain madness. People have suck a skewed picture of the risk.

      If the news media had made any attempt to give people an accurate picture of the risks from this virus, the lockdown shit would have ended a month ago at least. The fact that young, healthy people feel “unsafe” about going to work or to the store really illustrates how crazy it is. Life isn’t safe. People die of accidents and disease all the time. If you drive to work every day you are probably exposed to a much greater danger of dying than you are from this virus. Add in all the other things that could kill you at any time and the virus looks pretty mild.

    4. Well said.

      The New Normal™ is what you make it.

    5. So John we all gonna die at some point. You know the old joke.

      “Well doc am I gonna die?”

      “Yes…eventually”

      My mother, she lives in another city where my sister is. She is in her 80s. Strong matriarch of the family. Smart educated accomplished woman. Grandmother and great grandmother I cannot count them all and she never forgets a birthday or anniversary. I talk with her every day. She learned Zoom now to communicate with the family.

      She is as tired of this as anyone. She cannot participate in her normal activities and interact. We are in the same storm. I get the frustration.

      I am sure you do not mean to suggest that her life is worth less than mine or anyone else. I am sure you do not wish to go back to medicine as it existed in 1940.

      Lockdown whatever this is will end somehow.

      1. Why the fuck should John, or anybody else here, worry about your mother?

      2. I’m sure you don’t mean to imply that her life is worth more than mine or anyone else’s life.

      3. As callous as it will sound, the benefits to society of an educated 20 something to society and their working is actually far more important than your mother’s. This is basic utilitarianism and still true. If we measured on this case alone, which is really what triage is supposed to be, the lockdown would never have happened. If you don’t like the answer, you shouldn’t ask the question.

        1. Spock stated it best at the end of Wrath of Khan, to simplify it, “the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one”. When you are proposing policy as drastic as the lockdowns this needs to be the mindset. Not the Search for Spock mindset that “Sometimes the needs of the few or the one outweigh the needs of the many”. Both have their place but when you are proposing policies that impact everyone, them pure logic dictates the former in most cases.

        2. Triage.

          Yes I know something about that.

          So have you.

          I have not argued here against lifting imposed restrictions on life. It will happen anyway. The government cannot impose as much as most folks think it can.

          The real question is you and I. Our relationship as a community of individuals.

      4. Her life is no more or less valuable than anyone else’s. She doesn’t owe me anything. But, I don’t owe her giving up my quality of life to save her. And we may go back to the 1940s. There is nothing to say that our antibiotics will work forever and it appears they will not. We might not develop replacements for them and be stuck living in a world of drug resistant bugs.

        If that happens, what are you and grandma going to do? Just cower in your homes? Regardless, your mother is going to die and likely within the next ten years. Deal with it.

        1. Have I asked you for anything.

          Sounds like rhetoric to me.

          So could you rephrase the question.

          1. If you are not asking me for anything, then why does your mother have anything to do with my being unwilling to live in fear or give up my lifestyle over this? The only way she is relevant is if I am somehow obligated to give up my lifestyle for her safety. Otherwise, there is no way she is relevant to my refusal to do so.

            You brought her up. What other conclusion was the reader supposed to draw?

    6. Thank you, John.
      I, too, am so sick of hearing people gleefully exclaim that this is just the new ‘normal’.
      Maybe this new normal is fine for them, as I’m currently in a wealthy beach suburb in NZ where the cheapest house you can buy is 700k and it seems 3/4 of the people here are above the age of 60, own their home outright (most with a second home on the side), and are retired with a pension check coming in. Crosswords at home and walking the same stretch of beach 10x per weeks seems to be fine by them, and ‘closed borders’ just means skipping their two week international vacation.
      But I had an amazing life before this, spent living between Tahiti on my shitty old sailboat and Indonesia where I regularly drive motorbikes through unimaginably chaotic traffic. My husband works in the oil industry and both my brothers are pilots. We are all surfers and love to travel.
      We have all been furloughed from our jobs, forced to stop surfing even though this can be done socially distanced, my husband and I are trapped in NZ (not where we live) where it has been forbidden to hike, cast a fishing rod off the beach, or even drive unless you’re going the grocery store – all to mitigate a risk to the general population that is significantly smaller than the risks that the four of us choose as part of our normal lives rules.
      This is not going to be my new normal, either.

    7. “Until the 1940s there were no treatments for things like strep throat or really any sicknesses.”

      One of the biggest killers was TB, and thousands and thousands pulled up stakes and moved to ameliorate its effects (eventual death). The family of RM Nixon moved to California (for its dry climate) for that reason and it still ended up killing his two brothers. The wealthy would go to spas in the mountains like Davos, featured in Thomas Mann’s masterwork The Magic Mountain.

      “I am not giving up living a normal life and going to movies and ball games and running around with a fucking mask on like its some kind of science fiction dystopia over a virus. ”

      People live and learn to adapt to less than ideal conditions. Adapt or die: the cruelest law of the universe.

      1. Which is exactly the opposite of what lockdown policies and enforced social distancing is doing. It isn’t adapting but trying to control something that can’t be controlled.

        1. “It isn’t adapting but trying to control something that can’t be controlled.”

          Refusing to take any measures that mitigate viral infection is not adapting. It’s closer to burying one’s head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich. Ostriches don’t actually do this and I don’t recommend you try it either.

          As for lockdowns, they seem to be the politicians way of avoiding avoidable deaths. I’ve said it before, if you want Americans to submit to such measures willingly and with joy, pay them a weekly cheque. Beats working for a living.

          1. Doing nothing is a form of adapting. It is choosing to weigh your risks and deciding if the risks require you to change your way of life. It just isn’t your preferred method of adaptation. It is accepting the risks and deciding it isn’t worth the trouble. And it is how we generally deal with viruses.

            1. “Doing nothing is a form of adapting. ”

              But John wasn’t talking about ‘doing nothing.’ He was telling us he’s refusing to change his ways. That’s not adapting. To adapt is to change according to circumstances. Not changing is not adapting. Adapt or die: the cruelest law of the universe, especially for tories like John.

              1. Not choosing to change is the very definition of doing nothing. So yes it is adapting. Adaptation does not require change. You can adapt to a situation without changing. You are aware of the situation but choose instead not to change your habits. In order for it not to be adaptation you would have to be completely unaware. So, no adaptation does not require you to change anything. Accepting a situation and still not changing how you act is a form of adapting. And nowhere is John denying that COVID 19 exists. Ergo he has adapted just not in the direction you think he should. Eventually you will understand that not all adaptation requires you to change. Nor is change always warranted in order to adapt to a situation. You are ignoring some basic rules of biology and evolution. Those who change to deal with a new situation may not always be those who survive. There is no guarantee that change for change sake has any evolutionary benefit. Sometimes the best action is to not change anything.

                1. “Not choosing to change is the very definition of doing nothing. ”

                  You should read his comment again if you think it’s worth the effort. He writes about going to movies and ball games, and his intention to continue doing so. I’m not sure how you see this as adapting which I’ve already defined as changing to deal with new circumstances. For example, “The first sign of my wife’s adapting to life in Paris was her increasing fluency in French.” If, on the other hand, “The first sign of my wife’s adapting to life in Paris was her total lack of mastery of French,” you’d surely assume there was a typo or some other error.

                  Words have meanings. They’ve a temper, some of them—particularly verbs, they’re the proudest—adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs—however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!

                  1. He is adapting by choosing not to change. He has adapted by taking in information and making a conscious decision not to change. That in and of itself is adaptation. There is no reason to believe his choice is anymore likely to impact his survival than yours. Adaptation, despite as much as you keep insisting it does, does not require change in behavior.

                    1. You’re a funny man. Clown funny. Don’t go ‘adapting’ on me now.

                    2. Says the clown who doesn’t understand basic science.v

              2. I don’t have to adapt you fucking retard. I am not going to die from the virus. The cruelest law of the universe is that life is really hard for retards like you. You seem to think because some people are in danger I am in danger or that I must give a fuck about the people who are. No, I don’t.

                1. “The cruelest law of the universe is that life is really hard for retards like you.”

                  I disagree. I think the cruelest law of the universe is ‘adapt or die.’

                  1. To adapt you have to understand what you are supposed to adapt to and how. You are unable to do that. You seem to think I must adapt to something that is not a threat to me. You really don’t understand how your own law works. And you are too stupid to follow it.

                    1. “To adapt you have to understand what you are supposed to adapt to and how.”

                      I disagree. To adapt is to change. Understanding don’t enter into it.

                      “You seem to think I must adapt to something that is not a threat to me.”

                      I honestly don’t care what you do, or don’t do. I don’t think it’ll make any difference. Just the same, my advice, get out while the gettings good.

                    2. Adapting does not require change. Never has. Adapting to a new situation can be as simple as being aware of a situation but making no effort to change your actions. Adapting does not require you to actively change anything.

                  2. mtrueman
                    May.12.2020 at 9:55 pm
                    “I disagree. I think the cruelest law of the universe is ‘adapt or die.’”

                    Got any more sophistry, cliche’s or bullshit for us this evening, bullshitter?

                    1. Keep reading, I don’t want to spoil it for you.

                  3. Biological adaptation has little do with your deliberate efforts. You can’t think your way out of a virus, fucking commie troll.

                    1. “Biological adaptation”

                      Your fancy pants book learning doesn’t impress me.

                    2. It is obvious book learning doesn’t impress you because you keep arguing for a completely unscientific definition of adaptation. Biologically speaking adaptation does not equal change. Adaptation means adjusting to a new reality. That doesn’t mean you have to change anything. Choosing not to change is also a form of adapting.

                  4. No, as I pointed out there is no logical case that in order to survive you have to change. Otherwise evolution would not result in species that have remained virtually unchanged for millions of years. But we see several examples of species that have not changed. They haven’t adapted but continue as they were, ergo there is no evidence that you have to change Everytime something happens in order to survive. Adaptation does not require changing. There is no scientific principles that states this.

                    1. “No, as I pointed out there is no logical case that in order to survive you have to change.”

                      We’re changing all the time. We can’t help it. We’re all getting older and disintegrating. Especially John.

                    2. Did you think that was clever? Because it was just blatant sophistry. Yes entropy is a constant. Gee you got one of the most basic scientific concepts correct but entropy is not adaptation.

          2. //I’ve said it before, if you want Americans to submit to such measures willingly and with joy, pay them a weekly cheque. Beats working for a living.//

            Where the fuck you from “cheque” boy? Clearly not an American. Fucking commie trolls.

            1. No he just thinks that using the Queens English spelling makes him sound more sophisticated. His entire schtick is sophistry.

              1. He must really enjoy standing on a bread queue.

      2. I don’t have to live and learn anything. The virus is little or no threat to me and to the extent it is, it is a risk I am willing to take. So, no I am not changing my life. I don’t have to. To the extent I have to change my life, it is because risk adverse fascist assholes like you will force me to do it. And to that I say, go fuck yourself. I refuse to boy to your will.

        1. “I don’t have to live and learn anything. ”

          Ignorance is strength.

          1. Do you not understand that this virus only kills the old and the sick? Are you that big of a dumb fuck? Not every virus is a threat to everyone equally. I am relatively young and healthy. It is of little threat to me and there is no reason for me to be concerned about it.

            So what part of that do you not understand? Are you so fucking stupid you don’t understand basic biology? It appears you are. Well, I am not ignorant and understand what risk actually is.

          2. Strength is having the balls to say “make me.” If you’re not prepared to put a gun in someone’s face, nobody care about what you want them to do. Now fuck off, you commie troll.

          3. Not only are you a fascist fuck. Like every fascist fuck you take your dumb ass superstitions and desire to do harm and try and cloak it in “science”. Just thank God the Chinese haven’t developed a virus that kills those with low IQs and poor reasoning skills. The day that happens you and everyone like you’s days will be very short indeed.

            1. “Not only are you a fascist fuck.”

              Not only are you a fascist fuck, but you’re ugly too.
              Not only X, but Y. Is the way we usually do it.

              1. No, it is how those with simplistic understanding does it.

          4. mtrueman
            May.12.2020 at 9:51 pm
            “Ignorance is strength.”

            If that were true, you’d be an Olympian, bullshitter.

    8. “Grow up and understand you are going to die at some point.”

      Yep. Well said.

      Anyone who wants can hire somebody to wrap them in bubble pack, shove a catheter up their dick, install a poop bag on the old anus, toss them into a concrete bunker and feed them through a straw. TV is extra.

      This has gone way past silly. Since when does “the majority” get to decide how I live my life? If they don’t feel safe in public, they can stay at home. Since they aren’t outside anyway, what do they care? They have no standing.

      It just doesn’t seem that difficult?

  3. That we locked down the world over a known fraud’s hobbyist programming project should be the biggest scandal of the past 10 years

    1. It should be but it won’t be. The media will never report that or admit it is true. And God knows the dumb asses in government who fell for the con will never admit it. So most people won’t ever know that is what happened.

    2. not just that single fraud but the other fraud that axiomatic people can spread the virus which was a study of (1) ONE person out of 7 billion and that one study turned out to be flawed but we are still basing life around that one as well.

      Since when do scientist and politicians make decision based on single reports. single report from Ferguson, single report of axiomatic spread, single report of climate change.

      1. You mean asymptomatic, right?

        1. I think he meant asymptotic.

          1. No, it was definitely “asinine”.

        2. Your right Asymptomatic

          1. I kind of liked axiomatic.

            1. Heck, how about asymptotic?

      2. CDC on May 4 released a preliminary about the asymptomatic transmission and it’s probability.

        Also includes pre-symptomatic as a potential vector. You’re much more transmittable while symptomatic, but there is more evidence than just a single person for asymptomatic transmission.

        Also worth noting that a cough or sore throat won’t stand out to most people as “oh god I need to self isolate” levels of sick especially with allergy season.

        1. Unfortunately the CDC and other government health groups have no value anymore they are now trying to predict twice as many deaths than before if we open too soon. No one believes them anymore and if they do we may be in for a sorry state. all their predictions have been wrong and many of their shelter in place and essential business rules are now clearly seen to not make sense and are political purposes rather than health purposes. they want to call people deniers but when we have been lied to by not just Trump but the whole lot of them. our rulers have no cloth and we can all see that and its not pretty.

          1. They don’t even trust each other
            (See: Brix vs CDC)

            1. Wooden stake through the heart.

              It’s the only way to be safe.

        2. “CDC on May 4 released a preliminary about the asymptomatic transmission and it’s probability.

          Also includes pre-symptomatic as a potential vector. You’re much more transmittable while symptomatic, but there is more evidence than just a single person for asymptomatic transmission.”

          Now they have a study to conform with the original study of one, note i said conform and not confirm,. they do now they didn’t when they shut down and that was the point and as my other comment we can no longer trust the government at any level.

  4. The problem is that Americans (and the public in general) has no understanding of the scope and scale of these numbers. As Mr Bailey notes, models are now suggesting about 8900 deaths per day, which isn’t significantly different from a flu season (though it will go much longer).

    Another example: I saw an article on Yahoo News yesterday stating that there is a GRIM NEW STUDY out saying that the Years of Potential Life Lost (YLL or YPLL) for a WuFlu death was 12. This was supposed to be sobering, as most people think that people dying of Covid would have died of something else really soon.

    Of course YLL isn’t a literal number- it is a statistical abstract, and the idea that the guy who had heart disease and diabetes was going to live 12 more years is just a probability. Nevertheless people see that 12 as a totally unacceptable loss.

    But If you put it in context with the YLL of previous pandemics, you see that the current one isn’t too bad:

    YLL per 10,000 people
    1918 Spanish Flu: 2344
    1957 Flu: 96
    1968 Hong Kong Flu: 60
    2009 H1N1: 40
    2019 COVID: 12 YLL * 2.5 deaths per 10,000 = 30
    Typical Flu season: 19

    To be fair, more people per 10,000 will have died by the end of this. But that will put us at around 5 deaths per 10,000 and 60 YLL- which is right about where we were in 1968 when the Hong Kong Flu was ascendant we didn’t need to shut the economy down.

    1. Part of that is that modern life has become so safe that people seemed to have lost the ability to deal with risk or at least some people have. People seem to think they are entitled to live forever and that every possible sacrifice should be made to eliminate even the smallest risk.

      1. So shut the fuck up and pay your taxes like a grownup. If other people shouldn’t worry about dying, then you have no right worrying about government overreach and other minor things like that.

        1. Still can’t figure out how to hang yourself, eh?

          1. Your mom says I’m plenty hung already.

            1. My mom has herpes. Joke’s on you.

            2. Your being gay kinda takes the edge off that joke.

              Just sayin’.

              1. I had a dream last night where Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was hanging out with me at my mother’s house and then tried to seduce me. I wasn’t into it, but how do you say no to her? I don’t usually ask people to analyze my dreams, but I think I need some help with this one.

                1. It means you’re worried because you know you’re becoming a boring old queen. You reject it, but you recognize it has too much power for you to deny forever.

                2. OK, that got a genuine laugh.

                3. At least it’s better than sarcasmic dreaming about fucking his non-existent kids.

                4. Wasn’t it Tony the genius who said something about sophomoric comments being beneath discourse? And then he calls a complete strangers mother a whore? I don’t understand why authoritarian people troll these webpages. If you want to believe everything the government tells you and make up things out of whole cloth, then best of luck to you. Let the adults do the thinking.

                  1. Just boredom. The comments here are fun, and retarded. Sometimes, elucidating. I don’t think crackpots like Tony are ever really trying to convince anyone, other than themselves.

              2. Him using the same joke multiple times in one day doesn’t do it any favors either.

            3. She didn’t want to hurt your feelings.

        2. Taxes are an act of nature?

          1. The fact that he thought this comparison was compelling enough to raise twice speaks volumes.

            1. Shorter Tony: If you can’t change the laws of nature, you shouldn’t bother trying to change anything.

              It’s why he’s still as disappointing now as he was as a child.

    2. the other point is what is the life of a person like in those YLL since most of the cases are people living in nursing homes where there life is not of much signifigence anymore to society, hard to say but true . who wants to spend their last ten years in a home, i don’t

  5. I haven’t heard anyone discuss the unintended consequences of wrapping ourselves in bubble wrap. The human immune system only works when it constantly comes in contact with all manner of tiny microbes and viruses that are trying to kill us. If we deprive ourselves of that contact, we’re putting ourselves at in infinite more risk long term. I think Bill Maher of all people is the only person in the mainstream I have heard mention this.

    1. I am not sure that helps us much with a new virus like this. But along those lines, the only way this stops is we either develop a vaccine, which is hardly certain and likely at least a year away, or it works through the population to such a degree that the virus no longer can find hosts that are not immune and just dies out. All the lockdowns have done is push that off. And the quicker that happens the better off we are.

      1. To be fair, the longer this goes on, the more likely we are to come up with non-vaccine treatments that could help. For example, if I were an older person, I’d much rather come down with the disease today than 2 months ago when every doctor just stuffed a ventilator tube down your throat when you tested positive.

        Flattening the curve does give us more time to figure out what is going on with this disease and what is effective in treating it. (Note I still want to end the lockdown, but I don’t want to ignore the benefits of lowering the rate of spread.)

      2. Exactly. I’m not saying that it’s not real and hasn’t spread organically. But I’m thinking far beyond this particular virus. We can’t do this every time a new virus appears. It will happen every two years. Changing the entire culture to prevent exposure to harmful viruses and bacteria is contrary to millions of years of evolution that has served us incredibly well to this point. Keeping us away from these things at all cost is only a solution if you want to cause human extinction in the long term.

  6. like living in all the years before coronavirus?

  7. I wonder how many infections there are in China? {checks worldometers} 1. How’d they do that and how do they organize a society so that a bunch of gun nuts don’t show up in Tiananmen Square complaining about their freedom. We might want to take note at a society and a government that is willing to do more than shrug and say “That’s life!” In the face of a deadly pandemic that has no treatment and is killing thousands per day.

    1. Feel free to go to China. I’ll even pay for your ticket, and a swift kick in your fucking ass as you’re boarding the plane, which I hope gets shot down.

      1. Is this ticket first class? I have an account at CEX.IO. Do you want the number?

        1. Sure.

          Also, your address and social security number.

          1. It’s been so obvious that screech is running that sock, that I wonder why it even bothers.

          2. Why does every mongoloid leftist on here pretend to be rich?

            1. Because it’s the same person.

            2. Everyone on the internet is a massively hung millionaire playboy.

              1. Uhm, I am average length and generally have little money left over from one pay day to the next (I wish I was better at saving).

            3. Because they’re all lying pieces of shit.

    2. We’re never going to know how many infections there are in China. Beyond the fact that they have no incentive to report it accurately, they’re never going to test every single person in China or anywhere else in the world. No one is saying shrug it off. It’s not going to go away by cowering in our homes. Maybe the selfless thing to do is go out there and get it to help with herd immunity if you’re in one of the age groups for whom the death rate is a rounding error.
      It is unbelievable how willing you people are to shrug off the unintended consequences of your “do anything!” attitudes. The UN’s WFP is estimating that 135 million are at risk of starvation because of the lack of food supply caused by a complete global economic collapse. I fully acknowledge that number is also generated by a model that is almost certainly fundamentally flawed, but if it’s even 1% of that who die from starvation, you just completely negated any lives you saved from lockdowns and then some. To say nothing from increased suicides and drug and alcohol related death increases.
      Somehow this got twisted into people that want to go out and work and produce the goods and services that we need to keep society’s train on the tracks are the selfish people and the ones who are pissing themselves in their basements begging the state to take guns to anyone daring to take a walk outside are the paragons of altruism. That’s some world class gaslighting right there.

      1. He is a socialist troll.

        There is no such thing as “unintended consequences” with socialists. Everything is intended, as the ultimate goal remains a totalitarian socialist state.

    3. how do they organize a society so that a bunch of gun nuts don’t show up in Tiananmen Square complaining about their freedom.

      By organizing a society where unarmed protesters that showed up in Tiananmen Square were mowed down by guns.

      1. …and the accumulated goo of 1000’s of dead protesters were just hosed away by the CCP thugs.

      2. Yeah, I was just going to say the same. What is it with authoritarians and the inability to self-reflect?

        1. They self-reflect on their own revisionist history where they’ve never committed any atrocities.

    4. “How’d they do that ”

      By lying.

      Oh wait, YOU DIDN’T KNOW THAT AHAJAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
      AHAAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAH
      AHAHAHAH

      HE BELIEVED CHINA

      HAAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAH

      HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH


      1. HE

        BELIEVED

        CHINA

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHHA

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAH

        AHAHHAHAH

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

        HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH

        HAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAA

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

        AHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAAHHA

        HE BELIEVED CHINA

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
        AHAHAHAH

        HAHAHAHA

        AHHAAHAHAHAHA

  8. The lockdowns *should* be coming to an end, which is precisely why they will not be coming to an end. Too many governors have already gotten away with far too much to call an end to the project abruptly. Will they slowly ease restrictions? Certainly. But, the moment there is any “spike” in the number of infections, regardless of how shoddy the reporting is, you can be sure that the lockdowns will snap right back into place across the board. There are tens of millions of people, especially in blue states, eager to comply.

    The lockdown paradigm is here to stay.

    1. I remember in 2005 when the Iraq war “should be” coming to an end.

    2. Nobody is going to put up with a depression which is what endless lockdowns look like there’s no case or law that allows them to do this. This is why they are putting off opening up they know they open up a little bit people are just going to go back to normal pretty quickly and ignore them.

      1. //Nobody is going to put up with a depression which is what endless lockdowns look like there’s no case or law that allows them to do this. //

        I can’t speak for the rest of the country but I will tell you that the sheeple in NYC will do everything they are told to do, and will readily break their arms patting themselves on the back in celebration of their obsequiousness. NYC residents love the lockdown. They love the special feeling of being “good citizens” in service of an ever expanding nanny state. They really do. The degree to which I see people actively enjoying this shit is difficult to relate to people outside of NYC.

        1. Ditto here in New England.

          1. Ain’t that the truth? At least Gov. Scott in Vermont and Gov. Mills in Maine are being somewhat sensible. Sununu is opening things up again.

            I, for one, am not wearing a mask all friggin’ summer. Gov. Baker needs to be removed from office immediately, or challenged in court. Or both. I don’t really care which. He’s gone power-drunk.

    3. Nobody is going backwards, ever. The dem governors will resist and I predict within the next two weeks it will get violent but no one is going back,

  9. It turns out that significant flaws were identified by other researchers once Ferguson’s group finally got around to releasing their model’s computer code.

    I eagerly await my hat tip.

  10. Starting this Friday NY is easying the restrictions. Cuomo also announced that certain “low-risk” businesses can reopen this Friday. These include landscaping and gardening, low-risk outdoor recreational activities like tennis and drive-in movie theaters.

    1. This only applies to certain limited counties upstate. In other words, farm country.

      NYC is going to be on lockdown for many more months. I don’t think the lockdowns will ever really ease up. There are still morons banging pots and pans, and hollering like fanatics, from their windows and balconies every single day at 7:00 P.M. on the dot in honor of Fuhrer Cuomo and his army of “essential” workers. These people love the lockdowns; it’s like a little club for them, where everyone gets a virtue participation award.

      1. The Democrats want to give everyone $2000 a month for every member of your household until they consider the crisis averted. I was in a debate with a group on this. Someone actually did the math. Of course several people came up with the same tired trope of tax the rich and cut defense spending. Others pointed out, myself included, that these measures would not even come close to covering the cost long term. So they responded we could just have the fed print more money. I pointed out printing more money just leads to inflation. They ridiculed that notion as if it was a conspiracy. They disagreed with basic economic theory.

        1. The gold star electorate is not going to be swayed by the reality of economics, which is really just the reality of mathematics. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that there are millions of people in NYC, especially millennials, that are underemployed and toiling away at jobs they hate while barely being able to afford to live in a studio apartment that they are perpetually sharing with an endless rotation of roommates, lovers, and couch surfers.

          To these subsistence renters, a UBI is a godsend because they can finally “live the life they deserve” without being subject to whims of the greedy capitalists on Wall Street – or, more often than not, the poor shmuck that had the wherewithal to spend his entire life savings struggling to open up coffee shop only to have his already meager margins disappear into the abyss of minimum wage laws and, now, complete closure.

          They don’t care that it doesn’t work; all they care about is not working and getting paid for it. And now they have a “public safety” excuse to supplement their pre-existing millennial malaise.

          1. Once again science fiction writers prove to be precognitive. Corey* predicts this is the way the world economy will look in centuries in Caliban’s War, half of the world wanting to work and half on “basic”. I wonder if their prediction is correct on human population growth two. As more people go on the public file, the trend towards declining population growth will reverse itself. Unfortunately, based upon current data I tend to think they may be right.
            Also, on side not complaint, rewatching Season One after finishing Leviathan Wakes for the first time and am more disapointed in Syfy’s adaptation than I thought I would be. They really changed the dynamics of Miller, and the interactions of the Rocinante’s crew.

      2. Huh. I thought the banging pots and pans was an expression of frustration by people wishing they could do more. Funny how gestures are interpreted differently.

  11. Starting this Friday NY is easying the restrictions. Cuomo also announced that certain “low-risk” businesses can reopen this Friday. These include landscaping and gardening, low-risk outdoor recreational activities like tennis and drive-in movie theaters.

    1. Hit enter too soon.
      How ridiculous is it that easying restrictions get you the ability to garden. Science was never involved if outdoor activities were overly restricted.

  12. “Citing the advice of medical proffessionals, Democrats estimated that the shutdown should be lifted on November 4th.”

  13. “So what might learning to live with COVID-19 look like?” FFS, it’s going to look like living with the tens of thousands of other viruses out there that are survived by 99.8% of the people who get them. Why the fuck would you think that it’s any different? It’s not. The real question is what it’s going to look like to live with a Constitution that’s been through a cross-cut shredder thanks to this pants-shitting panic over nothing.

  14. I don’t understand why you people have to be contrarians about every goddamn thing that happens.

    The level of death is acceptable. Okay, that’s with global policy of managing human contact. What if we opened all the schools and stores and restaurants back up? Would the numbers remain acceptable? What are we permitting these deaths in service of? Economic health? It’s okay if half your family is dead as long as you get a paycheck?

    Then there’s the usual, knee-jerk retreat to conspiracy theory. Paranoia can be a symptom of some serious brain disorders, so I’d check myself out if I were you guys. This virus is either no big deal or a Chinese hoax after all, so feel free to go to the hospital without a mask.

    1. “I don’t understand why you people have to be contrarians about every goddamn thing that happens.”

      We’ll add that to the loooong list of things yo don’t understand. It has to do with “principles”, which is already on that list.

      1. That’s because you define having principles as sucking Trump cock at every possible opportunity.

        1. If you want to stay home like the little bitch that you are, nobody is going to drag you out of your mom’s basement. Now stop being a little faggot and pull the trigger already.

          1. You seem like the sort of people who should be in charge of everything.

            1. You’re the one crying about people not doing what you want them to do because you’re a little bitch.

              1. “Now stop being a little faggot…”

                “…you’re a little bitch.”

                Did you peak in high school or something?

                1. Mind your own fucking business. If you don’t want to get abused, fuck off. You constantly jump into shit that has nothing to do with you, you little dick weed.

                  Don’t you have to feed your stupid daughter or something?

                  1. I will take that as an affirmative.

                    1. Forgot to switch back to your “Tony” sock, huh? Outed yet again.

                    2. Oh yeah, I spend all day and night here switching accounts so I can be abused by man-children like you. Suuuuuurrrre.

                    3. Oh, you’re Tulpa. Still bitching about other people allegedly using socks, huh?

                    4. Awww Tony is upset I bust his stupid fucking socks. Lololololll

                    5. Tulpa, you are the only one using socks here, because you are a child. Have you ever contributed a single actual thought to anything here?

                    6. Oho TONY’S VERY UPSET AND LOOKING TO DFLECT AHAHAHAHA

                    7. Also, I’m not Tulpa. Just ask sporky.

                2. Says the guy who constantly prattles on about Trump’s cock and asshole.

                  In response to someone that was responding to someone talking about…sucking Trump’s cock.

                  You lefty assholes are always bringing up a cult. I’m now convinced that you guys really do belong to a cult that is obsessed with sucking cock.

                  1. It’s funny that sarcasmic and his socks all just happen to show up at the same time, every time, respond to the same comments by the same posters, and then make the exact same asinine points before diving into a conversation amongst themselves.

                    1. It’s all one person? Dude…. Someone should hire him! He’s got fucking talent! To maintain different personalities like that, that’s like what actors do! That’s one talented motherfucker! And to flawlessly have multiple conversations going, in character, while only agreeing with the others on libertarian principles? Dude! Why is he wasting his time here?

                3. Weird how you passed Tony’s trump sucking comment sarcasmic. Is that because it would point out you do the same shit? Argue like a nonsexual know nothing child?

                  1. Did you peak in high school too?

        2. Another sophomoric Tony trope: “Everyone who isn’t a leftist maggot like myself must be a Trump supporter”.

          Still the same idiot as ever. You’ve failed to improve your act while you were away.

          1. Compare and contrast that with Sevo, Geraje Guzba and others’ “Everyone who doesn’t profess their undying love for Trump is a leftist maggot.”

            1. Never even said anything remotely close. But you are leftist maggot, and it has nothing to do with Trump.

              1. Haaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha!

                1. You should cite where he said it. remember when you accused me of wanting to murder people? Good times.

            2. Please sarc, continue this downward spiral.

              1. We broke him, and he can’t fix himself.

                I find it very amusing.

        3. “That’s because you define having principles as sucking Trump cock at every possible opportunity.”

          Thank you for proving you’re both abysmally stupid and smug about it.

        4. I hope sarcasmic wanders in here just to realize he has the same argumentation skills of Tony.

    2. Talking about paranoia, while succumbing to mass hysteria?

      1. I’m listening to experts. Who are you listening to? Name names. Go ahead. I’m not ashamed of the sources where I get my information, and you shouldn’t be either.

        1. //I’m listening to experts.//

          Bet that sounded real smart in your head, didn’t it?

          1. But…that nice NPR reporter says all the things I already believe!

        2. Appeal to authority.

          1. It’s like kindergarten in here. Appealing to authorities, when they are experts on the subject at hand, is not fallacious. It’s rational. I highly doubt you get all your ideas by sitting in an armchair and formulating them ex nihilo.

            1. You are not acquainted with rationality. In fact, you and rationality aren’t even living on the same planet.

              1. “You are not acquainted with rationality.”

                That list continues to grow…

            2. No you appeal to only the experts that espouse your world view and ridicule those who don’t. That is why we call it appealing to authority.

              1. Many of the experts I trust are working for Donald Trump. So why don’t you go ahead and tell me what your reliable sources are. No need to be embarrassed. If you’re embarrassed then why are you trusting them in the first place?

                1. Again, by stating your sources work for Trump (as if that means anything) and then asking about “my sources” this demonstrates that your argument is an appeal to authority. By stating your sources are from a group you assume I agree with, you are attempting to demonstrate that you have the authorities on your side. By questioning who my authorities are, you are attempting to impeach the validity of my authorities. I, however, realize the data and the models don’t agree and that the r-value is nearly zero between the two sets. I also have looked at both sides and realize that as new data becomes available that science adapts to the new data and is not stagnant. The models are not tests but simply hypothesis. This is basic science. The testing comes, in their case, as different states and countries deal differently with this virus. What we can tell is that there is no correlation between quarantines and mortality or infection rates. Yes Sweden has a higher mortality rate then the US but far less than many European countries that went full lockdown. The variability of the results between full lockdown and no lockdown is way to many to draw an educated hypothesis other than their appears to be no correlation. Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana have similar mortality rates, similar infection rates (which is really at this point just a function of testing), similar population densities and similar demographics. The also share borders in many cases and share economic activity. All four practiced different levels of quarantine from almost nothing to stay at home. This seems to show that the correlation between quarantines and infection is exactly zero. By comparing similar models with different treatments we can look to see if there is any real significant differences. It doesn’t appear so.

                  1. Dude, that went so far over Tony’s head he’s now blinded by staring into the sun.

                2. And just to humor you, I will state my first experts are the staticians from Oxford who several years ago demonstrated that pandemic modelling was woefully inaccurate and vastly overestimated infections and mortality, and yet we continued to use the same modeling methods and based policy on this. We also ignored experts in other fields, such as economics, sociology, psychology etc.

            3. It’s like kindergarten in here.

              Like Mean Girls goes back to pre-K.

              1. And you just contribute to it. As does Tony.

                1. If by that you mean I question both sides, then yes. I’m an equal-opportunity contrarian. I only appear to be anti-Trump because the Trump supporters are numerous and loud.

                  1. You’re really not though.

                  2. Anyone that questions leftist narratives is, in your view, a Trump supporter. You contribute nothing libertarian, or even remotely libertarian. You come to this site to call people Trump dick suckers and cry about other people being mean to you. When normal people get divorced and has protective orders entered against them, prohibiting them from seeing their abused children, they drink. You, instead, come here and cry, and everyone laughs at you for doing it.

                  3. “If by that you mean I question both sides, then yes.”

                    Don’t flatter yourself; no one here is fooled.

                  4. Holy shit, sarcasmic had gone full Jeff. Hahaha. Hilarious.

                  5. Numerous and loud.

        3. I’d recommend you read Tucille’s recent article about listening to “experts” in different areas. But my response is:

          (1). Epidemiologists don’t (necessarily) know much about the economy. Or civil liberties. Or the psychological/sociological impact of isolation and unemployment.

          Listening to one type of “expert” at the exclusion of all others is the exact type of “denialism” your ilk loves to mock others for.

          (2) The epidemiologists may be the experts on this disease—but it doesn’t mean what they say is 100% accurate. That’s not paranoia—hell, that’s not even meant as criticism—just recognition that even the experts have been working with woefully incomplete information on COVID-19.

          This is evidenced by the regular revision of models and mortality rates, and by the flip-flopping by the CDC on the efficacy of masks, among other things.

          I’m not doubting that they know more than me about COVID-19, but it’s abundantly clear that we shouldn’t place 100% faith in their predictions and educated guesses—because that’s all they are.

          In conjunction: Basing policy decisions exclusively on the predictions and estimates of only one type of expert, is fucking stupid.

          1. Dr. Fauci works for Trump, so if you don’t believe what he says, you’re a stupid hypocrite.

            -Tony

            1. Wonder if Tony even realizes it was experts who pushed peanut allergies to new heights.

        4. You keep saying that dummy but you cant even accurately summarize what you think the experts are saying.

        5. Experts get things wrong a lot. Especially when there is very little good data to go on. Like now, for instance. The science is absolutely not settled in this instance.

    3. If you were killed in a car accident, and tested positive for the virus, yours would be counted as a Covid-19 related death. I’m not exaggerating. Anyone who tests positive and dies, regardless of the cause of death, ends up in those daily numbers. That’s straight from the CDC. Add to that the percentage of people who test positive and are asymptomatic, and you’ve got a recipe for a heaping bowl of steaming bullshit when it comes to mortality statistics.

      What is acceptable to you? Should we shut down the economy during flu season? That virus kills tens of thousands every year, and the vaccine is a crap shoot.

      It will be years before we know the true numbers, but by then who knows how many lives will be destroyed economically. You want to put millions of people in bread lines to save a few thousand lives? And you call libertarians callous?

      1. That may be true, but the same CDC also weighs underreporting of deaths, and there is some consensus among outside experts that on balance the CDC is undercounting.

        Obviously there is a tension between saving lives from the novel virus and bolstering well-being by not letting the economy go to complete shit. But they’re interconnected. If people don’t feel safe participating fully in the marketplace because there’s a large surge in deaths due to reopening, what good has been done for the economy?

        I’m sure we agree that we must discount Trump’s magical thinking that there will be no such outcome, particularly because he wants a strong economy so he’ll get reelected. I want a strong economy as much as you do because I could be out of work soon and I have a mortgage. But Trump’s magical-thinking open-everything plan is not the way to fix either problem. Quite the contrary.

        1. Fucking asshole talking to himself. Ridiculous.

          1. No, you’re a towel!

            1. MONKEYWRENCH – BUMPER STICKER = TINFOIL!!!!

              Sorry, wrong troll.

        2. I didn’t mention Trump.

          This whole thing is beyond stupid. It’s not about the virus. It’s about politics. If you wear a mask you’re virtue-signaling. If you don’t believe the hysteria then you’re a science-denier. Where’s the fucking truth?

          1. The truth is that Tony and his ilk it is entirely about partisanship. And has been from the start. Yes, I am sure the same can be said about some on the opposite side. But the more partisan it became, the more people got involved and made it partisan. For the longest time it was Tony and his ilk attacking anyone who even dared raise even the simplest question about the wisdom of their preferred methods. Now they are receiving more and more pushback and they are getting more and more shrill.

            1. Now they are receiving more and more pushback and they are getting more and more shrill.

              That could be said of either political camp.

              1. Not in this case. The loudest voices were definitely from the left at first. They were the ones making this about conservatives and libertarians wanting people to die so we could keep the economy open. Trump’s reactions, and many on the rights reactions, were a result of the initial partisanship of the left.

          2. Every country in the world has implemented draconian measures to deal with this problem. I’m going to wager that it’s not exaggerated or a hoax. Maybe I’m wrong.

            1. “Every country in the world”

              This isn’t an argument yet you keep acting like it is.

              Also, Sweden didn’t.

              1. And Sweden has five times the death rate of its neighbors.

                The irony abounds, of course, not just because y’all are jerking off to Sweden like a common Bernie-bro. In Sweden not only are kids still going to school, but it’s mandatory, and homeschooling is outlawed. Swedish people are complying with its government rules because Swedish culture is heavily collectivist to the point where it’s considered bad form to question government authority. A libertarian paradise, it is not, and its policy of attempting to speed up herd immunity by accepting higher deaths now in exchange for better outcomes in the long run, is arguably worth trying out to see how it goes. I’m just glad it’s not happening where I live.

                1. “And Sweden”

                  Didn’t. So you were wrong. Or lying.

                  “has five times the death rate of its neighbors”

                  That is a lie.

                  1. It’s not a lie if you believe it.

                    Right, Tony?

                  2. It’s also missing the point.

                    I think a thing people are struggling to deal with conceptually is that we don’t have meaningful data yet. We’re used to having a lot of fast accurate data on things.

                    We are currently in full data lag. We don’t know the actual mortality yet, nor the net mortality over let’s say a 3 year period. We don’t know the IFR etc etc.

                    Sweden took a gamble, that it would have a worse short term (which we’re still in) for an equal or less bad long term (which we’re a year from seeing and 3-4 years from being able to analyze MINIMUM).

                2. And less than Italy, Spain, France etc that had draconian lockdowns. It means that there is no correlation between lockdowns and no lockdowns in mortality. Also, it could, hypothetically speaking (since we can’t know at this time) that when all is said and done that the number of fatalities will normalize, where Sweden had a spike and then fell off while it’s neighbors had a flatter curve but in the end similar mortality rates. Actually, anyone who understands statistical modeling and basic calculus will tell you this is the most likely outcome. The area under the curve is unlikely to change but the slope and length of the curve is what is changed by lockdowns. Unless you make lockdowns permenant.

                  1. Comparing Sweden to Norway is helpful because they are similar cultures whose outbreaks started practically on the same day. Sweden’s death rate is five times that of Norway, which has restrictions similar to the rest of the world in place. There is no good reason to think that these restrictions don’t work, as I’m sure even Sweden would say (they’re accepting more deaths in the short term for hopefully better outcomes later). They worked during the 1918 flu too. Which is also to say the flu got out of hand when people weren’t socially distancing and staying in place.

                    I have no dogma in this fight. Go with what works. But let’s not muddy the waters with a libertarian bias (or any bias), which latches onto maximum individual liberty as the default solution because that is your primary political-social fixation in the first place.

                    1. “Comparing Sweden to Norway is helpful”

                      Not to my point which was that you were lying when you said “every country”

                      But please keep throwing up wall of text deflections

                    2. You are missing the point about the area under the curve. Sweden may have high mortality at this point but it is decreasing already. Norway’s is remaining stable. Therefore it is likely in the end that Norway and Sweden will have similar mortality. Also, look at Wyoming and Montana. Similar demographics. Wyoming almost no lockdowns. Montana over a month of lockdowns. No difference in data. Also the Dakotas and Montana have similar mortalities and infection rates while the Dakotas practiced self quarantine and South Dakota especially did almost no government mandating, whereas Montana as I stated went full stay at home for a month. Ergo, looking at these examples you can find little to no correlation. You have cherry picker a single example, Sweden and Norway, while ignoring other examples. This is why I label what you do as scientism.

                    3. Sweden and Norway have had much different migration patterns the last decade. But tony gonna tony.

                    4. “Comparing Sweden to Norway is helpful”
                      Or maybe not.
                      Population density: Sweden 23/sq km, Norway 14/sq km

                3. Sweden’s excess death rate is 18% the European average is near 40% dumbfuck.

            2. The US didn’t. Each state practiced different levels from almost nothing (the Dakotas, Wyoming and a few others) to full on lockdowns (New York, Michigan, etc). Once again you don’t even know the data.

          3. You are literally complaining about Tony doing what you do non stop. Let’s see if sarcasmic is self aware.

        3. I feel like everything with you is a strawman argument at this point. You constantly complain about reopening, but you do it on a binary thought process; that reopening means full, 100% reopening without restrictions. Yet, that is not what is happening anywhere or being advised by the administration or the experts.

          So, I like how you keep saying that you are listening to the experts, yet you keep proceeding with fallacious arguments based on the assumption that no one else is listening to the experts when the exact opposite is true.

          Therefore, what is your overall point? No re-opening at all or are you okay with re-opening with restrictions?

          1. You’re right to catch on that I have not articulated a specific policy plan. I don’t feel entitled to do so, as I am in fact not an expert on pandemics in general and especially not ones caused by novel viruses. The smart move for anyone is to go by the recommendations of the CDC and other reputable national and global health organizations. Even smarter would have been not to elect a government that cannot be trusted to maintain the reputation of those organizations, but woulda coulda shoulda. What about you?

            1. I agree with following the advise of experts. And that current advise is to slowly reopen with restrictions and then monitor the data to see what future actions to take. See, not that hard.

            2. “The smart move for anyone is to go by the recommendations of the CDC”

              THAT is a policy plan fucktard.

              1. And ignores how bad the CDC has been since January.

        4. If people don’t feel safe participating fully in the marketplace because there’s a large surge in deaths due to reopening, what good has been done for the economy?

          Well, that’s up to people. Why impose one solution when there is so much uncertainty? We know that the economic destruction is causing a lot of harm to billions of people world wide. We do not know if all of this distancing and staying at home has been particularly effective. Why choose certain harm to most people over possibly losing some marginal benefit to a much smaller group of people?

    4. “I don’t understand”

      We know.

    5. You see in a free country like we are supposedly the humans decide how much or little contact they have with each other. Stay the inside if you want to.

    6. Tony, no one is suggesting anything remotely close to a risk of half of anyone’s family dying. This is exactly the problem. People have a bizarrely skewed idea about the actual risks here.
      And dismissing the economic damage like that is just idiotic. It is well established that economic calamity has significant effects on health and mortality. This is not about placing money before lives. This is about focusing solely on one danger and ignoring what looks to me like a much greater one. No conspiracy required. Just ordinary idiocy.

  15. So. Before this COVID shit, is was 1 in 5 children don’t know where their next meal comes from. Now, it is 1 in 7. At least we are feeding more kids!

    1. Nowhere counts as a place right?

  16. “When will the Covid-19 pandemic end? And how?”

    The same way a lot of stuff ends: By declaring victory and moving on.

  17. Those projections are finally starting to look accurate to me for this first go-round. This one is all about demonstrating how a society deals with a surprise like ‘pandemic’. I am very unimpressed with how we did that in the US.

    I can’t see how anyone can argue that we have a public health system that is worth a shit. Not at the federal level and not at the state level. We are lucky this virus isn’t as deadly as Ebola or as contagious as measles. Not that we give a shit either so there will be no accountability.

    The state-level response was the right level for this – but except for some good data/visualization was all pretty much a clusterfuck. In particular the failures to even figure out how to protect against ‘institutional outbreaks’ (which should be easier) is almost Third-World level.

    The lack of social cohesion going into this was one of my bigger concerns. Sure enough, the response is totally partisan – which IMO means the bigger problems are not going to be the ones caused by the virus but the longer-term ones exposed by the virus.

    The obscenity of trillions spent mostly to bail out the connected just shows how corrupt we are now. Supported by close to 100% of DeRp and not effectively opposed (or better with counterproposals) by non-DeRp. Just more enslave future generations and everyone goes along. Rinse and repeat from 2008 – with more coming.

    1. If the virus were as deadly as ebola, it would never spread very far. There will never be a world wide ebola pandemic, only isolated outbreaks. The flip side is that any virus that is contagious enough and not so deadly it kills everyone that has it is impossible to stop. No public health service is going to stop such a virus like this one once it gets going. You can stop it at the very beginning but once it infects more than a thousand or a few hundred, you are screwed.

      1. The plague killed one-third to one-half of Europe’s population. A variety of different viruses killed up to 80% of the New World. Don’t try to blow smoke that deadly viruses aren’t really deadly because they can’t spread much.

        1. Those viruses had long incubation periods and lower mortality then Ebola. Plague also spread by a vector other than humans, the same as malaria and yellow fever. Because it is not deadly to it’s host vector it spreads more widely than one that requires human to human contact. Malaria and yellow fever also probably accounted for most the Amerindian’s deaths. Other sources of infection were diseases that Europeans had some innate immunity to, either through genetics or by previous infections. Thus, once again you had a susceptible host that was exposed by an immune host. It wasn’t a centuries long outbreak, rather it was a series of brief outbreaks that occurred every time a new susceptible population came into contact with a carrier group.
          The first outbreaks occurred where Europeans first made contact. The outbreaks were brief and very deadly. Then the outbreaks ended. As Europeans moved more inland, new populations were exposed and you had a new outbreak. And so on and so forth. So yes they were short lived, localized infections.
          And in actuality, the same pattern existed for Black Death. It was a series of localized outbreaks, that died off fairly quickly. It almost never flared up again for several decades in spots it had already impacted. However, the fleas that act as a transmitting vector migrate from one rat to the next. They also survive in cloth, wool etc. Thus when they were transported to a new area you had a new outbreak. The reason it lasted years is because of how slow travel was back then. BTW, plague is still considered a current pandemic.

    2. How do any of the projection look even remotely accurate? The CDC’s provisional adjusted number of deaths, counting even “presumed” cases where there has been no laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 infection, is 51,495 as of today.

      https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

      //The lack of social cohesion going into this was one of my bigger concerns.//

      When you have a coterie of anointed “experts” peddling doomsday scenarios and a litany of power hungry governors taking advantage of people’s fear and ignorance for personal gain, do you really expect social cohesion?

      No drinking the cool-aid is not the problem here. It’ the fact that there is an entire industry dedicated to forcing the cool-aid down people’s throats at all costs.

      1. CDC data has been crap on everything for going on two months now. The states are the ones with accurate data for themselves.

        And if I recall correctly – and I do – it was only about three weeks ago that there was some article here about how the IHME projections had gone from 80,000 to 60,000. the Bozo brigade was out in force yapping about how it would end up at 40,000 or something. I called ‘peak optimism’ (another 100% right – to the day) re the death toll because that model at the time didn’t even have a plateau and was delusional about the decline. Turns out I was right about the plateau – and only wrong about the decline because we’ve decided to turn the decline into leg2 of the wave up. so now we’re at 80k deaths with 147k projected by August.

        IDK why they use ‘August’ as some monthly marker. The virus ain’t going into hibernation in Sept. This ain’t Mission Impossible where the virus self-destructs in 5 4 3 2 1.

        1. God you are such a revisionist. It isn’t even funny. You blindly were pushing the two million deaths in the US nonsense long after it was discredited. Below you continue to state it is exponential. But here you mention a plateau. You can’t have a plateau with exponential growth. You don’t even understand the terms you are using.

          1. Additionally, upthread you try and use the plague and the deaths of Native Americans by disease as evidence that deadly diseases don’t die off quickly. The problem is you are trying to conflate a series of brief localized infections, as a single outbreak. That isn’t what happened in either of these cases. You had a series of outbreaks, that were brief in duration. In the case of the plague you had an immune host vector, fleas, that were lived in mercantile goods, and traveled at the speed of trade for the day. If you track the outbreaks they almost perfectly match up with how fast merchant trains and shipping of the time period traveled. The black death wasn’t a single prolonged outbreak. It was a series of short outbreaks over several years. It then died off for nearly a century. A new, slightly mutated bacteria was then reintroduced and followed the same path. After the initial, brief, outbreak in a localized area that area rarely ever had another one of much significance. It didn’t continue to reinfect the same area for years on end. It had simply moved onto a new area.

            1. You will be surprised I know to learn that 2020 and 2021 are even shorter timeframes than the Black Death and Columbian Exchange

          2. You blindly were pushing the two million deaths in the US nonsense long after it was discredited.

            Do I LOOK like the Imperial College of London? And BTW – their model was explicitly a worst-case scenario not a projection. Mine just happened to be right around that time. Course you ‘it’s just the flu’ folks have to keep revising lying about what ‘this ain’t the fucking flu’ folks have said as the death count rises above flu. I eagerly await the point where I supposedly predicted billions – nay trillions – of deaths.

            You can’t have a plateau with exponential growth. You don’t even understand the terms you are using.

            don’t lecture me on math. I’ve forgotten more than you will ever learn. What part of ‘first wave’ and ‘second wave’ makes you think I’ve ever been unaware that humans can affect the natural transmission? Which I talked about precisely because that is what happened in 1918 – and that particular scenario was on no one’s radar then when we had less than 20 confirmed cases and zero deaths.

    3. Stop bullshitting you were calling this the end of the world just weeks ago. You were telling us that deaths would grow exponentially and that we could have millions by the end of May. Stop rewriting history and trying the both sideism trope. By pull together you mean everyone act scared in their basement like you have.

      1. Point to that post then. You assholes who think this is the flu continually lie and repeat a lie about what I have said.
        I projected about 800k-1million fatalities in early Feb – a roughly 0.8% fatality rate. With the big wave of fatalities being this fall/winter. And yes I was talking about exponential growth IN EARLY FEBRUARY when you clowns were dismissing it all because there were only 10 cases or something

        AFAIK there is not one thing I’ve written that I would either change or that I’m wrong about. And certainly nothing that you bozos have ended up correct about.

        1. It has never been exponential growth. You didn’t even get that right. Can you even define what exponential growth is?
          The growth was always going to be either parabolic or asymptotic. So, no you aren’t anymore correct than I was in February. In fact, based upon the data so far, I would state you were far less correct and the fact that you don’t realize it just demonstrates how unaware you are of how things work.

          1. There also is the possibility that the infection will be a decreasing sine function, e.g. multiple but progressively smaller peaks. But it was never going to be exponential.

    4. I’ve got to hand it to you: you really are one shameless, relentless motherfucker.

      You and the rest of your hysterical pants-shitting ilk were completely wrong about everything, but no matter how much of a complete fool you make out of yourself, you never let that deter you from pushing your bullshit for very long.

      Don’t stop though: we’ll continue right on laughing at your monkey ass.

    5. JFree
      May.12.2020 at 2:07 pm
      Stuff your PANIC!!! flag up your ass, stick first and sit on it, you cowardly piece of lefty shit.

    1. Insanity. Complete, f-ing insanity.

      To be fair, the headline *is* inaccurate. He was actually saying that the idea of having an effective treatment or vaccine by fall was a bridge too far.

      This money quote: Fauci then qualified that what is at issue is “how the student will feel safe in going back to school.” WTF? This virus does not f-ing affect the VAST majority of kids in any meaningful way. WHY THE HELL would Fauci imply kids wouldn’t have cause to feel safe?

      Scaremongering freak is what that guy is.

      1. Everybody knows that coronavirus causes school mass shootings. Tony’s experts say so.

        1. Kids are being taught to fear social interaction, they’re indefinitely confined with their stressed-out parents, and people like this Fauci shithead are telling them things will never be the same.

          Nevermind that when they are finally “permitted” to go back to school, everyone’s wearing a freakin mask like Hannibal Lector. No ability to read social cues.

          I wouldn’t be at all surprised if some kids go completely off their nuts. This shit’s going to have a permanent effect on an entire generation.

          1. If they are anything like my kids they were over it about a week into it. My daughter actually started crying when I told her my school district decided to cancel school for the remainder of the school year. My oldest, who I usually have to pry out of bed in the morning to do chores before school is pissed that school got cancelled and calls it “stupid, fucking bullshit” the way society is acting.

            1. Yeah, mine’re homeschooled, so I’m not worried about them either. But suburban wine moms, who, as a collective, are in full batshit-insane freakout mode, are now impressing their fears and irrationality 24×7 on their precious little snowflakes. And I’m serious in worrying about younger kids and mask-wearing. That’s got to stunt social development.

              My oldest, who I usually have to pry out of bed in the morning to do chores before school
              You have your kids doing chores before school? I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

              1. It’s called owning a small, family ranch.

                1. I know what you do. I just wish I could give my kids same opportunity to learn what work means while they’re still young. (Say’s the dude who’s posting on freakin’ “Reason” instead of working.)

                  1. I got plenty of old fencing that needs mending/replaced this summer. 🙂

                    1. Used to do fencing on a buffalo ranch. I’m not sure I dislike my kids enough to put them through that job…

                    2. Yeah. It is the worst part, after losing livestock, of the job. And unfortunately,it is one that never seems to end.

          2. Case in point, from the Guardian: “One 47-year-old mom of two in Minneapolis said a neighbor’s birthday party recently prompted her to call the police. “Seeing them all gathering, not caring about social distancing, I actually started to cry,” she said. “Each one person that doesn’t care causes a ripple effect. It’s going to be a tsunami sooner or later.”

            That woman’s kids will be screwed up.

            1. I think the point raised above about kids being screwed up, no matter the parent, is a real concern, but yeah, hers are going to be horror shows.

              I see “social distancing” (possibly the worst term ever devised) being used as a method for bullying and harassment coming. On the radio last week, an interview with someone from the Hoover Institute cited an Australian study that said suicides as a result of social and economic dysfunction will far outpace the number of deaths from this stupid virus.

              And yet, the knuckle-down by knuckle-heads continues.

    2. Fauci needs to be executed for treason. Publicly.

  18. Flu season lasts about 13 weeks in average so we have maybe 4weeks to go. Numbers dropping though. I need to design my Black Flag and sharpen my favorite knives before next March though.

  19. An epidemiologists job is to worry. Don’t be surprised when he does.

  20. We are a country of ass holes.
    We know how to re-open safety. You need cleaning, PPE, social distancing, massive testing, and contract tracing and isolation. We could do all of these, as are other countries are doing successfully. But we are choosing not to for….reasons???? We are choosing to just give up and let people die. We are horrible and should be ashamed of ourselves. We could reopen and prevent many deaths, but we just won’t. We could have spend the last two months preparing for this but we did not.

    1. More whining from lefty POS.
      Go lock your own ass in, and stay there.

    2. People are dying even with your stupid, unscientific lockdowns. And in the process you are creating a Depression that will likely kill even more people. Who is the asshole again?

    3. How the hell are we going to contract tracing on tens of millions of people?

      You really are a complete and total if you actually believe your own bullshit and aren’t just being an asshole.

      1. Other counties are doing it, so what makes the US so different that we can not?

        1. As ND other countries aren’t doing it also. So what is your point?

        2. More whining from lefty POS.
          Go lock your own ass in, and stay there.

      2. “How the hell are we going to contract tracing on tens of millions of people?”

        Computers? My first guess.

        1. Chips. Mandatory phone applications. Oh, and about a million man army of “contact tracers,” otherwise known as the KGB.

          1. We’ve already got about a million law enforcement officers, which sounds about right for a country of assholes.

            1. And 326 million residents. Even if we had a million police (which we don’t) it would mean that each policeman would need to track 325 people each. And that is further complicated by the fact that population is not evenly distributed. So the only asshole seems to be you, who does not seem to grasp the sheer complexity of the issue.

              1. Oh I know the complexity. I am just baffled that so many people believe that the so-called greatest country in the world, a country that has so many great achievements, is unable to do what many other countries are doing. If we were trying to lead the pack, then ya, I would have my doubts, but all we have to do is copy the methods of other similar countries.

                1. No, you are amazed that so many Americans have decided your preferred method is not the correct one. There is no evidence that lockdowns decrease mortality, especially in the long run. So, following their course makes no more sense than ignoring it.

                2. And what makes this country great or at least used to, for most people is that we don’t refer to a top down, government mandated policy but cherish personal liberty.

                3. Forgot to log out of your “mtrueman” sock?

                  1. I was thinking the same thing.

                4. “…Oh I know the complexity. I am just baffled that so many people believe that the so-called greatest country in the world, a country that has so many great achievements, is unable to do what many other countries are doing…”

                  You’re full of shit and a liar besides.
                  Fuck off and die, slaver.

              2. “who does not seem to grasp the sheer complexity of the issue.”

                A nation of assholes led by assholes. It’s as simple as that. None of this should surprise you.

                1. No, it isn’t anymore a nation of assholes than any other country. That is just your sorry sophomoric attempt at nihilism.

                2. “…A nation of assholes led by assholes. It’s as simple as that…”

                  That’s your attempt at ‘clever’ this evening? Lame, even for you.

            2. mtrueman
              May.12.2020 at 7:29 pm
              “…for a country of assholes.”

              Sorry, asshole, you’re in the minority.
              Fuck off and die. Please.

    4. You really want this to be another Spanish Flu. But it isn’t.

      1. Since we are now calling it this the “Wuhan virus”, lets call the “Spanish flu” the “Kansas flu”. Fair is fair.

        1. Let’s call MG a fucking lefty ignoramus. Fair is fair.

    5. “We are a country of ass holes.”

      And you are being treated like a country of assholes. Don’t like it? Find another country, it’s what resourceful people have done for thousands of years.

      1. Resourceful people have treated others like assholes for thousand of years? Perhaps you’d like to volunteer? I’m sure there are a few us on here that would enjoy showing you how assholes are treated … especially that Father Kirkland. He loves assholes.

        1. Not everyone has the gumption to escape. It’s not a decision to be made lightly, without planning. Start by learning another language if you’re not too old.

          1. Okay, Molly.

            Fucking commie trolls.

          2. Why? There are several countries that English is the first or second official language. That was imbecilic even by your usually low standards.

            1. 67 to be exact.

              1. And several more that English is required in school.

            2. “Why?”

              Learning another language has many benefits. It will even deepen your appreciation of English. For example the word ‘leukemia’ comes from roots taken from the original Greek, and I was familiar with the word and disease, but I had no idea what it meant. When I learned Chinese, I had the answer, 3 characters – white blood sickness. And that’s what the original Greek means, as well.

              Learning Chinese is helpful because it serves as a good jumping off point for many East Asian languages, even those not related, like Japanese. It’s much like Latin with respect to European languages. You might find the tone system a little tricky, but the syntax is a piece of cake. Reading and writing requires a major commitment of time and effort.

              Learning Spanish would definitely be easier. Plus if you know Spanish, you don’t need any additional effort to make yourself understood in Italian or Portuguese.

              1. It has no necessary use if you want to emigrate which is obviously what you were implying before you tried this stupid attempt at sophistry. You made a stupid statement that in order to emigrate you should learn a foreign language. I pointed out that it wasn’t necessary so your comeback is learning a foreign language has other benefits. That has nothing to do with emigrating. God, you aren’t even good at sophistry. You literally lack basic reasoning skills.

                1. Just a suggestion to help you while away the hours under lockdown. Didn’t mean to offend you. If you don’t want to start by learning a second or third language, you don’t have to. In that case, my advice, start by applying for a passport. If you’re also offended by the idea of getting a passport, maybe this whole emigration thing is not for you after all. Stay put and rot, sucker!

                  1. I am not the one who thinks this country is full of assholes. Go ahead and emigrate. Because I never mentioned wanting to emigrate

                    1. “I am not the one who thinks this country is full of assholes. ”

                      More fool you. Even the cunts are assholes.

                  2. Your slimy, passive-agressive, attempts to establish your cred is every bit as laughable as your standard bullshit-shoveling.
                    Is your mommy impressed? No one here is.

                    1. “Your slimy, passive-agressive, attempts to establish your cred is every bit as laughable as your standard bullshit-shoveling.”

                      I never promised you a rose garden.

              2. Learning Dutch will help you learn English much quicker than learning Latin will, as would German since English is more closely related to both those languages than Latin. And while Latin and Germanic languages both derived from a proto-Indo European language they are much less similar than Chinese and Korean. So even your example of why learning a foreign language isn’t even anthropologically correct. Hell even Gaelic and German are more closely related than English and Latin.

                1. Hell English doesn’t even use the same word order or grammatical rules as Latin languages.

                  1. ” English doesn’t even use the same word order or grammatical rules as Latin languages.”

                    It hasn’t stopped English from borrowing a good deal of its vocabulary from Latin and Latin related languages. Order, grammar, rule and language are all borrowed from Latin. I challenge you to re-write the above sentence using only native Germanically derived words! As I said, knowing Chinese will tell you a great deal of Japanese vocabulary even though the languages aren’t related. The Japanese have borrowed a good deal of Chinese vocabulary.

                    I agree about Dutch. I once flew on a KLM flight and watched their video presentation. There was an episode of that great American sitcom Seinfeld. I turned off the sound and watched the Dutch subtitles. After 23 minutes I felt as though I was one episode shy of mastering the language.

                    “European language they are much less similar than Chinese and Korean”

                    That’s nuts. Chinese has ideographs, Korean has a kind of syllabary based on Sanskrit. European languages typically use Roman letters. Chinese is extremely analytic, Korean is moderately synthetic. (Synthetic means that formality, tense, person, number etc are bundled into one word, and analytic means one word plus a bunch of independent grammatical markers) Chinese is tonal, like a sing song, Korean is more like the European languages, none of which are tonal. Chinese is SVO, like English, and other European languages. Korean is SOV, with the verb coming at the end, with the subject and object defined by markers, like Japanese. Phonetically, Chinese consonants are divvied up by vibrating (or not) vocal chords, like English z/s, and Korean has a 3 part division based on degree of aspiration, to simplify somewhat.

    6. Social distancing is complete bullshit junk science. You leftist dumb asses will believe anything.

      https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/social_distancing_is_snake_oil_not_science.html

  21. Another Reason article full of fatally flawed logic. The paragraph starting with “So what might learning to live with COVID-19 look like?” goes on to quote various informative statistics, but then argues that somehow these numbers justify ending the lockdown. But the lockdown is the things that is keeping these numbers so low. As soon as you end the lockdown the infection and death rates will shoot up.

    Or maybe they won’t, but that is really a different question, namely is the lockdown actually limiting the infection rate. It’s amazing how many important questions are still not answered. Of course, shutting down the economy is also a disaster. Without more answers it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the right path to walk between quarantine and business as usual.

    1. We have states that implemented almost no rules, as we have countries that did. So we do have some data to base these decisions on. We also have two weeks of data to compare states that have ended the lockdown and states that have furthered it.

    2. // But the lockdown is the things that is keeping these numbers so low. As soon as you end the lockdown the infection and death rates will shoot up.//

      Your cite fell off.

    3. “…But the lockdown is the things that is keeping these numbers so low…”

      Your “stooopid” ate your cite. STFU until you have one. And fuck off, you cowardly piece of lefty shit.

    4. But the lockdown is the things that is keeping these numbers so low. As soon as you end the lockdown the infection and death rates will shoot up.

      It is called begging the question. Look it up and learn what it is. And then maybe stop doing it. You don’t know that the rates will shoot up. That is the entire fucking question.

  22. Whelp your odds are so low of even getting it and getting sick, not to mention dying, that you might as well take a chance. If someone offers you those odds, you take it.

    This was an exercise in government power, control, and massive spending. It was the democrats who wanted it the most, and they have been the worst of the betrayers. They deserve to lose power, permanently.

    1. Governments exist to eliminate chance, risk, and freedom.

      Obviously.

  23. Economic matters can be useful while humans are still alive, now forcing themselves to open the economy without caring about the threat of a pandemic that is easier to lead people to death is that the right choice ????

  24. If they are anything like my kids they were over it about a week into it. My daughter actually started crying when I told her my school district decided to cancel school for the remainder of the school year. My oldest, who I usually have to pry out of bed in the morning to do chores before best web development company in Jaipur school is pissed that school got canceled and calls it “stupid, fucking bullshit” the way society is acting.

  25. Economic matters can be useful while humans are still alive, now forcing themselves to open the economy without caring about the threat of a pandemic that is easier to lead people to death is that the right choice ????
    https://upsc-syllabus.com

  26. Very efficiently written information. It will be beneficial to anybody who utilizes it, including me. Keep up the good work. For sure i will check out more posts. This site seems to get a good amount of visitors.

  27. Six months ago I lost my job and after that I was fortunate enough to stumble upon a great website which literally saved me• I started working for them online and in a short time after I’ve started averaging 15k a month••• The best thing was that cause I am not that computer savvy all I needed was some basic typing skills and internet access to start••• This is where to start….SeeMore here

  28. I predict that our lack of interaction with other people will actually lead to a loss of herd immunity for other (non-covid19) illnesses. We are exchanging mild exposure all the time and this benefits our immune system.
    I will say that in 2021 there will be more cases of Shingles than we have had in the previous 3 years combined; and I think this would support my argument.

Please to post comments