COVID-19 (f/k/a "the Coronavirus")

[forgetful]

Unpopular opinion.

Looking at the numbers coming out of Europe, the US should proactively lock it all down.  Wait our two weeks, and take our medicine.  The longer we deny this, the more people become carelessly infected, and we will end up in a lockdown anyway.  Do it, get it over with, save some lives.

My question is, after the two weeks, then what? It's not going to be gone at that point. Fewer infections, possibly, but once people venture back out, it kicks back up again.

That is what the UK is modeling. That people won't stick with a lockdown form much more than 2-3 weeks. So they are waiting to start the lockdown until later where it will have a bigger effect.

Honestly, not sure what the best plan is.

[GooooMarquette]

My question is, after the two weeks, then what? It's not going to be gone at that point. Fewer infections, possibly, but once people venture back out, it kicks back up again.

That is what the UK is modeling. That people won't stick with a lockdown form much more than 2-3 weeks. So they are waiting to start the lockdown until later where it will have a bigger effect.

Honestly, not sure what the best plan is.

Even if it's 2 or 3 weeks, then a reprieve, then 2 or 3 weeks, etc...it phases the cases so medical professionals see cases in waves that wax and wane, as opposed to a continually increasing overflow.

[forgetful]

Even if it's 2 or 3 weeks, then a reprieve, then 2 or 3 weeks, etc...it phases the cases so medical professionals see cases in waves that wax and wane, as opposed to a continually increasing overflow.

I understand, but if the UK is right, and people won't follow subsequent 2-3 week isolations, then the best bet may be to wait.

Also, what happens when a wave of patients start hitting hospitals, and they start rationing care to prioritize icu beds? I don't see people in the US handling that well, especially when you start to see wealthy/powerful people being treated differently. Get ready for death panels and special treatment, if the worst case scenarios hold up.

I'm not advocating one or the other, just highlighting how little we know, and the difficulty in making a decision.

[Hards Alumni]

My question is, after the two weeks, then what? It's not going to be gone at that point. Fewer infections, possibly, but once people venture back out, it kicks back up again.

That is what the UK is modeling. That people won't stick with a lockdown form much more than 2-3 weeks. So they are waiting to start the lockdown until later where it will have a bigger effect.

Honestly, not sure what the best plan is.

What it does is it allows most people who have the disease to figure out that they are sick.  From the day they are infected until the day they show symptoms is within that time frame.  Plus it significantly slows the spread.  If you can't go anywhere without permission, you are home, and the only people you can spread it to are your family members.  This quickly brings down the R0.

Additionally, I'm not saying everything goes back to normal after two weeks, but it puts the spread in check, and we can reevaluate where we are at in the healthcare system at that point.   

[Hards Alumni]

I understand, but if the UK is right, and people won't follow subsequent 2-3 week isolations, then the best bet may be to wait.

Also, what happens when a wave of patients start hitting hospitals, and they start rationing care to prioritize icu beds? I don't see people in the US handling that well, especially when you start to see wealthy/powerful people being treated differently. Get ready for death panels and special treatment, if the worst case scenarios hold up.

I'm not advocating one or the other, just highlighting how little we know, and the difficulty in making a decision.

The US citizenry won't handle it well no matter what.  I also expect a rise in self inflicted GSWs.

[Chili]

What it does is it allows most people who have the disease to figure out that they are sick.  From the day they are infected until the day they show symptoms is within that time frame.  Plus it significantly slows the spread.  If you can't go anywhere without permission, you are home, and the only people you can spread it to are your family members.  This quickly brings down the R0.

Additionally, I'm not saying everything goes back to normal after two weeks, but it puts the spread in check, and we can reevaluate where we are at in the healthcare system at that point.

Priztker is finally talking about ordering full lock down and closing bars / restaurants.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-pandemic-chicago-illinois-news-20200315-tn4rchjbazb73h6x2i4vz7v3xq-story.html

[Hards Alumni]

Priztker is finally talking about ordering full lock down and closing bars / restaurants.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-pandemic-chicago-illinois-news-20200315-tn4rchjbazb73h6x2i4vz7v3xq-story.html

Good... would have been better to do it before this weekend's festivities.  Heard the lines for most bars were out the doors as usual on St. Patrick's day.

[forgetful]

What it does is it allows most people who have the disease to figure out that they are sick.  From the day they are infected until the day they show symptoms is within that time frame.  Plus it significantly slows the spread.  If you can't go anywhere without permission, you are home, and the only people you can spread it to are your family members.  This quickly brings down the R0.

Additionally, I'm not saying everything goes back to normal after two weeks, but it puts the spread in check, and we can reevaluate where we are at in the healthcare system at that point.

I agree, that is the model used successfully by other countries, but they had better testing capabilities, they didn't have political discord over the issue, and they had healthcare/employment systems that supported everyone.

I fear that the UK models, may be more applicable to us in the US. Obviously we are all in a wait and see format.

Just throwing out thoughts to see what others think.

[Chili]

Good... would have been better to do it before this weekend's festivities.  Heard the lines for most bars were out the doors as usual on St. Patrick's day.

Yup. This is the reason I will be WFH for a least 2 weeks. Because of dumbassery.

[Eldon]

Ohio Leading the Way

"We're basing this on science." When the nation hesitated, Ohio starting shutting down large gatherings.

https://www.cantonrep.com/news/20200314/ohio-leading-way-on-us-coronavirus-response

[rocket surgeon]

I understand, but if the UK is right, and people won't follow subsequent 2-3 week isolations, then the best bet may be to wait.

Also, what happens when a wave of patients start hitting hospitals, and they start rationing care to prioritize icu beds? I don't see people in the US handling that well, especially when you start to see wealthy/powerful people being treated differently. Get ready for death panels and special treatment, if the worst case scenarios hold up.

I'm not advocating one or the other, just highlighting how little we know, and the difficulty in making a decision.

  france isn't taking the "lockdowns" very good-rioting, over turning cars, fires, etc  as a country, they wouldn't have been my first choice for intolerance of the lockdowns

[rocket surgeon]

meriter hospital, madsion is restricting visitation to one family member(or significant) per patient as of yesterday. 

[GooooMarquette]

I understand, but if the UK is right, and people won't follow subsequent 2-3 week isolations, then the best bet may be to wait.

Also, what happens when a wave of patients start hitting hospitals, and they start rationing care to prioritize icu beds? I don't see people in the US handling that well, especially when you start to see wealthy/powerful people being treated differently. Get ready for death panels and special treatment, if the worst case scenarios hold up.

I'm not advocating one or the other, just highlighting how little we know, and the difficulty in making a decision.

Agreed. The best we can do is the best we can do...but it's difficult to figure out what the best is, given the combo of science and human nature.

[🏀]

Good... would have been better to do it before this weekend's festivities.  Heard the lines for most bars were out the doors as usual on St. Patrick's day.

Yep. Those idiots and the Stoolies can unnatural carnal knowledge right off.

[skianth16]

Unpopular opinion.

Looking at the numbers coming out of Europe, the US should proactively lock it all down.  Wait our two weeks, and take our medicine.  The longer we deny this, the more people become carelessly infected, and we will end up in a lockdown anyway.  Do it, get it over with, save some lives.

Making that decision would very likely result in the permanent closing of many small businesses and very painful financial situations for those living paycheck to paycheck. And you've got to think the stock market would not respond well to that news. The cost of that decision would be enormous from an economic standpoint.

And while it sounds cold to talk dollars when the goal is to save lives, it's a very real tradeoff that needs to be considered. Knowing that this primarily affects older citizens or those with current health issues, is it worth putting a not-insignificant percentage of the population into substantial financial risk and eroding trillions of dollars of investments in an attempt to slow the spread of a virus that is extremely unlikely to affect the overwhelming majority of the population?

I only bring this up to point out show how complex this is and how a decision may have benefits in one area but consequences in another. There are many more issues to consider here beyond just healthcare. And that's exactly why there isn't a simple playbook for this and why each country has varying responses to the crisis. I certainly don't know what the "right" answer is, but I do know that any decision here is very hard to make.

[injuryBug]

if testing is a week away how are people being tested now? last week? how are cases confirmed without testing?  if testing is still out and we are just guessing on the number of cases then the numbers are lower than we all think

[rocky_warrior]

Making that decision would very likely result in the permanent closing of many small businesses and very painful financial situations for those living paycheck to paycheck. And you've got to think the stock market would not respond well to that news. The cost of that decision would be enormous from an economic standpoint.

Largely agree, but would add that this is going to be huge from an economic standpoint regardless of the decision.  In fact, I don't *believe* the end result is going to be much different "shutdown" or "continue as normal", because "normal" is certainly not going to be "normal".

[Hards Alumni]

if testing is a week away how are people being tested now? last week? how are cases confirmed without testing?  if testing is still out and we are just guessing on the number of cases then the numbers are lower than we all think

No no, I should have said mass testing... the type that the VP said would be in the millions by the end of the week Friday the 13th.  There are, of course, some tests available... but there needed to be a production ramp up and labs needed time to prepare to do the tests. 

[Chili]

Making that decision would very likely result in the permanent closing of many small businesses and very painful financial situations for those living paycheck to paycheck. And you've got to think the stock market would not respond well to that news. The cost of that decision would be enormous from an economic standpoint.

And while it sounds cold to talk dollars when the goal is to save lives, it's a very real tradeoff that needs to be considered. Knowing that this primarily affects older citizens or those with current health issues, is it worth putting a not-insignificant percentage of the population into substantial financial risk and eroding trillions of dollars of investments in an attempt to slow the spread of a virus that is extremely unlikely to affect the overwhelming majority of the population?

I only bring this up to point out show how complex this is and how a decision may have benefits in one area but consequences in another. There are many more issues to consider here beyond just healthcare. And that's exactly why there isn't a simple playbook for this and why each country has varying responses to the crisis. I certainly don't know what the "right" answer is, but I do know that any decision here is very hard to make.

Counter opinion to that written by an MU BUAD Alum:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-12/stock-markets-need-to-see-the-government-panic

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Economic impact already started.
Front page of New Haven Register this morning says 2,000 state residents filed for unemployment on Friday after a very normal quiet week.

[jsglow]

My son started displaying symptoms tonight, so I took him to get tested.  A parent of one of his daycare classmates tested positive today.  Besides the testing area looking like a scene from outbreak, it was pretty fast and we were the only ones there for the 45 min it took. 

We're on self quarantine til our results come back, but stay safe out there.  I think it takes a case of it hitting home (our actual home) to shed some true light on the situation.

The Dr. basically said kids will be fine, they just are spreading it due to a lack of signs.  My boy is sleepy now, but was happy and playing all day.

He said my age group basically will get flu like symptoms and to not stress out about it unless there's severe shortness of breath (only being able to speak in one word increments was his sign to worry)

Lastly, he said 65+ is prayed on by the disease.  So anybody on here in that category should do their damndest to stay home and in self quarantine as much as humanly possible. 

Cheers everyone.  Any prayers would be appreciated, and we're going to take this one day at a time.  I will keep you all posted if you'd care for a separate superbar thread.

Prayers for your health in your family. I think starting a separate thread is an excellent idea. Perhaps we can use it to both follow your story and to serve as a tool for mutual support for Scoopers that test positive. Those folks will need friends and family to pitch in during the quarantine. No reason a fellow scooper can't make arrangements to drop off supplies on your front porch if it comes to that.  We'll all get through this together.

[skianth16]

Economic impact already started.
Front page of New Haven Register this morning says 2,000 state residents filed for unemployment on Friday after a very normal quiet week.

Makes sense. I would assume hiring will be a lower priority for a lot of companies for a little while here. That message might be getting out to applicants who now see a more urgent need to apply for unemployment benefits.

[warriorchick]

Makes sense. I would assume hiring will be a lower priority for a lot of companies for a little while here. That message might be getting out to applicants who now see a more urgent need to apply for unemployment benefits.

.

My retirement date is in 3 weeks, and my employer isn't able to bring people in for interviews for my replacement.  Looks like I will be getting a nice consulting contract out of the deal.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

.

My retirement date is in 3 weeks, and my employer isn't able to bring people in for interviews for my replacement.  Looks like I will be getting a nice consulting contract out of the deal.

Your company seems pretty dumb to be looking to start interviews for a known retirement of an exec only 3 weeks before said retirement date.

[forgetful]

I only bring this up to point out show how complex this is and how a decision may have benefits in one area but consequences in another. There are many more issues to consider here beyond just healthcare. And that's exactly why there isn't a simple playbook for this and why each country has varying responses to the crisis. I certainly don't know what the "right" answer is, but I do know that any decision here is very hard to make.

Agreed. One of the difficult things about decision making is the 2nd guessing after the fact. One has to collect all the data and make the best decision for everyone at the time.

I fear that with this being an election year, individuals will make decisions based on what helps them in their next election most, and not what is the best long-term decision. I hope people on both sides of the aisle recognize some things are more important than the next election.