California state university system cancels fall classes on campus

[Hans Sprungfeld]

EXACTLY....but it's not me that's moving the goalpost. It's you. Seems like the new goal is zero covid before reopen. That's not realistic unless you want a total shutdown for another year.

The goal was to flatten the curve...and it has been flattened. NYC sent the hospital ship away and the Javits center hospital is closing because it's not needed. Didn't NYC ship out ventilators because they weren't needed? Aren't we now sending ventilators to other countries because we don't need them?

My nephew is an oncologist in NJ and he had to help out in the hospital for a few weeks...when they were 95% Covid cases. He's now back to his regular practice because there are more NON-Covid patients in the hospital than covid, and they have excess ICU capacity.

That's a favorable trending, and a helpful anecdotal reporting.

I've yet to see, hear, read, or encounter someone credibly mounting a strong argument for "zero Covid." Is that really a thing, or simply a source of upset borne of impatience, frustration, and/or unsupported speculation. Please direct me to where you are seeing or hearing this, so that I can feel better informed.

 

[superjohn]

The one thing I don't understand is how many people are just willing to accept that people will have to make a choice between working to afford rent and putting themselves at risk of sickness/death. Obviously we're not going to shut down and stay socially isolated forever and anyone claiming that is being disingenuous. But that we're 2 months in and already at the point of having to open up too early is a bad sign

California and Illinois are hinting at 5-6 month shutdowns, it keeps getting longer. I have friends who are losing everything they've worked for.

 

[UCfor3]

I'm assuming that those protesting are NOT those who are vulnerable to dying from the virus. If you're over the age of 55 and/or have medical issues, and you're out protesting without a mask, well I don't what to say to those people. But the reality is those who are under 55 without medical issues are extremely, extremely unlikely to die of this. A large number won't even be symptomatic. That's no excuse to go out acting like a reckless fool, but for the vast majority of the population the risk of death is very low. It's those people who are becoming the most restless.

They might be unlikely to die from it but they may still give it to countless people who are far more likely to die from it. Their cavalier attitude toward other people is irresponsible. People with health issues can't stay home forever either. They need to provide for their families too. Sadly we can't count on some of these people to do their part to keep others safe. Also, just because you don't die doesn't mean you are forever aok. There have been several reports of people potentially having lasting effects or lung damage in some people. So little is known about this virus in the long term because it is novel.

 

[JimHurley]

That's a favorable trending, and a helpful anecdotal reporting.

I've yet to see, hear, read, or encounter someone credibly mounting a strong argument for "zero Covid." Is that really a thing, or simply a source of upset borne of impatience, frustration, and/or unsupported speculation. Please direct me to where you are seeing or hearing this, so that I can feel better informed.

Illinois governor has said they need to eradicate the virus before reopening. California governor has implied they will need a vaccine.

 

[NJHusky]

That's a favorable trending, and a helpful anecdotal reporting.

What is favorable anecdotal reporting...that we have an oversupply of hospital space? It's not anecdotal...its fact...how much did Chicago spend on UNUSED hospital space? providing additional factual info is NOT an anecdote

 

[ctchamps]

Very fair. I'd argue the virus will never get to zero, there may never be herd immunity, and a vaccination might not even be effective. If that's the case, we just gonna stay locked down forever? I know the flu comparison is not a good one but we have a vaccine for that, it spikes every year, and people die every year. That's sadly the way life is sometimes. That doesn't mean the whole country needs to be on house arrest. The chances of a healthy individual under 55 dying from this virus is astonishingly low. It will happen, yes, but extremely unlikely. For those who aren't vulnerable, it's time to use some common sense and begin a slow return to normalcy.

Again dying is only a part of the issue. A significant number of people under 55 and older than 35 were hospitalized and required intensive care.

So we just don't debate between economics and medical I'm going to throw in some information that doesn't alter the economic and medical predicament we currently are under but I haven't noticed mentioned elsewhere.

Medical:

Remdesivir is just the start for medical treatment of the virus. EIDD 2801 is another nucleoside analog that is showing potential and can be made in a pill form allowing for a much less expensive and quicker roll out for treatment. I expect over the next six months to a year an announcement that a medical treatment to alleviate the disease to be forthcoming. And a vaccination probably won't be far behind.

Promising Treatment

There are several anti inflammatory studies being done to inhibit or decrease the severe cascading response to the infection.

Economic:

For all the debate in this forum, the reporting in the news or the statements made by politicians the most salient point is how will Americans react to day to day situations. This article shows that people were reacting similarly in spite of the rhetoric throughout America.

Government Orders Alone Didn’t Close the Economy. They Probably Can’t Reopen It.

This article shows that the lowest paid workers in the USA actually benefit until July 31st while the country is in lockdown.

It pays to stay unemployed. That might be a good thing

 

[phillionaire]

No, my friend. The majority of those protesting are the ones who are not able to afford rent, put food on the table, or provide for their families. Those of us fortunate enough to still be working or to work from home (myself luckily) should be more open minded. A lot of people who still have jobs would feel differently if they were unable to provide for themselves or their families because their states want to stayed locked down until a vaccine comes along, all for a virus that effects mostly the elderly. We can still PROTECT the elderly and vulnerable while slowly getting people back to work. It's not a one variable issue.

I can say with pretty near certainty that the GI Joe's protesting in Michigan with their multiple thousand dollar AR-15s and other rifles are not working class and are most likely either part of the petite bourgeoisie or, more likely, are paid by nefarious forces

 

[JimHurley]

They might be unlikely to die from it but they may still give it to countless people who are far more likely to die from it. Their cavalier attitude toward other people is irresponsible. People with health issues can't stay home forever either. They need to provide for their families too. Sadly we can't count on some of these people to do their part to keep others safe. Also, just because you don't die doesn't mean you are forever aok. There have been several reports of people potentially having lasting effects or lung damage in some people. So little is known about this virus in the long term because it is novel.

Yup, you make a lot of good points. That is why I favor continued self-isolation for the vulnerable. As I said in my last post, I'm extremely unlikely to die from it being in my 20s but the fact that I live with my grandparents who are approaching 80 keeps me responsible. The thing is cases will likely never hit zero, the vaccine may not be effective, and there will never be enough testing available to test everyone regularly. I think people need to consider those facts when planning a course of action.

 

[UCTitleTown]

Let's not underestimate the toll that home schooling is having on the mental health of kids. Long-term isolation can have very detrimental effects. My kid is climbing the walls and desperate to go back to school. Established students being isolated and not socializing in a classroom environment for 6 months is going to have some real long-term negative impact. I see a lot of prescriptions being written in the future.

 

[ctchamps]

EXACTLY....but it's not me that's moving the goalpost. It's you. Seems like the new goal is zero covid before reopen. That's not realistic unless you want a total shutdown for another year.

The goal was to flatten the curve...and it has been flattened. NYC sent the hospital ship away and the Javits center hospital is closing because it's not needed. Didn't NYC ship out ventilators because they weren't needed? Aren't we now sending ventilators to other countries because we don't need them?

My nephew is an oncologist in NJ and he had to help out in the hospital for a few weeks...when they were 95% Covid cases. He's now back to his regular practice because there are more NON-Covid patients in the hospital than covid, and they have excess ICU capacity.

Let's be clear. I'm advocating adequate testing and contact tracing so that the economy can open up properly. Do that and you can avoid additional spikes with attendant fears in the population and economic collapse. The goal was to flatten the curve and not allow it to spike again. Do you honestly believe we've achieved that goal?

 

[superjohn]

Again dying is only a part of the issue. A significant number of people under 55 and older than 35 were hospitalized and required intensive care.

So we just don't debate between economics and medical I'm going to throw in some information that doesn't alter the economic and medical predicament we currently are under but I haven't noticed mentioned elsewhere.

Medical:

Remdesivir is just the start for medical treatment of the virus. EIDD 2801 is another nucleoside analog that is showing potential and can be made in a pill form allowing for a much less expensive and quicker roll out for treatment. I expect over the next six months to a year an announcement that a medical treatment to alleviate the disease to be forthcoming. And a vaccination probably won't be far behind.

Promising Treatment

There are several anti inflammatory studies being done to inhibit or decrease the severe cascading response to the infection.

Economic:

For all the debate in this forum, the reporting in the news or the statements made by politicians the most salient point is how will Americans react to day to day situations. This article shows that people were reacting similarly in spite of the rhetoric throughout America.

Government Orders Alone Didn’t Close the Economy. They Probably Can’t Reopen It.

This article shows that the lowest paid workers in the USA actually benefit until July 31st while the country is in lockdown.

It pays to stay unemployed. That might be a good thing

It's not the economics and the medical. The economics is the medical. Saw a study a week ot so ago that 70,000 cancer diagnoses in the US will be missed because of the lockdown, people won't be treated for heart problems like they should. These numbers will only go up with neverneding lockdowns in places like Chicago and LA...

Suicides are up, domestic violence up, physical and sexual abuse of kids up, alcohol and drug abuse up. Kids will be paying the biggest price and the ramifications will be longterm. It's quite a burden to put on the future of the country and the group that accounts for a miniscule amount of Covid deaths.

 

[JimHurley]

Again dying is only a part of the issue. A significant number of people under 55 and older than 35 were hospitalized and required intensive care.

So we just don't debate between economics and medical I'm going to throw in some information that doesn't alter the economic and medical predicament we currently are under but I haven't noticed mentioned elsewhere.

Medical:

Remdesivir is just the start for medical treatment of the virus. EIDD 2801 is another nucleoside analog that is showing potential and can be made in a pill form allowing for a much less expensive and quicker roll out for treatment. I expect over the next six months to a year an announcement that a medical treatment to alleviate the disease to be forthcoming. And a vaccination probably won't be far behind.

Promising Treatment

There are several anti inflammatory studies being done to inhibit or decrease the severe cascading response to the infection.

Economic:

For all the debate in this forum, the reporting in the news or the statements made by politicians the most salient point is how will Americans react to day to day situations. This article shows that people were reacting similarly in spite of the rhetoric throughout America.

Government Orders Alone Didn’t Close the Economy. They Probably Can’t Reopen It.

This article shows that the lowest paid workers in the USA actually benefit until July 31st while the country is in lockdown.

It pays to stay unemployed. That might be a good thing

Thanks for this info. There is a "significant" number of people over 55 and under 35 requiring intensive care, but the number per 100,000 residents is very low. I'd say there's a significant number of coronavirus cases in this country, but when you look at it with perspective, only about 0.4% of the total US population has tested positive. It's significant, but it's certainly not high when looking at it from that angle.

 

[JimHurley]

Let's not underestimate the toll that home schooling is having on the mental health of kids. Long-term isolation can have very detrimental effects. My kid is climbing the walls and desperate to go back to school. Established students being isolated and not socializing in a classroom environment for 6 months is going to have some real long-term negative impact. I see a lot of prescriptions being written in the future.

This is also scary. Especially for those not as fortunate to have a computer and/or internet access. Less privileged kids are essentially missing a vital period in their education.

 

[ctchamps]

Yup, you make a lot of good points. That is why I favor continued self-isolation for the vulnerable. As I said in my last post, I'm extremely unlikely to die from it being in my 20s but the fact that I live with my grandparents who are approaching 80 keeps me responsible. The thing is cases will likely never hit zero, the vaccine may not be effective, and there will never be enough testing available to test everyone regularly. I think people need to consider those facts when planning a course of action.

I know it's China and I'm skeptical about what they put out almost as much as the what I hear from dot, dot dot. Whuhon Province just had eleven new cases. China is in the process of testing all eleven million of it's residents. When do you think we'll be able to come close to that type of testing. Of course they have their citizens identified and can follow pretty much every one of them. I would never advocate that for this country. The salient point is they have the testing capacity. We suck to say the least.

 

[navery12]

You're right but the reality is that the vast majority are not at risk of sickness/death. Those who are should not have to choose, correct. The virus has between a 0.4-0.9% death rate, with the average age of death being higher than the average life expectancy. That population should be protected at all costs. But for those under 50, the virus has a less than 0.1% death rate. And that is what is frustrating people. The fact that a virus effecting mainly the elderly, who are already prone to illness, is shutting down the country. Now for me, my grandparents live with me so I am not going anywhere other than the grocery store. I know my actions could take their lives, and I'm taking as much caution as possible to avoid that. But not everyone is in my position...

But right now we don't know what the long term effects are and that's what scares me. I'm 26 so I'm not at risk of dying in 3 weeks if I get it. But what I don't know is what's going to happen 5-10 years from now if I get it and there's long term damage

It's easy to say that only the high risk people stay home and we open back up, and that's what's going to happen. I'm just not certain the short term risk population is the same as the long term.

And to be clear, I'm not saying shut down the world until we get a vaccine but having some (not all) schooling online or a year of no sports isn't crazy to me

 

[UCfor3]

Yup, you make a lot of good points. That is why I favor continued self-isolation for the vulnerable. As I said in my last post, I'm extremely unlikely to die from it being in my 20s but the fact that I live with my grandparents who are approaching 80 keeps me responsible. The thing is cases will likely never hit zero, the vaccine may not be effective, and there will never be enough testing available to test everyone regularly. I think people need to consider those facts when planning a course of action.

Masks supposedly help diminish the spread of people that have the virus. Masks don't necessarily protect the people that wear them and don't have the virus. So here is the scenario...I have health issues and are vulnerable. My wife is less vulnerable than me but still has some issues and is in her early 50's. I can shelter in place but she is made to return to work next week. She catches covid from some wingnut that refuses to wear a mask, brings it home to me, and I die..or worse she dies. We did everything we were supposed to and hypothetically it was still not enough. I could shelter in place but my wife could still bring it home. I mean they can't even keep it out of the west wing.

 

[NJHusky]

I can say with pretty near certainty that the GI Joe's protesting in Michigan with their multiple thousand dollar AR-15s and other rifles are not working class and are most likely either part of the petite bourgeoisie or, more likely, are paid by nefarious forces

can you provide some factual basis for this?

 

[NJHusky]

Let's be clear. I'm advocating adequate testing and contact tracing so that the economy can open up properly. Do that and you can avoid additional spikes with attendant fears in the population and economic collapse. The goal was to flatten the curve and not allow it to spike again. Do you honestly believe we've achieved that goal?

Yes, I do believe it has been flattened!

 

[JimHurley]

I know it's China and I'm skeptical about what they put out almost as much as the what I hear from dot, dot dot. Whuhon Province just had eleven new cases. China is in the process of testing all eleven million of it's residents. When do you think we'll be able to come close to that type of testing. Of course they have their citizens identified and can follow pretty much every one of them. I would never advocate that for this country. The salient point is they have the testing capacity. We suck to say the least.

OK, 11 million is much different than 330 million. We just can't do that. It's not in the realm of possibility. 330 million tests? And what good is a one time test for everyone? You need way more than that. So, we're talking in the billions as far as number of tests. Again, just not possible. Testing is overrated if you cannot test every resident of your country regularly, which we will never ever be able to do.

But right now we don't know what the long term effects are and that's what scares me. I'm 26 so I'm not at risk of dying in 3 weeks if I get it. But what I don't know is what's going to happen 5-10 years from now if I get it and there's long term damage

It's easy to say that only the high risk people stay home and we open back up, and that's what's going to happen. I'm just not certain the short term risk population is the same as the long term.

And to be clear, I'm not saying shut down the world until we get a vaccine but having some (not all) schooling online or a year of no sports isn't crazy to me

Right, nobody knows. That's the bottom line. I think the media has injected lots of unnecessary fear into this country. Because again, nobody knows. Experts can give you their opinions of their areas of expertise but it's an assumption at best. Anybody speaking factually regarding the future of this virus is lying.

Masks supposedly help diminish the spread of people that have the virus. Masks don't necessarily protect the people that wear them and don't have the virus. So here is the scenario...I have health issues and are vulnerable. My wife is less vulnerable than me but still has some issues and is in her early 50's. I can shelter in place but she is made to return to work next week. She catches covid from some wingnut that refuses to wear a mask, brings it home to me, and I die..or worse she dies. We did everything we were supposed to and hypothetically it was still not enough. I could shelter in place but my wife could still bring it home. I mean they can't even keep it out of the west wing.

That's a very realistic scenario. If I was an employer I'd require my employees to wear a mask so the scenario you described is as least likely as possible to happen. Other than that, I'm not as sure. That's where it gets tricky. To the extremes, your wife could not go back to work but then you wouldn't be able to afford a living. She could also wait for cases to go down to near zero, but there's a good chance that may never happen.

My cousin is a nurse who lives with her mom, who is 70. It's a real concern. My cousin works on a floor that has had patients with the virus. So it's similar to what you described. My cousin wears a mask around the house. It's unfortunate, but a part of life right now.

 

[UCfor3]

Yes, I do believe it has been flattened!

That depends on where you live right now. It is on the rise in many states. Many which are open now. We have 4% of the worlds population and 28% of the worlds deaths from Covid. Let those numbers sink in for a second. We are shockingly bad at this. Any confidence that we have this under control seems like wishful thinking. I love the term "open up smartly." What has given anyone the confidence that we can do any of this smartly at this point? You can't even open a park for a weekend without it looking like Mardi Gras.

 

[ctchamps]

Thanks for this info. There is a "significant" number of people over 55 and under 35 requiring intensive care, but the number per 100,000 residents is very low. I'd say there's a significant number of coronavirus cases in this country, but when you look at it with perspective, only about 0.4% of the total US population has tested positive. It's significant, but it's certainly not high when looking at it from that angle.

Agree about the numbers. But even those low percentage numbers will overwhelm the medical system. That's what happen in Lombardy Italy and NYC and several places in Spain. The reason other places in the USA did not go through the crisis that NYC suffered is that people observed what was happening there and were scared enough by that situation to isolate. The degree of isolation is reducing. Some people have no choice financially. But many who have a choice lack discipline and will use finances as an excuse.

The important thing is not arguing amongst ourselves about what is the best choice. There is none. We get any additional spikes and the economy could be worse off than if we prolonged stay at home mandates. We'll find out soon enough. My opinion is that we will absolutely have spikes and most likely they will be worse than the first spike. How many and when is less predictable, but I'm not betting this summer will give us a respite. The biggest unknown is how will the average person react to those spikes.

When things were happening in Lombard Italy I correctly called in this forum that the USA was going to be in trouble. I got the expected pushback that we are not Lombard Italy. It took NYC for Americans to take things seriously. Of course the best learning is when we have situations happening to ourselves. So I expect a significant number of people to rationalize the worse case situation is confined to NYC because that city is different than Podunk USA. That's irrational because the virus doesn't recognize geography. Interestingly the reactions were similar after 911.

I'm more into predictions than pizzing back and forth over and over again the same arguments. That is why I've stayed out of most of these debates.

I've been wrong about one up to this point. Thought Florida would have considerable more problems than they have had. Part of my "incorrect prediction" was because most of the mayors took control of their cities ahead of the governor. Part is due to the probability the governor is fudging the numbers considerably more than the average politician on both sides of the spectrum. Nonetheless I'm happy to be wrong on this.

I'm still waiting on my hypothesis of hydroxychloroquine. I'll be happy to be wrong on that one as well.

 

[Peacefrog]

I'm actually appreciating some of the reasoned discussion here. And on The Boneyard of all places. No matter where I stand on an issue, hearing arguments from both sides helps me crystallize my own thoughts. I have family members that work in healthcare who have witnessed and continue to witness the horrors: suffering, lack of testing, lack of PPE, death, etc... I also have a good friend with all his money invested in his business that was thriving before the virus but is non-essential and currently shutdown. If he can't reopen fairly soon he will be ruined and starting over financially in his late 40's. Lots of people arguing with utter certainty on both sides. Perhaps there is no "right" answer; they are all bad to some extent. We are left to try and figure out which course of action causes the least devastation.

 

[UCfor3]

OK, 11 million is much different than 330 million. We just can't do that. It's not in the realm of possibility. 330 million tests? And what good is a one time test for everyone? You need way more than that. So, we're talking in the billions as far as number of tests. Again, just not possible. Testing is overrated if you cannot test every resident of your country regularly, which we will never ever be able to do.



Right, nobody knows. That's the bottom line. I think the media has injected lots of unnecessary fear into this country. Because again, nobody knows. Experts can give you their opinions of their areas of expertise but it's an assumption at best. Anybody speaking factually regarding the future of this virus is lying.



That's a very realistic scenario. If I was an employer I'd require my employees to wear a mask so the scenario you described is as least likely as possible to happen. Other than that, I'm not as sure. That's where it gets tricky. To the extremes, your wife could not go back to work but then you wouldn't be able to afford a living. She could also wait for cases to go down to near zero, but there's a good chance that may never happen.

My cousin is a nurse who lives with her mom, who is 70. It's a real concern. My cousin works on a floor that has had patients with the virus. So it's similar to what you described. My cousin wears a mask around the house. It's unfortunate, but a part of life right now.

That scenario just happens to be my life. Some tough decisions coming up. Several people in her office have had Covid and lets just say they have not acted responsibly. Several others are in contact with covid positive people. It's tough relying on other people to be vigilant when lives are at stake. You can't control how other people act or think. Tough situation for so many people...

 

[ctchamps]

Yes, I do believe it has been flattened!

Do you believe you won't have additional spikes?

 

[JimHurley]

Agree about the numbers. But even those low percentage numbers will overwhelm the medical system. That's what happen in Lombardy Italy and NYC and several places in Spain. The reason other places in the USA did not go through the crisis that NYC suffered is that people observed what was happening there and were scared enough by that situation to isolate. The degree of isolation is reducing. Some people have no choice financially. But many who have a choice lack discipline and will use finances as an excuse.

The important thing is not arguing amongst ourselves about what is the best choice. There is none. We get any additional spikes and the economy could be worse off than if we prolonged stay at home mandates. We'll find out soon enough. My opinion is that we will absolutely have spikes and most likely they will be worse than the first spike. How many and when is less predictable, but I'm not betting this summer will give us a respite. The biggest unknown is how will the average person react to those spikes.

When things were happening in Lombard Italy I correctly called in this forum that the USA was going to be in trouble. I got the expected pushback that we are not Lombard Italy. It took NYC for Americans to take things seriously. Of course the best learning is when we have situations happening to ourselves. So I expect a significant number of people to rationalize the worse case situation is confined to NYC because that city is different than Podunk USA. That's irrational because the virus doesn't recognize geography. Interestingly the reactions were similar after 911.

I'm more into predictions than pizzing back and forth over and over again the same arguments. That is why I've stayed out of most of these debates.

I've been wrong about one up to this point. Thought Florida would have considerable more problems than they have had. Part of my "incorrect prediction" was because most of the mayors took control of their cities ahead of the governor. Part is due to the probability the governor is fudging the numbers considerably more than the average politician on both sides of the spectrum. Nonetheless I'm happy to be wrong on this.

I'm still waiting on my hypothesis of hydroxychloroquine. I'll be happy to be wrong on that one as well.

All good insight. The two sentences I bolded are the absolute truth. We can all share our thoughts on what is best, but it's all opinion and there truly is no "best" risk-free option.

My hypothesis is that the government will continue to slowly reopen, with the vulnerable and those living with the vulnerable being encouraged to practice extreme caution. There will likely be another spike, but it will be a result of those who absolutely have to go to work actually going to work.