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

231–240 of 406 posts

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

#231

Post by rriepe »

Animats wrote: post #129
archgoon wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The "curve" in "flatten the curve" is an epidemic curve, not a Bell curve.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemic_curve

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

#232

Post by apatters »

saalweachter wrote: post #211
apatters wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like both the perception of and response to this pandemic are not reflective of reality. What am I getting wrong here? - Around 200 million Americans will eventually get it, barring extraordinary events (like a vaccine arriving in 6 months). We cannot change this. - Around 0.5% will die, overwhelmingly those who had a low remaining life expectancy to begin with. This is a much larger body count than most peo…

> Around 200 million Americans will eventually get it, barring extraordinary events (like a vaccine arriving in 6 months). We cannot change this. "Significantly less than 200 million Americans catching it" is still on the table. "Herd immunity" is just the point at which the reproduction rate of the disease falls below 1 because the average infected person does not encounter anyone else to infect (because everyone el…

This is a great comment, thanks. So isn't there an argument in favor of infecting more people sooner in order to increase the immunity rate of the population, particularly if those people are at lower risk of complications for the disease?

For example why not pursue a policy such as: kids can go to school unless they live with someone who is at risk (since we know that children are at very low risk for complications). Similar to how we managed chickenpox before there was a vaccine.

I think we need to explore alternatives to lockdowns because I believe the economics of lockdowns will make them impossible to continue for very long. At the moment people see this as a "be heroic and do the right thing" issues, but most people don't yet understand the severity of the economic impact and haven't yet been personally affected by it. Lockdowns will probably become politically untenable by May or June whether anyone today likes that fact or not.

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

#233

Post by arcticbull »

aodin wrote: post #230
arcticbull wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Gangelt showed 15% had antibodies (subject to, potentially fair criticisms re: methodology) so I think it's fair to say it varies by locale. While I understand that many folks from Wuhan travel all over the United States, the non-stop options from Wuhan to NYC and, if I recall correctly, SFO and LAX meant that more opportunities existed for early spread than the middle of Colorado. In fact, I can't actually pin…

San Miguel County is home to Telluride ski resort, an international destination with about half a million visits per year [1] [1] https://www.telluridenews.com/news/article_1547199f-46bc-547...

True, population 2484.

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

#234

Post by chillacy »

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.

One passibility is: if some people are going to work then everyone's going to have to work, or else risk falling behind. It's the prisoner's dilemma, someone who wants to stay home would end up having to go to work anyways. This has already happened with the laughable amount of people considered "essential" when the governor of NYC made it optional (investment bankers taking the subway to go to work!)

Taken like that it becomes more like restrictions on pollution or laws against corporate espionage in how the government shapes the economy already.

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

#235

Post by marcinzm »

apatters wrote: post #180
Animats wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It seems like both the perception of and response to this pandemic are not reflective of reality. What am I getting wrong here? - Around 200 million Americans will eventually get it, barring extraordinary events (like a vaccine arriving in 6 months). We cannot change this. - Around 0.5% will die, overwhelmingly those who had a low remaining life expectancy to begin with. This is a much larger body count than most peo…

The death rate is 0.5% IF there's really good medical treatment. If there isn't then not only does the death rate from the covid go up but so do death rates for every other condition requiring medical treatment. And not only during the pandemic but for a some time afterwards as the health system recovers. That's not counting those who survive but have some form of permanent damage.

The way to avoid that is to at least spread out the impact over time. Telling people it'll be okay leads to no one listening and the health system collapsing. That's human nature. Telling people it's the apocalypse means most listen and the health system survives. Welcome to humanity.

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

#236

Post by randyrand »

mrfusion wrote: post #174
pm_me_ur_fullz wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can come into the state and you can leave the state, what state-level circumstance is preventing you? I'm grasping at straws but maybe you are estranged and your family is on the street but they won't let you into the hobo-hotel? Every other circumstance I can think of is a Federal issue closing borders for people that aren't Americans.

Isn’t CA under lockdown? Only supposed to leave your apartment for groceries right?

No, you can go outside for exercise, walks, errands. etc.

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

#238

Post by momokoko »

mshroyer wrote: post #11

Why is the April section of the "removal of intervention" curve below the "with intervention" curve? Particularly since there are actual "hospitalizations" data points plotted along the former?

Because the graph was probably made in Powerpoint or Illustrator.

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

#239

Post by sergiotapia »

chillacy wrote: post #234
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.

One passibility is: if some people are going to work then everyone's going to have to work, or else risk falling behind. It's the prisoner's dilemma, someone who wants to stay home would end up having to go to work anyways. This has already happened with the laughable amount of people considered "essential" when the governor of NYC made it optional (investment bankers taking the subway to go to work!) Taken like that…

>One passibility is: if some people are going to work then everyone's going to have to work, or else risk falling behind.

Then that's the reality. Again, I don't believe we should be forced to be locked down by the government, let alone some rinky dink local government politician on a power trip. Leave it to the individual.

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

#240

Post by marcinzm »

apatters wrote: post #232
saalweachter wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Around 200 million Americans will eventually get it, barring extraordinary events (like a vaccine arriving in 6 months). We cannot change this. "Significantly less than 200 million Americans catching it" is still on the table. "Herd immunity" is just the point at which the reproduction rate of the disease falls below 1 because the average infected person does not encounter anyone else to infect (because everyone el…

This is a great comment, thanks. So isn't there an argument in favor of infecting more people sooner in order to increase the immunity rate of the population, particularly if those people are at lower risk of complications for the disease? For example why not pursue a policy such as: kids can go to school unless they live with someone who is at risk (since we know that children are at very low risk for complications)…

>For example why not pursue a policy such as: kids can go to school unless they live with someone who is at risk (since we know that children are at very low risk for complications). Similar to how we managed chickenpox before there was a vaccine.

Because kids are the most likely to ignore even simple ways of preventing infection. Then you get exponential growth via kids and the health system implodes.

Post reply on HN