Re: [vpFREE] Z

 




-----Original Message-----
From: 'H. Dunbar .' h_dunbar@hotmail.com [vpFREE] <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 16, 2020 6:06 pm
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Z



Harry, thanks for the kind words.   I hope what follows doesn't change your opinion of me!  ;>)

->  It's when you offer a counter argument that I benefit most.

Choices are going to have to be made.   The current policy is working to flatten the curve, but at what cost?    

Let me propose a hypo.   Assume that continuing the stay-at-home and other measures would for sure result in a 20-year Second Great Depression with 50% of the US population either homeless and/or struggling to get enough to eat.  Would you choose continuing the measures or choose allowing Covid-19 to run its course?

Maybe it's a lousy hypo, and maybe you'll think we don't know how bad the Covid-19 damage can be.   We do know, however, that a large majority of people don't need hospital care to recover.    For that matter, we don't have any data on the consequences of shutting down large parts of the world economy for months at a time.

Are we prepared to shut down for another 10 months?  (the lower end of vaccine development estimates.)   If not, then what will the exit strategy look like?   It sounds like you agree that implementing contact tracing and tracking faces huge obstacles.   There are over 600,000 cases; how many people would it take to do contact tracing!?

If 2 million people died from the pandemic in the US, that would double the number of people that die in a "normal" year.   That's horrible for sure, but it's conceivable that trying to prevent those deaths could have a worse result for humanity.

->  I'll note there a considerable economic cost in the foregone contribution of those whose lives are shortened (even if that "contribution" is no more than as consumers in the economy).  That cost, of course, is borne over a number of years, but it needs to be part of the equation.

In commenting, I didn't intend to suggest that an extended "stay at home" response is anything I envision as an appropriate measure.  It's critical that a "normal" level of economic activity be restored as soon as possible.  But that return must incorporate strict measures to slow COVID-19 spread.  This will call on for tremendous ingenuity and innovation.

I'm troubled by any suggestion that we might just turn the spigots back on when it comes to economic activity without a considerable re-engineering that pays heed to the hazards in our current situation.

FWIW, I'm completely complying with the CDC recommendations.  Hardly leaving the house, and wearing a mask whenever I do need to go into a business.  I'm all for the current policy, but I'm uneasy (to say the least) about the exit strategy and the long term consequences of the shut down.

--Dunbar

From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of harry.porter@verizon.net [vpFREE] <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2020 3:47 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Z
 
 
Dunbar -  You're undoubtedly one of the most rational and quantitatively-oriented individuals I've had the privilege to correspond with.

I'm sure that you're aware that if COVID-19 were permitted to spread unfettered, we're ultimately talking  about 1 to 2 million deaths in the US, conservatively.    So, yeah, in terms of projected accelerated mortality, I find the numbers "truly alarming".

In my mind, the most important measures to take are those that will slow the spread until such time as widespread inoculations are possible and feasible.   Those same measures will also ensure that peak case loads don't overwhelm healthcare resources.

I keep seeing testing referred to in a rather nebulous sense, without a targeted goal specified.  It seems to me to be critical as a means to keep tabs on the state of the infection spread, allowing us to predict peak infection and steer resources accordingly.  If the testing involves deep penetration into the population, then I guess there's a second benefit of identifying asymptomatic individuals and directing them to isolate.  (However, I expect that statistical sampling/testing will yield the most critical results right now.)

The recent discussion re a need for contact tracing/tracking betrays an area of my ignorance.  I can't quite envision the form this will take in practice, simply because individual contact from one person to another takes such a broad form (or does it ignore most very casual contacts and focus on only those we spend significant, more intimate time with?)  I understand tracing/tracking when it comes to STD's.  Most people don't engage with multiple partners throughout each day.  Further, when a potential STD infectee is contacted, not only can they test for infection, but they can immediately treat it.  (Is there a treatment protocol at this time for an asymptomatic COVID-19 infection?)

In answer to your last question, "Yes", once measures to slow the spread of COVID-19 (which I don't necessarily see as including tracing/testing) are lifted, a spike in infections is inevitable (until such time as we've achieved a significant degree of "herd immunity").  It's this simple fact that should be the driving rationale behind whatever strategy we pursue hereon out.



-----Original Message-----
From: 'H. Dunbar .' h_dunbar@hotmail.com [vpFREE] <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 16, 2020 2:01 pm
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Z



I, too, have been thinking along these lines.    With over 2.3 million dying each year in the US prior to Covid-19, are the current Covid-19 death projections truly alarming?    Especially when 'unintended consequences' are factored in, like economic hardship and food shortages.

It's hard to imagine a successful short-term exit strategy.   I understand the immediate goal is to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed, but is this country ready to deploy the huge resources necessary to do full contact tracing and tracking?   Without that, isn't another spike inevitable, once restrictions are lifted?    

Also, I want to echo Jersey Stu's remarks about how refreshing it is that this discussion is taking place without political finger-pointing.   A rarity.

Dunbar




__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (42)
vpFREE Links:

http://usma1955.com/20228//V/Links.htm

                            ***************************************

vpFREE Messages (since 10 OCT 2019):

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/vpfree-archives

                            ***************************************

Old vpFREE Yahoo archives:

http://usma1955.com/20228/V/Yahoo/vpFREE_Yahoo_Archives.htm

.

__,_._,___