Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

gov.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 406 posts

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

#121

Post by sergiotapia »

gdulli wrote: post #115
sergiotapia wrote: post #106

I don't understand why at risk people don't just stay at home. Why lock everybody else up? Enough is enough, kids need to go back to school and people need to go back to work. This document seems hand-wavy and doesn't answer anything.

First, because they live with people who aren't at risk and if those people go about their lives it defeats the purpose. Second, if everyone not explicitly at high risk went about their normal business, some percentage of them would still need medical attention and the hospitals would run out of beds, leaving some to die.

So, you live with people that are at risk, you can stay home too!

Second: That's the nature of nature. If you want, you can protect yourself, stay home!

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

#122

Post by ajross »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #94
ajross wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

OK. That seems like sort of a strawman, but fine. I'm OK with very rural areas having a "Stay home, OR at least 20 miles from the nearest people" rule. Is Loving Texas really chafing under the existing shelter order? I mean, surely that's the way it's being enforced currently, no?

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

#123

Post by throwaway237683 »

yodsanklai wrote: post #112

I would cynically summarize this as: lockdown is economically unsustainable. We need to go back to work. Let's hope we can control the epidemics this time better than before the lockdown. We may have new tools this time (contact tracing, masks, test). But we're not really sure they'll work. It's the exact same situation in France where we're planning to go out of lockdown in 4 weeks. It seems unclear that we'll have…

Isn't it amazing that an absolutely massive privacy invasion that is called contact tracing is already accepted as _inevitable_ if we are ever to be allowed to step out of our homes?

Talk about cynicism.

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

#124

Post by dmode »

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 don't really understand your comment. This is more of a "vision" doc that sets a framework and principles on what the plan will look like. The next iteration will be a more detailed plan. It is fairly typical of tech product work, where you create your vision statement and then create a more detailed plan

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

#125

Post by yodsanklai »

standardUser wrote: post #52

It's worth looking at Denmark, Austria, Czechia and other European countries that have already started loosening restrictions this week. Like California, they locked down fast and flattened the curve. Now, Denmark is opening school and all three (plus Germany and parts of Italy) are opening smaller non-essential shops. I haven't found great info on how well these countries have implemented contact tracing, but they d…

I don't think Europe is doing particularly well either. Well, at least France where I live.

France is going to release lockdown in a month. My impression is that this is mostly for economical reasons because it was unsustainable. I'm not confident we'll deal with the epidemics much better this time. The gvt still hasn't released their roadmap, but they hope to improve their testing capacity, the availability of masks, and to enable contact tracing using some hypothetical app. There's no silver bullet, but we just hope that it'll work, otherwise we'll have to go into lockdown again (or not if it appears too costly). Our gvt hasn't communicated clearly on the possible outcomes. The president speech was mostly unsatisfying politician rhetoric, trying to avoid the fact that they didn't anticipate the crisis, and that they had no satisfactory solutions.

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

#126

Post by adrianmonk »

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…

I'm very tempted to argue that in any successful plan, a pretty small minority of the population would be symptomatic at any given time. And the above article has me convinced we should be testing asymptomatic people on a very wide scale in order to get the economy going again. (Enough to test most of the population regularly, like every two weeks.)

Together, those two things tell me we should have such a large testing capacity that testing symptomatic people isn't a stretch. (Of course, we might need more reliable tests if their medical situation is shaky, which is the different category of testing capacity.)

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

#127

Post by gdulli »

throwaway237683 wrote: post #100
xienze wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 ima…

I know it's folly but I'm trying to follow the logic here. Newsom and Cuomo, who won their offices fairly easily in their respective elections, seized on a plan to drastically hurt the economies of their respective states. Because, being the ones who took charge of the situation, that would gain some intangible leadership points that would increase their chances of winning their next elections despite the inevitable severe unemployment and budget shortfalls that would much more certainly sink their chances.

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

#128

Post by rconti »

jshevek wrote: post #91
joe_the_user wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When I turn on the news at night, I don't see the information for the county I intend to visit once it's deemed safe(er) to travel. I see the information for where I live.

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

#129

Post by Animats »

archgoon wrote: post #51
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…

Why should infections follow a bell curve? Shouldn't it be the derivative of a the logistic curve, which should be approximately exponential on both ends. I don't see how a quadratic should show up in the exponent; either mathematically or epidemiologically.

That's a good question. If control measures are undertaken to "flatten the curve" down to the capacity of the medical system, we'd expect to see new infections per day and deaths per day level out, maybe decline a little, but not decline a lot. Which is what the actuals show for the areas worst off.[1]

At some point, there's saturation, and "herd immunity". For this virus, that's somewhere in the 60%-80% range of the population. US population is around 333,000,000, so saturation is somewhere above 200 million.

We're nowhere near that. Current known US total cases are nearing 2 million. Current estimates of undetected cases are in the 80% range, so current total cases is probably around 10 million. So about 20x more people have to get sick before herd immunity. That's well over a year away.

[1] https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest

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

#130

Post by ravenstine »

It doesn't make any sense that we continue the lockdown in its current state.

Hospitals in California aren't overrun. We were insisted upon that the "flattening the curve" was to prevent the medical system from being overwhelmed. With what we've been able to do, we're not even close to having overrun hospitals. By now, we should have ramped up the system to account for greater numbers of severe cases.

Given that, we should quarantine the vulnerable population and allow the rest of the population to get things back to normal. Otherwise, we'll come out of this with no herd immunity, potentially making the last month a total loss, and creating further loss in the near future.

Post reply on HN