Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat • Hacker News Board

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#391

Post by Zenst » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:17 PM UTC

Zenst wrote: post #335

cstross wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's being reported here (the UK) as "anyone who has visited or trsvelled through a Schengen zone country in the past 14 days". Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/11/coronavirus-ou...

Yip, I read that elsewhere as well. Honestly should of just said, all air travel. How the thing spread to other countries in the first place. Still, I'd be supprised if London don't end up with quarantine zones before the month is up. Going by how it has patterned in countries that have had to move from containment onto delay. Then it's not a case of if, but when.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51857856

Does appear that the transition from containment into delay has just started.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#392

Post by angry_octet » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:24 PM UTC

TheFiend7 wrote: post #369

dx034 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> obligatory masks for all States struggle to get enough masks for medical staff, diverting any for the general public doesn't seem smart. And self made masks will have so little effect that they could be detrimental if people decide to be less careful because they wear a masks. To the other points, education about hand washing and behavior in public is the one thing governments have all done for weeks now. It just s…

This mentality is just false. If more people of the general populous have masks, how does that not reduce transmission therefore flatten the curve? Now I understand the logic behind there being shortages. But saying that the general populous shouldn't wear masks because it doesn't do anything doesn't sound accurate.

Without training it is very hard to wear PPE correctly. Even if you change masks regularly, it is hard not to touch the outside (hot side) of the mask with your hands. Reusing masks makes this even more likely.

Most people don't get a good fit of the mask either. Respirators are a bit easier but nowhere near enough of them.

Practically speaking all it does is burn through a small supply of masks.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#393

Post by cvwright » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:26 PM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #389

cvwright wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, look at the differential equations on this page about the Kermack-McKendrick model: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Kermack-McKendrickModel.html Notice that the rate of change in the infected population ( dI/dt ) is proportional to the current number of infected ( I ) and the current number of susceptible ( S ). In the early stages, when S is large and I is still small, this acts just like an exponential function i…

Yeah, exactly. In the beginning exponential, later on not anymore. Without changing the equation. So, no, not exponential. Because, you know, very early on an exponential graph can approximated by something non-exponential. Would be utter BS, sure, so nobody does it.

Exponential growth. It's the growth phase that matters.

People keep mentioning the exponential because both of these curves, at an important point in time, grow very fast. Much faster than anything you're likely to encounter in daily life, so the public really doesn't have the requisite intuition.

But I can see you're not interested in understanding the point. You asked for equations, I gave you equations. Good day sir.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#394

Post by angry_octet » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:27 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #312

michaelt wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the internment of Japanese-American citizens during WW2 [1] was legally possible for the federal government, to me it would seem odd if cancelling Coachella wasn't. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of_Japanese_America...

The US courts have since explicitly rejected the reasoning used to justify the internment of Japanese-American citizens. It would not be legally possible today.

So do it anyway, and then 12 months later, after everyone is released, maybe the Supreme Court says you can't do it.

I'm not sating that it is a good idea, just that judicial review doesn't seem particularly effective.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#395

Post by busyant » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:29 PM UTC

makomk wrote: post #299

TeMPOraL wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is surprising to me to. If this was Star Trek world, you'd have computational models built by experts shared and discussed the very first day, forming the very foundation of the discussion and policy around the virus. I know of a certain company whose entire purpose is building and selling a product that lets you plug in equations of complex, dynamic systems and play with the models to understand and predict thing…

The trouble is that pretty much all of the data is garbage quality, and if you feed garbage into a computer you of course just get garbage out. The figures from Wuhan are particularly bad, probably just a function of their testing ramp-up until well after the peak, and the ones from Italy might not be much better. (The other problem is that China has taken the position that their numbers are an exact description of r…

I wouldn't necessarily call the data "garbage" but the numbers are definitely _soft_.

But soft numbers are a common issue with many areas of public health. In particular, analysis of the current pandemic suffers from both a "numerator" and "denominator" problem (http://conflict.lshtm.ac.uk/page_83.htm)

I think many of us are accustomed to getting high-quality stats when studying a process. But that's often not possible with a fast-moving public health issue.

I think you have to acknowledge the limitations of the data, but it can still be helpful.

The thing I _don't_ like about the JHU dashboard is that it doesn't really let you slice the data in interesting ways. For example, I'd like to be able to click on a country or state/province and see temporal data. This doesn't seem like it would be that difficult, but maybe I'm naive.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#396

Post by mardifoufs » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:34 PM UTC

JediWing wrote: post #286

mardifoufs wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? This has nothing to do with the slippery slope fallacy. . It's not because we're aren't there yet that saying that it could happen is a fallacy. With that logic any type of planning or forecast about the virus is just a slippery slope since we aren't there. And If you agree that forecasts about the virus are okay, I dont see why forecasts about the economy depending on what policy is enforced (full isolation th…

It is textbook slippery slope. Because grandparent said they would sacrifice a realistic tax increase to save lives in the COVID-19 outbreak, the parent asked about a confiscatory 99% tax rate and asset seizure, which would be wholly unnecessary for paying for the current crisis.

Yes, current crisis. Everyone agrees on the fact that the virus will probably spread and become much more widespread. Isn't it logical that costs will go up too, especially if the state decides that the economy isn't worth the loss of lives? Is slippery slope just saying that cause and effect exist now?

I don't see how the original comment was unreasonable in asking what is the threshold where economic losses are too high. Halting all economic activity to completely stop the spread of the disease and prevent deaths amounts to a 100% taxation since you are forced to not work and generate revenue. Whether that is acceptable or not isn't my point, but asking the question isn't a fallacy

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#397

Post by bujak » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:49 PM UTC

AllegedAlec wrote: post #21

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like some dystopian eugenics shit to be honest, get rid of those who no longer contribute to society. I for one am working towards my old age, I'd hate to be left to just die.

> eugenics That word doesn't work when describing people who are no longer part of the reproducing population.

they call it deadwood trimming in corporatespeak

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#398

Post by Certhas » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 5:51 PM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #390

Certhas wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your link, look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_modelling_of_infe... S = N - I - R, and lets used normalized ratios, so i = I/N, r = R/N, etc... so the dynamics of i are given by: di/dt = beta (1 - i - r) i - gamma i di/dt = (beta - gamma) i - beta (i^2 + ri) At the beginning of the disease, the ratio of infected and recovered is very small, say 1e-5 for 100 cases in a population of 10 million.…

"The initial exponential growth rate" Key word, initial. Later on, not so much. Which is the whole point, pandemics aren't exponential over the complete run time. So, why not using these formulas at least in the models instead of using exponential equation limited by world population? Edit: "It will have an exponentially growing phase, and then an exponentially shrinking phase" Confirming the point above. Math is a p…

Okay you're just trolling now. We are very much in the initial exponential phase of Covid-19. As I derived above, once you get to 10% you might start seeing deviations from exponential in the SIR model. The bump that you saw in China is not due to this deviation from exponential growth behaviour. We luckily never got close to 10% infection. It's due to getting to negative exponential growth. The beta(t) part of my answer above.

You're free to use whatever sensible model you want in your analysis, but you are criticising people for using exponential models. You have no arguments for that. Then you throw out Wikipedia, falsely claiming that exponential models are nowhere to be found there. Then you demand peer reviewed studies that use an exponential model, which I provide. But somehow that is not enough either.

In fact there are numerous assumptions in the SIR/exponential growth model. These might not hold. We might get slightly sub-exponential growth in some diseases. There is vast literature on that. But the base line in all the vast literature on this is that the most natural, obvious and common behaviour is exponential.

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#399

Post by apexalpha » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

silvestrov wrote: post #152

Denmark did act yesterday evening & today: - events with more than 100 people forbidden. - all schools will close - all non-critical employees must stay home. - all private employees off-job as much as possible. - stay in your home. - don't travel to [many] countries, more restricts will come. - All indoor cultural institutions, libraries, leisure facilities, etc. are closed. And today they made a temporary law which…

We have just had an announcement in the Netherlands with pretty much the same, except for one notable differnce.

The Dutch government keeps schools open. They say closing schools would also force many parents to stay at home and that many of them are much needed in health care, police etc..

Re: Why some governments appear not to be acting on the Covid-19 threat

#400

Post by hef19898 » Thu, Mar 12, 2020, 6:41 PM UTC

cvwright wrote: post #393

hef19898 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, exactly. In the beginning exponential, later on not anymore. Without changing the equation. So, no, not exponential. Because, you know, very early on an exponential graph can approximated by something non-exponential. Would be utter BS, sure, so nobody does it.

Exponential growth . It's the growth phase that matters. People keep mentioning the exponential because both of these curves, at an important point in time, grow very fast. Much faster than anything you're likely to encounter in daily life, so the public really doesn't have the requisite intuition. But I can see you're not interested in understanding the point. You asked for equations, I gave you equations. Good day…

We are, I think, not disagreeing at all. May sound crazy, but bear with me a second here. I know that the initial phase of any epidemic is exponential. Key are these three small words, initial growth phase. Because they make all the difference, as every epidemic will ultimately peak.

These three words are simply to often drowned out in discussions about COVID-19. That's we you see extrapolations of this growth against, for example, the population of Italy. And this is dangerous. And I don't think we disagree here, I never disputed the exponential nature of the early phase.

We just shouldn't make the mistake in assuming everybody catches these three little words, especially not online.

The most critical question everybody is trying to answer right now is, when the peak will be. And whether this peak will to high for our medical infrastructure. With all the measures being taken, the conclusion seems to be the point will be too high. Hence the counter measures. So we should all do what we can to flatten the curve as much as possible. I never said anything else, and honestly, I don't see where are disagreeing here.