Utopia Talk / Politics / Corona XXI

Seb Member	Sat May 02 10:56:34 As Sam derailed the last thread with bullshit, thought I'd post this for Forwyn and Rugian that summarises the principles for what a sensible public health approach to c-19 and what an economic response needs to prep for, and the role of lockdown in a phased approach. https://ncase.me/covid-19/
smart dude Member	Sat May 02 11:04:37 Not to change the subject, but is anyone else more bummed out than ever that Hot Rod died (again)? His reaction to all this coronavirus stuff would have been comedy for the ages.
Pillz Member	Sat May 02 11:23:33 https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/coronavirus-updates-may-1-canada-in-a-recession Montreal estimates true number of infected at 250k with 27k confirmed. Will double testing. I think it was in another link, but over 90% of cases requiring intensive care are located in nursing homes. hospitals traffic down to below flu season levels in most of the province except 5 Montreal area hospitals dealing with local outbreaks. Again, the majority of hospitalizations are for people 60 and up. Seems more and more obvious that this is extremely minor, and the only steps necessary to mitigate its impact are encouraging seniors to stay home and practice exceptional hygiene standards with their families. Also shut down all visitor access to nursing homes and diligently screen personnel. Early retirement programs & senior specific emergency wage subsidy programs will begin appearing by July.
smart dude Member	Sat May 02 11:59:35 I dunno. Lots of people were saying "the flu kills more people blah blah blah" and now that coronavirus has killed in a couple of months than most flus kill in an entire year, the same people keep moving the goalposts. No one knows. Let's reopen the country, I say. Then we get to find out which side are the morons. I don't know, and I dont have a pony in this race, but I will be sticking up on popcorn either way.
sam adams Member	Sat May 02 17:24:41 For someone who still cant tell the difference between mean and median, im surprised you got the roman numerals correct. Tell us the truth seb, you had to look it up didnt you?
Seb Member	Sat May 02 23:46:13 Take it to the other thread Sam.
Seb Member	Sat May 02 23:53:27 Pillz: Yes, but isn't that *because* of lockdown? Once it's in a nursing home it moves rapidly though a target rich environment that can't isolate. So the fact they are swamping numbers during lockdown isn't necessarily an indicator that it is only a risk to that demographic, it's far more a case that this demographics risk is less mitigated by lockdown because they can't isolate as effectively. We're seeing the other pathways by which it effects younger people (e.g. strokes) other than respiratory disease.
Seb Member	Sun May 03 06:51:32 Also it's pretty rich for someone who doesn't know what per capita means to cast unfounded aspersions about Latin numerals.
sam adams Member	Sun May 03 11:43:07 "Per capita cant be a median" -seb. Lol
smart dude Member	Sun May 03 12:29:20 rofl. Seb's wife's boyfriend's son asked for a new turban for his birthday and so Seb is busy knitting it for him. Don't blame him for being a little distracted.
jergul large member	Sun May 03 12:35:45 Knitting is actually not very womanly. In Norway at least, knitting emerged from seamanship stuff with ropes and nets. Its not even very old. 16th century.
smart dude Member	Sun May 03 12:50:52 "not very womanly. In Norway at least" lol, okay.
jergul large member	Sun May 03 13:13:18 You need to know many knitting techniques to work on the decks of artic trawlers to put it that way.
sam adams Member	Mon May 04 13:54:43 Lol@norway. Anyway back on topic... is there any chance at a vaccine in the next few months? Or are we going to have to open back and do this the old fashioned way?
Daemon Member	Mon May 04 14:03:10 If a vaccine would be released in the next few months then I personally would not use it in the first 3 months after release. There is a reason why the development process usually takes very long. Anyway, everything is still uncertain: https://www.foxnews.com/health/coronavirus-vaccine-may-never-come-health-expert-warns A special envoy to the World Health Organization on the coronavirus said in an interview Sunday that the global economy may have to assume that there will not be a vaccine and consider ways to approach the virus a “constant threat." Dr. David Nabarro, a professor of global health at Imperial College London, told CNN that societies need to get into the position where they can defend against it while getting on with daily lives. He pointed out that some viruses do not have a vaccine. The report pointed out that some vaccines are in the trial stage and some experts are optimistic due to the fact that COVID-19 is not known to mutate at a fast rate. “There are some viruses that we still do not have vaccines against,” he told CNN. “We can’t make an absolute assumption that a vaccine all appear at all, or if it does appear, whether it will pass all the tests of efficacy and safety.” The Center for Infectious Disease Research at the University of Minnesota recently suggested that COVID-19 will linger for the next two years and countries should be prepared for “periodic” outbreaks. The report said containment will be so challenging due, in part, to the fact that so many of those infected are asymptomatic, according to Bloomberg. [...]
jergul large member	Mon May 04 14:04:25 Sammy No chance of an effective and safe vaccine within the next few months. Probably not the next few years either.
Paramount Member	Mon May 04 14:09:39 The only one I have heard saying that there will be a vaccine in the next few months, is Trump. lol But maybe Trump knows something that others don’t. If the virus came from a US lab, it is likely that American scientists already have a cure. But they are holding on to it just a little bit longer so it won’t look suspicious if they release it too soon.
Wrath of Orion Member	Mon May 04 14:30:31 I've posted this before, but the coronavirus family is known for vaccine amplification. There's no reason to think this version of it won't carry some serious risk of that, too. That takes a long time to work out (it just takes a lot of testing), so any vaccine in the near future will have necessarily skipped a lot of that. So yeah, no fucking way would I touch anything they come out with in the next few months. We also have the issue that antibodies are appearing, but we're still not certain if that is conveying full immunity or just a mitigating effect. We also don't know if any kind of immunity or mitigating effect would be long lasting or very temporary. Further, there are a number of reports now of unexpected organ damage (anecdotally) linked to COVID-19. There are a lot of unknowns there, but that is concerning (and not terribly uncommon for viral infections).
Wrath of Orion Member	Mon May 04 14:32:08 The idea that we will see hotspots and local lockdowns crop up again and again over the next year or more is extremely likely. It's not going to be anywhere close to normal for a long time.
Paramount Member	Mon May 04 14:52:34 Maybe the best thing would be to go out there and get exposed to a small doze of Corona. A small doze should be easier to survive, as long as it doesn’t gets deep into your lungs. Right?
jergul large member	Mon May 04 15:00:34 Para Pseudovaccinating yourself seems intuitively like a horrible idea.
Paramount Member	Mon May 04 15:09:52 But aren’t we all going to get Corona eventually? If my body and health is at is prime now, wouldn’t it be better to get Corona now? Let’s say something happens to me next year, something that makes my health worse. If I get Corona then, then maybe I won’t survive it?
Paramount Member	Mon May 04 15:13:00 Of course, the best thing would be to not get Corona at all. But is it possible to be able to avoid it and live a normal social life?
Seb Member	Tue May 05 02:20:29 Very real possibility infection only confers temporary immunity paramount. If globally we can move to a Korean approach to controlling infection, you might not get infected.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 02:28:02 US daily death rate still fluctuating around just under 2000 per day 7 weeks after daily deaths hit 3, when most countries started declining 4 to 5 weeks after the same point.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 10:00:39 "Very real possibility infection only confers temporary immunity paramount. " What are you basing this on? With similar viruses, post-infection immunity lasts at least several months, possible years. https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-immunity-reinfection#2 "Other types of coronaviruses appear to cause some immunity. Studies show that people are protected against the coronaviruses that cause the common cold for up to a year after an infection. And our bodies have antibodies against the SARS coronavirus for up to 4 years." Basically, you, and some experts, are just talking out of their ass about the immunity and I am really not sure why. More: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/04/roche-ceo-very-likely-coronavirus-patients-develop-immunity.html "“We know from other coronaviruses that it’s very likely as soon as you have gone through an infection you will also acquire immunity,” he said. “But this still, nevertheless, has to be proven over time. We need studies to really see whether those people who have been infected once are subject to reinfection. But there’s a high likelihood that this will be the case.” Schwan’s take on immunity to Covid-19 came after South Korean scientists concluded it was impossible for the virus to reinfect humans. There had been concern that people were appearing to fall ill with the coronavirus a second time in Japan, China and South Korea — but researchers from the South Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said last week that this phenomenon had resulted from testing failures."
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 10:08:44 I mean really, what the fuck would be the point of vaccines if you did not acquire immunity after an infection? Seb is disputing hundreds of years worth of research and imperical data for no apparent reason, with no evidence of his own, just to... what? I honestly don't know. Are there many viruses that can immediately reinfect you after you recover? I can't think of any, but I suppose there could be some out there.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 10:13:25 "US daily death rate still fluctuating around just under 2000 per day 7 weeks after daily deaths hit 3, when most countries started declining 4 to 5 weeks after the same point." The UK still has a per capita death rate twice the US.
Wrath of Orion Member	Tue May 05 10:23:15 Yes, there are plenty that can reinfect you after you recover. How many depends on the timeline you're talking about along with other details. It's a much more complicated issue than simply asking, "Can you get reinfected?" If you're talking about within a week or two, no, there aren't many that do that. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Take it out to a couple months and there are some that can reinfect. Longer than that and the list keeps growing. But there are other factors to consider including multiple strains, viral load you're exposed to, reactivation of a virus (not the same as reinfection), "faulty" testing (which can overlap with a virus that can reactivate), etc.
Sam Adams Member	Tue May 05 10:27:19 If the vaccine is a few months off and it works, it is worth a total shutdown still. If the vaccine is years off... well then the damage to our economy becomes much greater than the damage caused by corona, and we have to reopen.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:02:49 "Take it out to a couple months and there are some that can reinfect. Longer than that and the list keeps growing. " Such as...??? Name one and the approximate timeline of "a couple months". I'm just saying that despite overwhelming evidence that says you are generally immune post-infection for at least 6+ months, Seb and others are jumping at every opportunity to scare people, even when their reasons are questionable at best. No need to give conspiracy theorists and other morons ammunition. Just be straight with people rather than trying to manipulate data to justify your course of action.
Wrath of Orion Member	Tue May 05 11:07:51 RSV can definitely reinfect in that time period. Just doing a quick search brought up this study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2010624
Wrath of Orion Member	Tue May 05 11:10:32 While I agree that fear-mongering based on SARS-CoV-2 reinfection is not good, it's also not good to blather on about how viral reinfection is bullshit. Your entire point is, "I'm not a epidemiologist, but I don't believe in that bullshit, so you should listen to me." Typical.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:12:28 "The immune response during reinfection with RSV is apparently effective, inasmuch as symptoms are usually mild and last for a short period"
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:13:46 " Your entire point is, "I'm not a epidemiologist, but I don't believe in that bullshit, so you should listen to me." " Uhh... no. My point was... "Look at this mountain of evidence that says reinfection is not likely" while alleged experts continue to warn against reinfection despite no evidence to the contrary.
Wrath of Orion Member	Tue May 05 11:13:48 RSV is almost always extremely mild and short lasting. So your quote doesn't mean anything other than a reinfection acts like a normal infection.
Wrath of Orion Member	Tue May 05 11:15:54 You seem to not understand there is a difference between advising caution about reinfection (which I agree is unlikely, but not impossible) and fear-mongering. Some are fear-mongering, but not most. Why is it always so black and white with you? What in the actual fuck is wrong with you?
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:18:38 "RSV is almost always extremely mild and short lasting. So your quote doesn't mean anything other than a reinfection acts like a normal infection. " Because pretty much everyone gets infected as an infant or toddler. So later in life you have partial immunity.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:19:54 "You seem to not understand there is a difference between advising caution about reinfection (which I agree is unlikely, but not impossible) and fear-mongering. Some are fear-mongering, but not most. Why is it always so black and white with you? What in the actual fuck is wrong with you? " I'm not the one claiming that even if you have already been infected by CV and recovered, that you should still stay home because there is like a .000000000001% chance you could get immediately reinfected.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:21:23 You have a better chance of winning the powerball than you do of getting CV, completely recovering, and then getting it again withing the next couple of months. Actual scientists have shown its nearly impossible to get reinfected and that most reinfections are due to shitty testing.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:21:39 Dakyron: "With similar viruses, post-infection immunity lasts at least several months, possible years." I think you just answered your own question. So let's say paramount goes out and tries to get his mild infection to get immunity, it might only buy him several months of "protection".
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:21:47 so... tldr; FUCK YOU I'M RIGHT!
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:24:40 "So let's say paramount goes out and tries to get his mild infection to get immunity, it might only buy him several months of "protection". " OK, first there is no way he could purposefully give himself a "mild infection" by just being around other infected people. He could infect himself, but then there is no guarantee it would be mild. Second, I am no way advocating for the stupid shit paramount is saying. Third, inoculation, predecessor to vaccines, was essentially giving yourself a mild infection to gain immunity and it worked pretty well. Fourth, you are stupid.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 11:25:20 Fifth, judging by other coronaviruses, his immunity would probably last a year, at least.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:29:32 Sam: Per capita is a spurious metric. The virus isn't evenly distributed, and 80% of the UK population lives a few hops from the UK's main outbreak site. The key metric is ability of a country to bring the outbreak under control. Even the UK, the second worst response in the world, managed that three weeks ago with the most incompetent govt in modern times. The US still hasn't. Third world country.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:33:27 Sam: Track and trace is the alternative to vaccine - quarantining the infected. But you need low numbers of infected individuals circulating (testing per number of infected people is the meric, not testing per capita*). The purpose of lockdown is to get to that level, while implementing changes to shop layout, practices etc. that also contribute to keeping R_0 down. *This doesn't mean median.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:36:06 Dakyron: Ok, sure, if you think deliberately getting infected with a disease that has a 1 in 500 chance of killing you to get maybe only six months of immunity is a good idea, go ahead and join paramount! Frankly I'd sit tight until we've got track and test in place so that the chance of being infected can be reduced to very low levels until a vaccine comes along.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 11:36:46 The UK passes france, approaches italy death rates. "We have the virus under control!!!" -seb, after confusing mean and median for 4 months, needs to find something else to be retarded about.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:36:50 Dakyron: "OK, first there is no way he could purposefully give himself a "mild infection" by just being around other infected people. He could infect himself, but then there is no guarantee it would be mild." No shit. Really?
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:42:57 Sam, you compared a median to a wholey fictional number (it wasn't UK median income for the relevant year and you've never really articulated a justification for it), and erroneously presented both as means, only correcting yourself afterwards and taking four months to provide a source for one of the two numbers. You really need to let that one drop. Yes, we have the virus under control now. We have death rates higher than Italy because we waited two weeks to do lockdown. The US has managed to do even worse than the UK, despite the UK being led by an imbicile that actually decided to go to a cv ward and shake everyone hand, and ended up contracting the disease as a result. Quite an achievement. And somehow you are dumb enough to convince yourself you are doing better.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 11:43:22 "Track and trace is the alternative to vaccine - quarantining the infected. But you need low numbers of infected individuals circulating (testing per number of infected people is the meric, not testing per capita*). The purpose of lockdown is to get to that level, while implementing changes to shop layout, practices etc. that also contribute to keeping R_0 down. " True. That is one option. But we have yet to see any ability by any western government to come close to this. Perhaps it is possible, i dont know. So another easier option is to let all the healthy people get it and reopen the economy. If we are talking about the lockdowns being years long, then the virus damage of exposing us healthy folks is less than the economic damage.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 11:46:11 "and erroneously presented both as means" You were told both values were medians 4 months ago and repeatadly since then. But go ahead and keep lieing about it, i suppose that is easier on your fragile mind than admitting and learning from your mistake.
Paramount Member	Tue May 05 11:49:23 Seb, ” Frankly I'd sit tight until we've got track and test in place so that the chance of being infected can be reduced to very low levels until a vaccine comes along.” You could sit tight for 1-2 years, or maybe forever because maybe there won’t be any vaccine.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:52:22 I'm not sure, Dakyron, what you actually think we disagree about. The lower case for post infection immunity from Corona viruses is a few months, as you cited. So it is entirely accurate to point out that there's a real possibility any immunity might last a few months. Paramount's plan (were it feasible) is probably not going to get him what he thinks he's getting. Yes, I know how vaccines were discovered, not really sure how it's relevant here, other than to indicates how Paramount might naively try and go about getting a weak infection - collecting snot from a confirmed covid victim, denaturing it, and introducing it into a skin lesion far away from his mouth to avoid it finding a way to his lungs. There's no guarantee that would be a good idea. I personally am not keen on trying a vaccine that's rushed through tests. Lots of potential risks. E.g. missed side effects, shorter than anticipated period of immunity resulting in overconfidence. Use lockdown to get to low rates of new infection, move to track and trace, ease lockdown while keeping social distancing measures in place, mandatory isolation for those infected and those who have come into contact with full pay guaranteed until years show negative. Then we can do the vaccine work properly and not half arse it.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 11:53:33 Paramount: I'd only need to sit tight until we get track and trace going. Then it will only be infected sitting tight, and those recently in contact until they are confirmed testing negative.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 12:02:12 Sam: 1. You stated it was a median only *after* I'd posted the mean value. So arguing I compared a mean to median is spurious. At the time I did so, you'd presented it as a mean. 2. The second value, £21k isn't a median Sam. The second value is an unsourced number that doesn't correspond to the median income, median household income, median personal disposable income or any other figure that you could compare. You've never provided a source for this number and the closest thing we can find is from 7 year prior to the year you used, but that would be far, far more stupid than assuming when you said "per capita" you meant "per capita" not "median per capita". The actual number for median income of all UK employees (not full time) is £26k, which in 2018 nominal terms would mean UK was between 28% and 35% higher than Alabama using median figures (can't be arsed to find year average exchange rate). Worse for you in PPP terms. You've been claiming the UK median income is lower for four months...
Seb Member	Tue May 05 12:11:28 Sam: "True. That is one option. But we have yet to see any ability by any western government to come close to this. Perhaps it is possible, i dont know." If the South Koreans can do it, why can't we? Are you arguing the Asians are just better than us? "So another easier option is to let all the healthy people get it and reopen the economy." You'd still be looking at loads of deaths. Even at the stated rates of 0.4% last time I checked for healthy demographics, I'm not inclined to roll the dice to rush back to work. I value my life more than a 4 in 1000 roll of the dice. Particularly as the chance of spending a period of time incapacitated anyway is higher. You'd likely overwhelm the date capacity so lethality would be higher as many wouldn't get treatment. Even if you do open up, the reduced activity from people minimising exposure will be a huge economic hit, plus countries that adopt an alternative policy will start to impose travel restrictions on those that allow mass circulation of the disease, also hitting trade and economy. Particularly in the US where the service workers are most exposed and most at risk, resulting in logistics problems etc. (White collar workers like you and me can work effectively from home, we aren't shut down economically, we are just bored). Finally, if it turns out infection only provides a shorter immunity period, and we have seasonal variations, there's a possibility we get another large spike next winter, leaving us right back where we started. The marginal cost for waiting another month to bring death rates to lower levels seems well married merited. The cost of the last six to 8 weeks is sunk. Track and trace is where we should be going. And a travel ban on the US until it gets its act together.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 12:24:33 "You stated it was a median only *after* I'd posted the mean value." This would excuse your mistake for one post, not 600. Seb, does your constant confusion and repeated mistakes interfere with your daily life? Do they let you drive anymore?
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 12:31:25 What we disagree about, Seb, is that you use any and all information to push for continued lockdowns and economic destruction, even that information disagrees with your PoV. A few months is not the lowend, that would be the lowest possible extreme, with the "median" being something like 2 years. Also, if COVID-19 is serious enough to warrant complete worldwide economic destruction, depression, isolation, etc... then there is no fucking way it is not serious enough to warrant use of a good vaccine candidate rushed through what is normally an exhaustive testing process and give it to high-risk groups like the elderly, obese people with diabetes, etc... Basically, no matter what the information says, no matter what the facts, you and others like you push for only their solution: complete lockdown which is not only bad for the economy and bad for people's overall health, but is probably unconstitutional in the United States without a declaration of marshal law, which would put our fucktard in chief in a position of virtually unchecked authority.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 13:04:25 Dakyron: You appear to be approaching this from an ideological lens (or at least assuming that I am), which is a category error. The information you say disagrees with my point of view is exactly the same as you provided. You agree that infection may only provides immunity for 6-12 months. On what basis are you saying that this information disagrees with my pov? The reason I think keeping lockdown is safer follows logically from the facts that I think we agree on. We don't know when an effective vaccine is coming, but about 18 months would be the normal time frame. We don't know how much of the population has post infection immunity (nor how long that lasts), but estimates on the lower side are about 5-10%. So plenty of scope for a second peak. So the downside risk of a rush to exit lockdown before the conditions to keep r_0 below 1 are in place then is to end up right back where we started. And if we do that either we need to lock down again, or we will take a large economic hit from the diseases anyway as health care systems become overwhelmed, people's consumption behaviour change, and large scale absences and other disruption from the disease manifest. The lethality may be low but lots of people need to take time off. A path to exiting lockdown is clear enough, if we focus on getting numbers down to a level that track and trace can manage, and build track and trace capability working, then we can get the economy moving with very limited risk of a second spike and focus on a vaccine. This really ought not to take more than another month for most countries (though of course, that depends on people focusing on this rather than wondering if we are losing too much money and should be losing more lives instead). Any grain from bringing forward ending lockdown comes with a risk of further losses. Sure, we could lift the lockdown, and it turns out that actually we've done enough to keep R_0 below 1 without track and trace. But that seems unlikely. The upside Vs remaining in lockdown until track and trace is viable is capped, the downside risk is very large, however you cut it. Plus, lifting lockdown without a comprehensive and well communicated plan explaining why we think it's safe (not just better from a macroeconomic perspective) isn't likely to result in a resumption of economic activity. Many people will continue to behave in a way similar to lockdown. The political risks of sending blue collar service and manufacturing workers into a high risk environment while the white collars continue to work from home shouldn't be overlooked either. For me it's a no brainer. The evidence and reasonable assumptions point to maintaining lockdown for another six weeks to implement track and trace, with only very cautious and limited easements until then. The costs are known but can be absorbed, multualised and spread over a century for countries with their own bank, and much longer if the world's major economies collaborated. Meanwhile, if we open everything back up we risk ending up exactly where we started within 12 months, with large numbers of deaths, an overwhelmed healthcare system and a fucked up economy because pandemics will do that without a lockdown. Orderly management, or disorderly catastrophe based on chasing a benefit of 8 weeks of the cost of lockdown on the basis of hoping all the dice come up good? Not a great idea from my perspective.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 13:10:28 Dakyron: Question, if you have the option of working from home (as has proven viable for most white collar workers), and thus mitigating risk of it, would you take a vaccine that hasn't gone through proper tests? From a systemic point of view, I can't see that working well, and if the vaccine turns out to be ineffective then resulting in lots of death, or lots of side effects - that's going to have a big problem with uptake of the next vaccine.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 13:45:59 Pro tip: take neither economic nor health advice from someone as frequently confused as seb.
Dakyron Member	Tue May 05 13:54:18 "You agree that infection may only provides immunity for 6-12 months. On what basis are you saying that this information disagrees with my pov? " Again, that is the low end of the range. It is most likely much higher. And "may" is really "99% likely". I want to say the words out loud. "If you are infected with CV and fully recover, you are very, very, very likely to be immune to CV for at least a year, and even after that you are much less likely to develop a severe case if you do manage to become reinfected." You make it sound like it is a small possibility instead of a near-certainty. "We don't know when an effective vaccine is coming, but about 18 months would be the normal time frame." We cannot continue to isolate for 18 months. The damage to our collective mental health, economy, and supply chain would be devastating on the scale of the second world war. "We don't know how much of the population has post infection immunity (nor how long that lasts), but estimates on the lower side are about 5-10%. So plenty of scope for a second peak. " 10% would put that at 35M infected in the US with less than 100K deaths, giving a fatality rate of like 0.005%. "So the downside risk of a rush to exit lockdown before the conditions to keep r_0 below 1 are in place then is to end up right back where we started. And if we do that either we need to lock down again, or we will take a large economic hit from the diseases anyway as health care systems become overwhelmed, people's consumption behaviour change, and large scale absences and other disruption from the disease manifest. The lethality may be low but lots of people need to take time off. " The healthcare system in the US is not close to being overwhelmed. Why? "A path to exiting lockdown is clear enough, if we focus on getting numbers down to a level that track and trace can manage, and build track and trace capability working, then we can get the economy moving with very limited risk of a second spike and focus on a vaccine. " How long does this take? Its been two months. Anyone originally infected 8 weeks ago has either died or long since recovered. 8 weeks, even for the incompetency of government, is enough time to create a track and trace plan. "Plus, lifting lockdown without a comprehensive and well communicated plan explaining why we think it's safe (not just better from a macroeconomic perspective) isn't likely to result in a resumption of economic activity. Many people will continue to behave in a way similar to lockdown." People in this state, and others, have been ignoring the stay at home order for weeks. Cases have not spiked. Why? "This really ought not to take more than another month for most countries (though of course, that depends on people focusing on this rather than wondering if we are losing too much money and should be losing more lives instead). " What will happen in the next month that has not already happened? Only fear is keeping the shutdown in place. "The political risks of sending blue collar service and manufacturing workers into a high risk environment while the white collars continue to work from home shouldn't be overlooked either. " This is already happening. We need food, medecine, equipment, etc... ' "For me it's a no brainer. The evidence and reasonable assumptions point to maintaining lockdown for another six weeks to implement track and trace, with only very cautious and limited easements until then. The costs are known but can be absorbed, multualised and spread over a century for countries with their own bank, and much longer if the world's major economies collaborated. " What % would you put the chance of the world economies collaborating? 1% 0.1% About the same chance of you dying of COVID-19? "Meanwhile, if we open everything back up we risk ending up exactly where we started within 12 months, with large numbers of deaths, an overwhelmed healthcare system and a fucked up economy because pandemics will do that without a lockdown. " 12 months ago there was close to 0 cases. "Question, if you have the option of working from home (as has proven viable for most white collar workers), and thus mitigating risk of it, would you take a vaccine that hasn't gone through proper tests? " Irrelevant for me since I have already been exposed to CV, but no. I would give the vaccine to those at high risk.
Daemon Member	Tue May 05 14:26:01 http://www...covid-19-antibody-blood-tests/ [...] In mid-March, the agency loosened its rules, declaring via an update to its emergency use guidance that antibody tests could be sold without seeking the agency’s approval, provided that manufacturers did their own validation. Now FDA officials are walking back that decision. Facing criticism that the loosened policy has undammed a flood of flawed tests and fraudulent marketing, agency officials revised their rules Monday to require manufacturers to submit their tests for validation and meet specific standards for accuracy. “Flexibility never meant we would allow fraud,” wrote Anand Shah, an FDA deputy commissioner, and Jeff Shuren, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, in a blog post elaborating on the changes. They called out “unscrupulous actors” who were “using the pandemic as an opportunity to take advantage of Americans’ anxiety.” So far, the FDA has approved 12 antibody tests through the emergency use process—including those from large manufacturers such as Roche, Ortho, and Abbott—and most of them only in the last few days. Yet agency officials say that more than 160 others are being sold in the US without the FDA’s authorization. They note that some companies have used the agency’s tacit allowance of the tests to market their tests as “FDA approved,” in explicit violation of the earlier guidance. But fraud isn’t the only issue. One of the key performance problems with antibody tests has been false positives. That's when a test erroneously signals that it’s found evidence of a past infection. Due to low rates of Covid-19 antibody prevalence in the US population (most estimates put the figure in the low single digits), even a test with a very low false-positive rate can produce just as many false positives as true ones. Someone who has received a false positive might assume they are now immune to the disease. And that’s a dicey proposition when antibody tests are being eyed for assisting in important decisions, like who is qualified to donate convalescent plasma that could help treat Covid-19 patients, and who is fit to go back to the office or make rounds on a hospital floor. [...]
Seb Member	Tue May 05 14:58:39 Dakyron: "Again, that is the low end of the range." So, isn't it reasonable to say "would you be happy to live with the reasonable worst case scenario" when venturing something so risky? "It is most likely much higher." On what basis do you say that? A year more isn't "much" higher on any absolute metric. What statistical analysis do you have to suggest it would "most likely" be more than a year? "And "may" is really "99% likely"." I think you should read that sentence again substituting "99% likely" for "may" and check whether it actually is more in line with your view and less in line with your view. Let me do that for you now: "You agree that infection is 99% likely to only provide immunity for 6-12 months." I certainly wouldn't say that is 99% only to provide immunity for 6-12 months. I am quite happy to keep may, and say "may" means "is a possibility". "If you are infected with CV and fully recover, you are very, very, very likely to be immune to CV for at least a year, and even after that you are much less likely to develop a severe case if you do manage to become reinfected." On what basis do you say this? The actual evidence to support this is low - this is more wishful thinking, cherry picking the best case. Plentry of corona viruses and others have low immunity periods, and it's absurdly risky to pick the best case and say "it is very very very likely" with no evidence. You should plan conservatively. "You make it sound like it is a small possibility instead of a near-certainty." I don't see any basis that it is a near-certainty, but while there is a reasonable range, I think you should plan to be resilient against the reasonable worst case. "We cannot continue to isolate for 18 months." I haven't proposed we should. I think a reasonable case for getting deaths down below the 100s per day for most countries is about four weeks. We ought to be well on the way to building track and trace capability. Say 8 more weeks max. The US is fucked because your policy is all over the place, but the rest of the world should just slap a travel ban on the US (The US, having prevaricated, would now have to be locked down for a much longer period of time to get to that state, while the rest of the world is up and running which is politically untenable given the inability of your leadership to accept it fucked up and impose a nationwide u turn, and cannot undertake the monetary and fiscal policy needed to support it due to it being contrary to the dogma of the ruling party, even if it is entirely economically manageable - so yes, you guys are fucked but there is no way we should let you be our tyhpoid mary for phase 2) "10% would put that at 35M infected in the US with less than 100K deaths, giving a fatality rate of like 0.005%." The studies are for different countries that, while they have done a better job of controlling spread, are much smaller relative to the outbreak clusters. I'm pretty sure far fewer than 10% in the US have been affected - 10% in the areas where the main clusters are is probably a better estimate. "The healthcare system in the US is not close to being overwhelmed. Why?" The areas that have the disease have locked down. One of the things you may see in the coming weeks is the areas that didn't lock down start to blow up. "How long does this take?" I'd say around 8 weeks I'd estimate for the UK and most European countries (as I've said a number of times). That's based on the current trend lines for getting disease cases into the mid to low 10's range, and for track and trace based on the timelines for standing up contingency operations for Brexit supply chain disruption and customs advice/turnback sites I've spent the last year working on. Assuming that work on that has been progressing in parallel with building test capacity over the last two months. Note however, a viable track and trace won't be able to handle a situation with hundreds of new cases a day, so you need both the capability in place, scale it up to meet the number of cases you can get down to. "Anyone originally infected 8 weeks ago has either died or long since recovered." Yet alas, have infected more people. R_0 is around 0.5-0.8 in most Eurpoean countries, which means that the number of current cases is halving on a c. 4 week period. "People in this state, and others, have been ignoring the stay at home order for weeks. Cases have not spiked. Why?" I've no idea which state "this" state is, but you can see a range of states where disease is now spiking. "What will happen in the next month that has not already happened? Only fear is keeping the shutdown in place." For the US, god knows. You guys are fucked now. For Europe, cases down to about the mid to low 10s, and development and implementation of measures to reduce R_0 in particular sectors that haven't already done so in the way e.g. supermarkets have put in place cubicle walls for till operators, queues for entry, one way systems etc. to reduce potential for infecting each other. "This is already happening. We need food, medecine, equipment, etc... " Yes, but by lifting lock down you are going to be greatly increasing the risks of those key workers already at work, and exposing a much wider tranche of people to that risk. "What % would you put the chance of the world economies collaborating? 1% 0.1% About the same chance of you dying of COVID-19?" Yeah, but in part that is due to playing to this weird fatalism that you are pushing. I'm not going to take the policy option off the table - it's what they *should* be doing. "12 months ago there was close to 0 cases." I'm not sure how that's relevant? I said within 12 months, we could end up back where we started going into lockdown. "Irrelevant for me since I have already been exposed to CV" You've tested positive and sure it wasn't a false positive? "I would give the vaccine to those at high risk." If you were a high risk individual, but had the option of isolating rather than going to work, would you take it? Unless we are suddenly going fascist, you don't get to "give it" to people, they have to chose it. I can think of nothing more catastrophic (especially with the anti-vaxer movement going) to innoculate all the grannies with an improperly tested vaccine that turns out to have side effects or lead to them dying anyway - just so we could rush everyone back to work.
Pillz Member	Tue May 05 15:52:36 He's so afraid of everything, how's Seb live?
Seb Member	Tue May 05 16:01:23 Pillz: How much GDP per head do you think another four months of lock down is worth? Your life must not be worth very much to you to be willing to role a dice, even with the odds at 0.05%. And presumably you have elderly relatives you care about who are at risk too? How much do you value your grandparents or parents life? The risk is far greater than terrorism.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 16:30:59 Its not about GDP dumbseb, its about time. The length of lockdown one is willing to consider is approximately equal to the odds of death or debilitating injury times life expectency. Now its not quite a 1:1 ratio because my lockdown time is still worth 80 to 90 percent of my normal time... but a single poor person stuck in a tiny apartment in a shithole city like nyc or london, unable to work at all, would have a very different value of their lockdown time than me.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue May 05 16:35:12 I have lost count of which week of working from home this is, but I have found new routines and habits now. I ain't going back to the filthy office with the infested water and coffee machine, people and their filthy fingers and coughing. Nope, working in a robe is the new life.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 16:47:59 Sam: Polls show support for lockdown is still 70% here, and the demands for lifting lock down are all coming from the normal business lobbying channels. There isn't really much basis for this idea there is a popular resistance to lockdown at this stage, and I think people would likely be more willing to tolerate another 8 weeks if there was a clearly articulated plan that would guarantee that it would be lifted, remain lifted, and we would get back to a smooth trajectory. From both a social and an economic perspective, it is really important that we can get a firm grip on the situation that commands confidence. If you end up having to u turn, or have the prospect of doing so, you will lose public and business confidence. But like I say, the US is pretty obviously fucked now - with some states spiking and some states dropping. Without coordination at a national level, it will now circulate indefinitely.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 16:49:46 Nim: If schools could just open.... I do miss the office a bit, I've had about four hours now of video cons on an issue that could have been solved in half an hour if we were all around a whiteboard.
sam adams Member	Tue May 05 16:57:33 "Polls show support for lockdown is still 70% here" And will decrease as this wears on. Especially as confidence in the government/medical industry to test properly and develop vacines fades.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 17:09:35 Sam: It's the other way around: as confidence in testing and vaccine fades, the more support for lockdown increases, and the harder to withdraw financial support will be without incurring bigger political opprobrium. However, testing capacity is increasing, and getting ahead of this is pretty viable.
Sam Adams Member	Tue May 05 17:13:25 If people dont see a quick(months) solution, the healthy population with a 1 in a 1000 death chance will increasingly be willing to expose themselves.
Pillz Member	Tue May 05 17:16:40 Thank you for reinforcing what I said about you Seb. Yes, I'm willing to live a normal life and ignore a 0.005% chance that Corona will kill me. As for senior relatives - people die. We can not and should not be putting our nations into months or years of economic hardship to save a few people already at the end of their lives. They simply do not matter. Nor would you or I. It would take orders of magnitudes more deaths for me to blink here - and a staggering number for me to say maybe it's gone too far. As it stands all data suggests you're wrong about the seriousness of the outbreak - but you repeatedly cling on to 'we don't know'-type answers to justify your terrified panic and the prospect of 0.005% of people dying.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 17:34:39 Pillz: The best stats from the countries with most comprehensive testing suggest it is more like 100 times riskier than you are presenting: 0.5% mortality rate for adults under 60. You only get these very low rates if you start using national populations as the denominator which is dodgy as fuck. There is little need for this to mean years of economic hardship: indeed sensible policies to sustain demand and employment followed by swift rebound can be achieved, but is dependent on strong confidence, not a piece meal drip of individuals heading back to work. Few people are going to be happy to risk their elderly relatives even if you are willing to throw them under the bus, which means they will behave cautiously. Releasing lockdown with no clear plan in place is far more likely to disrupt a swift rebound. I seriously doubt that you would be lucky enough that over a five year period the benefit of opening up 8 months earlier would offset the lack of confidence.
Seb Member	Tue May 05 17:36:55 Sam: Yes, I agree, you have maybe an 8 week window. Once deaths drop below 50 a day, people will assume there is no risk any more and it will be very hard to maintain lockdown under those conditions, even if failure to do so would inevitably lead to another massive spike in three to four weeks times. But this should be entirely feasible for countries that have got this under control.
Habebe Member	Tue May 05 18:12:53 Listen I dont think this rocket science, those who can work at home should indefinitely do so. Those who cant, we take measures to mitigate the virus to a level that will not over burden our HC system. For high risk individuals we should continue our delivery options and distancing and fill in the gaps to meet the needs of such people like in retirement communities and such. I wish Trump would have a universal national testing system, other than that id say he did pretty well.
jergul large member	Tue May 05 18:19:18 It seems a bit early for the US to open up. Spain had 27% dead to 73% recovered 32 days ago. Which is what the US has today. The death % fell to 14% over the course of the month. Which is typical.
Habebe Member	Tue May 05 18:40:40 Jergul, Well the entire nation? Mabey not but certainly some areas should start. First and foremost we should protect vulnerables. Then go from there.
Paramount Member	Wed May 06 01:07:36 US infection rate rising outside New York as states open up Take the New York metropolitan area’s progress against the coronavirus out of the equation and the numbers show the rest of the U.S. is moving in the wrong direction, with the known infection rate rising even as states move to lift their lockdowns, an Associated Press analysis found Tuesday. New confirmed infections per day in the U.S. exceed 20,000, and deaths per day are well over 1,000, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University. And public health officials warn that the failure to flatten the curve and drive down the infection rate in places could lead to many more deaths — perhaps tens of thousands — as people are allowed to venture out and businesses reopen. “Make no mistakes: This virus is still circulating in our community, perhaps even more now than in previous weeks” said Linda Ochs, director of the Health Department in Shawnee County, Kansas. http://apnews.com/4450a59eb5276bc5cecc61613e797018
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed May 06 01:23:08 The only reasonable response say in januari februari was to shut down and shut down hard for 2-4 weeks. Assess the situation and then figure out what to do. But most countries opted for the denial and disbelief strategy while it spread. We could have been done by now and have this under control. There is a false dichotomy that either we crash the economy or we let the old people die swamping the hospitals.
Seb Member	Wed May 06 02:28:59 Nim: Yup. Earlier you lock down, the quicker you can come out. And the dichotomy is rubbish. You can lockdown and preserve the economy structurally for a quick rebound, whereas trying to protect the economy without addressing the disease will lead to a crap economy and lots of deaths.
Daemon Member	Wed May 06 04:40:59 Sweden rejects German help: http://today.rtl.lu/news/world/a/1512860.html German zombie hunters stopped at Swedish border with car full of weapons RTL|Update: 06.05.2020 The couple belonged to a group called "Zombie Response Team" and were found to have 16 illegal weapons in their possession upon crossing the border. This rather curious incident took place on 25 March but has only now been publicised in local media. Two images released by the Swedish customs agency show that the couple - a man and a woman - arrived into the country in a Hummer vehicle which bore a "Zombie Response Team" logo as well as the rather ominous warning that "infected people will be shot." Also in their possession of illegal weapons. Reporting varies slightly as to exactly how many weapons were seized, from 16 to "over 20." What has been confirmed is that their arsenal included several crossbows, a taser or some other form of electric shock weapon, several firearms designed to fire teargas canisters (and several canisters thereof), a knuckle iron, and at least one truncheon. The local prosecutor noted that they hadn't chosen the most inconspicuous of vehicles for smuggling weaponry, while the couple's defence attorney states that the couple had not known that the weapons could not be legally brought into the country. They were reportedly on their way to a summer house which they had recently purchased in the south-easterly Blekinge region of the country. Some Swedish media have speculated that the couple are part of a role-playing association as a means of explaining the 'Zombie Response Team', but there has as yet been no confirmation as to whether this is the case.
Paramount Member	Wed May 06 07:22:04 ” Some Swedish media have speculated that the couple are part of a role-playing association as a means of explaining the 'Zombie Response Team', but there has as yet been no confirmation as to whether this is the case” Maybe they are Anti Fascist Action and came to Sweden to kidnap someone into the basement of the summerhouse they have purchased. AFA Stockholm recently wrote graffiti on the house belonging to a politician, calling on her to resign. She hasn’t resigned yet. So now maybe AFA called in the Zombie Response Team? I don’t know. I’m just speculating.
Dakyron Member	Wed May 06 11:51:22 Seb - Most of what you said was nonsense, but... "I haven't proposed we should. I think a reasonable case for getting deaths down below the 100s per day for most countries is about four weeks. We ought to be well on the way to building track and trace capability. Say 8 more weeks max. The US is fucked because your policy is all over the place, but the rest of the world should just slap a travel ban on the US (The US, having prevaricated, would now have to be locked down for a much longer period of time to get to that state, while the rest of the world is up and running which is politically untenable given the inability of your leadership to accept it fucked up and impose a nationwide u turn, and cannot undertake the monetary and fiscal policy needed to support it due to it being contrary to the dogma of the ruling party, even if it is entirely economically manageable - so yes, you guys are fucked but there is no way we should let you be our tyhpoid mary for phase 2) " This is a great example. In my state, Arizona, we have had about 350 total CV deaths. This despite not issuing a shutdown until mid-March. Hospitals here are empty. Its 105 fucking degrees outside(F). My redneck neighbors have been running around doing whatever they want for weeks now. They are still alive. Why are we still in lockdown? I get not allowing large gatherings like a football game or concert, but to ban people from going to a restaurant or to a retail store... what is the point? The virus has been rather conclusively proven to only severely affect a small portion of the population. Education about the risk, enhanced protections for vulnerable populations, and a ban on large gatherings(over 100 people) seems reasonable. Full on economic lockdown seems overkill and borderline irresponsible at this point. As for testing positive, my wife and child both exhibited CV like symptoms back in early March, before testing was available here. So, I'm pretty sure we have already been exposed. I have not had an anti-body test, but should it ever be widely publicly available, I would probably get one just to see.
Dakyron Member	Wed May 06 11:53:42 "And the dichotomy is rubbish. You can lockdown and preserve the economy structurally for a quick rebound, whereas trying to protect the economy without addressing the disease will lead to a crap economy and lots of deaths." If you live a shithole where the main economic activity comes from government employment and finance. If you live in an area that relies heavily on tourism and the service industry you are truly fucked right now. They are talking 30% budget reductions for state and local budgets here. That is worse than during the recession.
Seb Member	Wed May 06 13:37:07 "This despite not issuing a shutdown until mid-March" You didn't get a big cluster there, and Arizona has thus got to where other places need to get. But if the whole US left lockdown, pretty sure you'd get a nice cluster there eventually from infected people from New York or wherever. Coordination doesn't mean uniformity btw. "The virus has been rather conclusively proven to only severely affect a small portion of the population." If there's conclusive proof, why does the median profession overwhelmingly disagree? "So, I'm pretty sure we have already been exposed." Or you just had a cold. "If you live a shithole where the main economic activity comes from government employment and finance." Neither of those is true of the UK, tourism is a big thing for London, and the biggest is er... services. But if you have a decent furlough system you can suspend those sectors, centralise and mutualise the costs and kick it off into govt debt to pay off like ww2 debt over half a century. What you are describing is a consequence of your federal govt having limited imagination when it comes to fiscal and monetary policy.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed May 06 13:50:13 Dakyron Not if you go early quick and make it swift. Imagine you have thia cavity in your tooth, you can either go fix now for a sum of money or wait until your tooth is infected and endure agony and an order magnitude larger sum of money to fill your root canal or get a prosthetic. It is a principle you find every where in the medical field, it applies on the population level as well.
jergul large member	Wed May 06 19:57:17 http://www.healthdata.org/
Paramount Member	Thu May 07 01:45:37 http://www...than-pearl-harbor-9-11-attacks ” President Trump said Wednesday the coronavirus “attack” is “worse” than the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks. “We went through the worst attack we've ever had in our country. This is really the worst attack we've ever had. This is worse than Pearl Harbor. This is worse than the World Trade Center,” Trump said while signing a proclamation in the Oval Office in honor of National Nurses Day. “There's never been an attack like this. And it never should have happened,” Trump continued. “It could've been stopped at the source, it should've been stopped at the source. It should've been stopped in China.” It could have been stopped, or slowed down VERY GREATLY if Trump had reacted earlier and banned travel in January already. I was one of the first who asked: ”Why won’t we ban travel?” I asked the question in late January early February. I knew what needed to be done. Trump must have known too but he chose to ignore it or he didn’t know what to do. Or maybe he knew but he didn’t know. Yes it is possible. ” The Trump administration was in talks Tuesday to wind down the coronavirus task force, but Trump said Wednesday he would keep the task force and add a few members to it after learning how respected the group was. “I had no idea how popular the task force was when I started talking about winding it down,” the president said, adding that he got calls from “very important people” suggesting he keep the force. "I knew it myself, I didn't know whether or not it was appreciated by the public, but it is appreciated by the public." ^ lol
jergul large member	Thu May 07 03:09:50 Hmm, he forgot to subprime lending crisis attack on America that later spread to the world. To speak of something that really should have stopped at the source.
Seb Member	Thu May 07 04:13:57 Well apparently the UK govt is going to ease lockdown, despite not having test as trace up and running. I think that would settle the argument here on whether it's a good idea.
smart dude Member	Thu May 07 04:25:51 Nightmare scenario (and my official prediction): COVID-19 more or less disappears this summer. Trump (who actually did nothing) will claim victory over the pandemic. All the morons in the country will believe him and re-elect him in November. Then, literally five minutes after his re-election, a second wave will break out and all hell breaks loose. And now, instead of being close to an election where we can remove Sir Bonespurs, we are stuck with him for 4 entire goddamn years. Bank on it.
jergul large member	Thu May 07 04:27:42 Seb Test and trace is simply a way of pressing up economic activity while keeping R below 1. You can have more economic activity if you can track, trace and isolate quickly. UK is currently at 0.7, right? It can open up a little bit. Not much. The ceiling is 3 without measures. So 10% less social distancing. Not more.
jergul large member	Thu May 07 04:32:50 SD That is not much of a nightmare scenario. Covid-19 hides during the summer. Rears its head in October in 1000nds of hotspots. Combines with seasonal flu. A vaccine is rushed out, turns out it adversely impacts on overall mortality. Elections are put off from November. Some half-assed election is held on the eve of the 24th of January giving Trump what he thinks is a mandate for another 4 years. Immigration limitations continue. Net population decline in the US for 2020 - 2.5 million people. Population growth is the main driver of US gdp growth, so would on its own cause a recession.
smart dude Member	Thu May 07 04:36:19 Not really different from my scenario. Whether he is reelected in November or wins via some sham election in January, either way the result is the same: He is and will be president until January 2025.
jergul large member	Thu May 07 04:41:41 Strike that on election. The 32 States where the GOP controls the state legislatures instruct their electoral college delegates to elect Trump and Pence. Democratic legislatures do not send delegates to the electoral college. The GOP wins the electoral college just before the constituional deadline in January. Trump wins. Turds gleefully point out that the US is a republic, not a democracy (the rest of us agree that that US is a republic and no longer a democracy). There is your nightmare. Though I am sure we could make it worse.
Pillz Member	Thu May 07 08:56:45 We can't develop a vaccine. Coronaviruses are not really the greatest example of success in that field. It'll spread. The 2nd wave in the fall won't be as bad - more people in the health care industry will have immunity (it temporary) and in the general population too, for what little that'll matter. What will happen is nursing homes and seniors residences will be isolated and appropriate equipment and staff made available to them. Expect them to begin using purpose built temporary or rented facilities to house corona patients in the beginning, to maintain a normal functioning of the main health care system - albeit probably without elective and non emergency procedures and with less staff as resources are diverted. Trump is reelected, the left ignores the 2nd wave and takes the fall to protest. Winter will be a wild card! Jergul's prediction is less likely but way more fun.
jergul large member	Thu May 07 09:28:16 Pillz It was not a prediction. It was a worst case scenario. Lazy, I am sure we could make it worse.
	show deleted posts