141–150 of 919 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except there are already dozens of coyotes inside the fence.
Exactly. Easier to hunt and kill the interlopers if you can prevent more from coming in.
I feel like there are some particular cultural attributes in the United States that make this useless at this point. The United States has a very individualistic attitude. Sure, we can pause travel from Europe, but the current administration is very anti-europe. Can we pause travel in the US? I strongly doubt that we can effectively given the strong anti-expertise attitudes as well. My guess is that the United States…
Many parts are really not as collectivist as people seem to think. Not as collectivist as Asia at least, not even close. Individualistic tendencies are strong over there, although not as strong as in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The mortality rate seems to be as low as 0.6% in South Korea or as high as 5% in Italy. [...] It is not an End of Days zombie apocalypse. A few percent is a lot . World War II killed 3% of the human population, and that's where we're headed if we don't stop it.
Because World War 2 killed 3% of the general population. The coronavirus, in a single country, has killed 5% of infected people and elder people or those with pre-existing conditions are majorly overrepresented in infection rates. >World War II killed 3% of the human population, and that's where we're headed if we don't stop it. This isn't just wrong. It's irresponsible for you to be saying these types of absolutely…
I'm not sure how you think how critical it is. I personally have never had this issue and do not mind at all to lay still for a whole year to try to reduce the risk of this happening.
Regardless of the ability of people to travel to the UK or Canada and get here (which people have done for a long time with other nations we don't take kindly to) it's absolutely going to reduce the number of people who will travel across the pond. Which is the goal, reduce infection rates. My concern is how economies are going to respond to the US being cut off from Continental ports for a month, which as far as I c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can anyone comment on supply chains that rely on Europe to source goods? I know medical grade steel comes from over there, but I don't know what else. I don't see why commercial sea-shipping would be restricted. Mariners may not be allowed to leave their ship while in port though.
Because the virus can spread on surfaces I think. As well as food, and organic matter.
> It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes, but this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads.
> In general, because of poor survivability of these coronaviruses on surfaces, there is likely very low risk of spread from food products or packaging that are shipped over a period of days or weeks at ambient, refrigerated, or frozen temperatures.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure where this level of panic is coming from. Numbers are about to spike everywhere pretty much no matter what anybody does, because better testing and funding has become available. Quarantining an entire continent, and even worse than this badly doing it, seems to be an astonishing overreaction. The average age of death for coronavirus victims is 83. The mortality rate seems to be as low as 0.6% in South Ko…
Estimates have said that they expect 20%-60% of people to get it (originally [1] but updated according to [2]. Something like 10-15% of those people require hospitalization [2] and something like 0.5% - 4% of people die [4]. If we use the lower bounds on all those we are talking about 6.5 million Americans hospitalized and 327,000 dead. For the sake of comparison, that is almost half the number of Americans who have…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't a classic case of one person can ruin it for everyone. When I choose not to go to the bar, the guy at the bar that ignored the advice about not going out in public still doesn't infect me . So less dramatically: individuals can (and will!) reduce their exposure to infected people that make poor choices. Of course the more people that do the right thing the better, but it isn't a situation where the outcome i…
Unless you hermetically seal yourself from the outside world, you are still at risk. Yes that risk can be reduced, but as more and more people are affected, your own chances go up exponentially, no matter what measures you take.
(I'm being sarcastic, but changing the exponent is (literally) what all the public health messaging about flattening the curve is about)
Regardless of the ability of people to travel to the UK or Canada and get here (which people have done for a long time with other nations we don't take kindly to) it's absolutely going to reduce the number of people who will travel across the pond. Which is the goal, reduce infection rates. My concern is how economies are going to respond to the US being cut off from Continental ports for a month, which as far as I c…
I don't know about the actual economy but finance seems to hate this. Most open market indicators dropped by like 3%...
Oil and other commodities also took a dump.
This awfully sounds like politically motivated than medically motivated. Edit: Apparently it’s limited to Schengen Zone: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/03/11/homeland-security-acting...
How so? This will undoubtedly push the world into recession, how does that help Trump?
If you're trying to draw a cordon sanitaire, then why leave out the busiest hub in the region? I don't see any indication that there's any intention to prevent people from the Europe getting to the US via indirect means (which includes Canada, Iceland, and it seems even the Azores).
And if you're not trying to draw a cordon sanitaire, why go to such an extreme measure? Banning entry of people who have visited afflicted regions in the recent past (as was done for China) is possible, so why not do that instead? Why ban cargo in addition, given that the coronavirus is thought to be unable to survive the week-long voyage without live hosts?
Furthermore, why include Ireland (an island nation so far relatively unaffected by coronavirus) in the ban, but not the UK (an island nation with greater connections to continental Europe, including a connecting tunnel, that is more heavily affected)?
(In the USA) Is this going to accomplish anything? The virus is already here and has been spreading out-of-control for quite a while now. The only reason the numbers are still so low here is the incredibly low number of tests being done.