Since this was posted in response to me, I just wanted to clarify that my entire family went into self-quarantine as soon as my son said he had cold-like symptoms. All the signs point to this being just a common cold, not corona, but we aren't taking any chances with anyone else's lives. Meanwhile, the end of my post was serious. There are still many deniers. Do everything you can to NOT get sick, and pray you are successful at it.
Thanks, fisheyes, for bringing us news from the front lines. Call a TV station. Get the story out.
My small business has made the decision to close through the end of the month and reevaluate at that time. Also, we are paying staff 70% of average wages to stay home and reduce their personal risk and the risk of community health.
Is the goal of the social distancing efforts to keep a larger percentage of the public from catching the virus at all or, rather, to spread out, over time, the same basic number of infections so as not to overwhelm limited health care resources? Or (hopefully) both? There seem to be conflicting signals, which, in my opinion, is clouding the urgency of the social distancing message, particularly among young adults.
It's both. At some point, assuming immunity is lasting, which so far looks to be the case, we will start to get herd effects to reduce the total number of cases. If you delay infection for long enough, we may even have a vaccine to reduce numbers even further. But we have to get from here to there slowly enough to not choke the system and increase deaths, even if the basic number of infections ends up unchanged.
Well, of course if you adequately distance yourself from infected people you won’t become infected, so this would be ‘both,’ to the extent that the distancing falls short of perfection.
The WHO China Joint Mission Report suggested that 80% of transmission occurred in the household, although this was in a context where interpersonal contacts were drastically reduced by the interventions put in place. Here’s how that report defined social distancing:
Social distancing: At the national level, the State Council extended the Spring Festival holiday in 2020, all parts of the country actively cancelled or suspended activities like sport events, cinema, theatre, and schools and colleges in all parts of the country postponed reopening after the holiday. Enterprises and institutions have staggered their return to work. Transportation Departments setup thousands of health and quarantine stations in national service areas, and in entrances and exits for passengers at stations. Hubei Province adopted the most stringent traffic control measures, such as suspension of urban public transport, including subway, ferry and long-distance passenger transport. Every citizen has to wear a mask in public. Home support mechanisms were established. As a consequence of all of these measures, public life is very reduced.
I agree that the ultimate purpose of social distancing has not been crisply stated. I believe the answer is "both." Better medical care, which occurs if we can avoid a spike in cases, means fewer deaths. Fewer cases, if we can reduce the overall infection rate, mean fewer serious illnesses and deaths. The explanation has been more on the former -- government and health care leaders are in near panic that the number of cases will swamp the health care system in the next few weeks. (I could have written, "NEXT FEW WEEKS!") Less has been said about a lower infection rate resulting in fewer cases over, say, the next six-eight months. I suppose many are thinking that summer will bring some respite and that recurrence in the fall will be less consequential -- and that eventually we will have a vaccine.
Another problem arrives after and if "social distancing" is done successfully now and in the next two weeks. Then the question is "For how long?" Are we prepared to fundamentally change our life and work for months and months?
Sage Grouse
---------------------------------------
'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013
we've been asked to not get too into politics, but the WaPo and others have noted that for weeks the Fox luminaries like Hannity, Ingraham, Pirro et al (and Newt) have adamantly downplayed the threat of Covid 19, but that seems to be changing, Newt has done a 180...he's in Italy, his wife is ambassador to the Holy See ...and Tucker Carlson had a heart to heart with the Prez to the effect that the threat is real.
everyone loves being bombarded with money, so the Gov sending out cash will be a hit, but seriously, a thousand bucks will not get me to spend more...I don't think the problem is that people are lacking money, they're fearful of the unknown.
As such, much of the $$ would likely be saved, (maybe some bills paid). And by the way, I don't think Romney's proposal was $1k/month, it was just $1k (per family? person? not clear). I hope they have my correct address...
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...an-andrew-yang
edit: ok, Romney proposed $1k per adult...my dog will be three in a month, does that qualify?
Outer Banks to close to tourists: https://www.darenc.com/departments/e...nagement/entry
it will help folks with paying some bills though if they are out of work or if their income is reduced even if working.
The amount is not set, nor is the cut-off in income (if any) and whether there will be some phasing in between the "haves" (whatever that is) and the "have nots" (whatever that is). It won't be a quick process.
(For those interested in the details of the Congressional workings on this and other bills, I highly recommend following Jake Sherman of Politico on Twitter. He has a lot up on this already.)