81–90 of 393 posts
To be clear, the governor unequivocally said this is not a shelter in place. It is merely language telling employers that they are to not have workers physically present. The governor also said there will not be any civil penalties for individuals that do not stay at home.
I feel like we should just do this nation wide.
USA is huge, and the virus is hitting different areas with different intensities. Its spread is heavily impacted by population density and rates of random social encounters. A Nationwide lockdown might make sense if the goal was to snuff the infection out, but as of now the goal is to lower the peak of the curve. If you lock down too early, you extend the infection to a length of time that makes the lockdown impossib…
I don't understand why we can't take a more localize approach to this. Maybe only implement the lock downs in the worst areas, or areas entering acceleration phase. Can't we be smarter about this?
We don't even know if it will snuff the infection out. It might just be kicking the can down the road. In my area, it is still very low risk. Meanwhile, businesses are already beginning to shut down, and people's are loosing their livelihoods.
Do they have a definition of what constitutes non-essential?
https://esd.ny.gov/guidance-executive-order-2026
It felt like the scope of the whole state was too wide considering the lack of cases near us. And without any definite financial assistance in place. Hoping something more definite comes soon as I know multiple people who are affected by this order.
So we persist in stasis for a month or a year with no end in sight while the economy begins to collapse, which will also destroy lives and lead to humanitarian disaster?
And all of that on shoddy evidence which probably is not counting the true case fatality rate due to woeful ignorance of the total number of infected people?
This article from a Stanford Professor makes the case that COVID-19 mortality is not as high as initial reports make it seem:
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-a...
We also have potential treatments emerging that could alleviate much of the strain on the healthcare system.
We need to make rational and strategic decisions here, not decisions based out of fear.
Massive and systematic society wide testing is the first step, the second step is the bulk manufacture of demonstrated COVID-19 treatments. The third is ramping up hospital capacity.
All of this is so that we can reopen society in a reasonable amount of time prepared to deal with the inevitable spread of this virus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
USA is huge, and the virus is hitting different areas with different intensities. Its spread is heavily impacted by population density and rates of random social encounters. A Nationwide lockdown might make sense if the goal was to snuff the infection out, but as of now the goal is to lower the peak of the curve. If you lock down too early, you extend the infection to a length of time that makes the lockdown impossib…
> If you lock down too early, you extend the infection to a length of time that makes the lockdown impossible. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that?
There is currently no plan in place to penalize individuals for gathering socially Then people won't take the rules seriously. Lots of people in this country still don't believe or understand how much damage this virus can inflict.
> > There is currently no plan in place to penalize individuals for gathering socially > Then people won't take the rules seriously. What should the government do to these people? Arrest them? Already there are news headlines saying "US jails begin releasing prisoners to stem Covid-19 infections" [1][2] and from that article, specifically relating to New York: "New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said on Wednesday tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A month? Wouldn't it be more like 1-2 weeks?
We'll see an acceleration of cases, due to accelerated testing. Additionally, there's a 2-3 week period between infection and death for the worst cases, so barring spectacular new treatments, even a reduction in cases will take a few weeks to impact the death rate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A month? Wouldn't it be more like 1-2 weeks?
We'll see an acceleration of cases, due to accelerated testing. Additionally, there's a 2-3 week period between infection and death for the worst cases, so barring spectacular new treatments, even a reduction in cases will take a few weeks to impact the death rate.
1. X incubates for a week
2. X gets symptoms and infects spouse
3. X's spouse incubates for a week
4. X's spouse worsens for a few weeks
5. X's spouse dies
To be clear, the governor unequivocally said this is not a shelter in place. It is merely language telling employers that they are to not have workers physically present. The governor also said there will not be any civil penalties for individuals that do not stay at home.
I think this will open the door for NYC to fully "shelter in place" lockdown, however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems to be a reaction to people not doing it on their own sufficiently enough, like what happened in Italy. Perhaps Washingtonians are taking the recommendations more seriously, so they don't require an official mandate. That decision can't be a light one, and I don't envy those that have to make it.
There is no law enforcement action being taken for the NY or CA order. They’re relying on “social-pressure” to keep people inside.