California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#91

Post by jshevek » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:17 PM UTC

joe_the_user wrote: post #25

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #7

I personally think we need a county-by-county approach. There is a high variation of the infection at local levels. All the news is currently about how bad New York is and it's true but we're not all New York. http://www.countycovid19.com/

I live in Nevada County, which apparently has a very low infection rate (34 cases, none in the last week) but if you open this county, what prevents folks from other countries from flooding in and bringing more infection? This county was previous a tourist mecca so it would be especially inviting. But any county that was open would be an appealing destination for the closed counties.

I see this as an argument for a county-by-county approach in which the specific circumstances of the county are taken into account.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#92

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:20 PM UTC

dsl wrote: post #72

djrogers wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any comparison using the officially reported death toll in Wuhan at face value is of no value whatsoever.

Have you been on site in Wuhan? Collected any data? Where can we get a copy?

No, we don't have solid data on Wuhan. Neither does anyone else outside of China (or so we strongly suspect). The question isn't whether someone has better data than you. The point is that you don't have believable data for Wuhan.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#93

Post by jshevek » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:21 PM UTC

adelHBN wrote: post #41

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #7

I personally think we need a county-by-county approach. There is a high variation of the infection at local levels. All the news is currently about how bad New York is and it's true but we're not all New York. http://www.countycovid19.com/

Thanks for sharing the link. But how do you enforce stay-at-home policies or any rigorous public health policies, in populated counties that border each other, such as San Francisco and San Mateo counties, or LA and Orang counties.

I think you are asking specifically about the enforcement issues that derive from neighboring populated counties with different policies? Neighboring counties can and should coordinate to address this, possibly choosing to enforce the same policies even if they have different infection rates, as they did for the initial lockdown in the bay area. This doesn't prevent us from using a county-by-county approach in other areas.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#94

Post by AnimalMuppet » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:23 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #33

timr wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different regions have dramatically different population densities, and don't necessarily need shelter-in-place rules. In NYC, shelter-in-place is probably the only feasible way to reduce social interactions when case-count is exploding, but in Boise, where people mostly live in detached housing and drive cars and cases are measured in the hundreds, it might be sufficient to eliminate large gatherings and shut down r…

> don't necessarily need shelter-in-place rules Is there a cite for that? Because that's not the way the data looks. Everywhere was growing with roughly the same exponent before lockdown. The numbers were bigger in NY because it grew longer pre-detection, but there's no reason to believe that everywhere else was any different. Really this disease's growth constant looks shockingly consistent almost everywhere in the…

All right, here's a different example. Loving County, TX, is roughly 50 or 100 people. It has roughly the area of Los Angeles County. "Don't leave your house" is a bit more ridiculous when the next humans are 20 miles away. Sure, maybe don't go visit them... but stay at home? Why?

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#95

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:25 PM UTC

kurthr wrote: post #4

I’d like to see something that’s clear and doesn’t risk so much on rapid accurate testing and tracking of... everyone with significant delayed feedback. Something that could be done in rural areas or even developing countries. A reliable next step in the Hammer and the Dance. I found this: http://pandemicbreak.org/

I don't mean this to be a gotcha, but society has a lot of hidden complexity. Rigid prescriptive proposals like this are unlikely to be good ideas, which is why governments haven't been presenting them.

In this particular case, the plan is great for personal life but is clearly infeasible economically. You can't just toggle a factory on and off every 2 weeks; it depends on supply chains extending weeks into the past and feeds into chains extending weeks into the future. Any complex business which is turned off in the 2 week breaks isn't going to be sustainable in the other 2 weeks.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#96

Post by xienze » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:28 PM UTC

Ninjak8051 wrote: post #53

mikekij wrote: post #30

This entire plan is based on models that do not align with what we are seeing. The graph on slide two[1] of the official CA govt plan shows hospitalizations With Intervention rising exponentially, exceeding our hospital capacity in early June. The actual new infection data shows that the rate of new infections has been decreasing since at least 4/4 [2], meaning that the graph of active hospitalizations should be a be…

Additionally, notice that the orange data points (actual hospitalizations) are significantly under the "With Intervention" plot. So why even include the slide? Clearly the assumptions behind the "With Intervention" plot do not match reality TODAY, let alone in a few weeks. Not a good sign if people are making actual decisions based on this.

> Clearly the assumptions behind the "With Intervention" plot do not match reality TODAY, let alone in a few weeks.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills with the way people are talking about this whole thing still being out of control, when data shows the situation is even better than the most optimistic models were predicting. And by that I mean, pretend I was on HN 3 weeks ago predicting 25K deaths in the USA by today. I’d have been downvoted into oblivion and told I was delusional. But here we are.

Clearly NYC was hit far harder than the rest of the country, but it seems like every state and municipality is simply basing their models on NYC case numbers scaled by population. I don’t get it.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#97

Post by phkahler » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:28 PM UTC

mchusma wrote: post #67

A real plan would look like this https://imgur.com/spemOeG specifying the levels of restrictions and the metrics we will use to track the metrics. This allows people to understand what to expect the best possible. We already have huge uncertainty, we don't need to add uncertainty of government response on top of uncertainty of the virus. I think there is huge room to debate the numbers and what goes in what level, bu…

>> I like many others are deeply upset by leadership from both parties, at all levels of government.

I'm sitting at home in Michigan where the governor has closed almost all businesses. Politicians bicker over weather governors or the president have the authority to reopen things. And yet there is no plan as far as I can see. No goals, no criteria to trigger next steps, nothing. Meanwhile the press just snipes at people.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#98

Post by xienze » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:33 PM UTC

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #7

I personally think we need a county-by-county approach. There is a high variation of the infection at local levels. All the news is currently about how bad New York is and it's true but we're not all New York. http://www.countycovid19.com/

Agree completely, it seems like everyone wants to treat every municipality as NYC, just scaled down. I’d like to see county-by-county assessment, with added common sense restrictions like elderly and sick people self-quarantining, which I think at this point people are familiar and somewhat comfortable with.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#99

Post by mikeg8 » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:37 PM UTC

bhickey wrote: post #54

adrianmonk wrote: post #39

From indicator #1: > How prepared is our state to test everyone who is symptomatic? Another view is that opening the economy should involve testing people who are NOT symptomatic. Quoting from an MIT Technology Review article ( https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/08/998785/stop-covi... ): > The key, says Romer, is repeatedly testing everyone without symptoms to identify who is infected. (People with symptoms sho…

> Another view is that opening the economy should involve testing people who are NOT symptomatic. Testing people with symptoms is a waste of tests. When tests are in short supply assume everyone with symptoms is positive, isolate them and test their contacts who don't have symptoms. As of last week, Boston Medical Center had a 44% positive rate on the tests they were running on symptomatic people. They could find mor…

My best friend's mom came down with pneumonia two weeks ago, she had all the same symptoms of a COVID patient, but when two separate tests came back negative, the approach to getting her back home and with her family was dramatically different than it would have been to assume she tested positive and begin quarantining off her entire family who did not have true exposure.

Re: California’s Roadmap to Modify the Stay-at-Home Order [pdf]

#100

Post by throwaway237683 » Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 11:41 PM UTC

xienze wrote: post #96

Ninjak8051 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Additionally, notice that the orange data points (actual hospitalizations) are significantly under the "With Intervention" plot. So why even include the slide? Clearly the assumptions behind the "With Intervention" plot do not match reality TODAY, let alone in a few weeks. Not a good sign if people are making actual decisions based on this.

> Clearly the assumptions behind the "With Intervention" plot do not match reality TODAY, let alone in a few weeks. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills with the way people are talking about this whole thing still being out of control, when data shows the situation is even better than the most optimistic models were predicting. And by that I mean, pretend I was on HN 3 weeks ago predicting 25K deaths in the USA by toda…

You're not crazy. It was very clear from the way the situation was handled even a month ago that CA and NY governors are not wasting time with this good crisis, and are using it for their political gain. The rampant fear mongering was used to overblow the severity of the situation and sell the idea of locking down hard before it's too late, completely disregarding the economy fallout, all the while projecting the image of Strong Leaders and Saviors of the Nation. A bit of too late for this election year (if elections are not postponed, that is!) but definitely will be useful for the next election cycle.

The actual data did not support the apocalyptic prognoses then and it looks even more at contrast with what is going on now. But good luck explaining that to a bunch of people scared to death because of the constant hammering of ZOMG PEOPLE ARE DYING!!!!111 from the news.

All in all it's a #FakeApocalypse. As it was obvious two months ago.