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

The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

sfmayor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 893 posts

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#101

Post by xsmasher »

cobookman wrote: post #80
primeradical wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To anyone reading the comment above, it is extremely poor advice and should not be followed. Stay at home and shelter in place orders are not solely for the purpose of protecting ones-self from contracting the virus. They also serve to limit the spread from unsuspecting carriers. You can carry and spread the virus unknowingly and this will result in susceptible people contracting it and dying. The only way we know th…

So when do you lift the stay in place? When there's 0 cases? If so, what if that never happens?

I've heard some mention of "two weeks of decline in the number of new cases." That sounds reasonable to me.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#103

Post by koenigdavidmj »

exmadscientist wrote: post #63
djrogers wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the lockdown is not to prevent everyone from getting the disease, or to hide in our homes until it magically goes away. The stated purpose of the lockdown was to 'flatten the curve'. Don't go moving goalposts on us all now that we've flattened the curve, especially when we're talking about people's constitutional rights.

Moving the goalposts was always the idea. That's what the governor here in WA did, and said as much. I, personally, am livid that the construction site right outside my bedroom window is now allowed to make ungodly amounts of noise for 15 hours a day and I have nowhere to go. This is insane. Lockdowns have a tremendous cost in mental health. There's a point at which the toll is simply too high. We're not there yet, b…

Moving the goalposts could probably be a confusing bit of terminology here. OP means that the original intention was “lock down so that we don’t run out of ICU beds”, and now it is “lock down until there’s a vaccine”. The end condition is being changed every time we get close to it.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#104

Post by cs702 »

scott_s wrote: post #29
marcell wrote: post #5

Blanket lockdown has to end. This policy has outlived its usefulness, and is harming people's quality of life without a clear goal. The initial premise of the "flatten the curve" memes was to avoid overwhelming hospitals. The shelter-in-place has not only had this effect, it's been too effective. Hospital utilization in the bay area is at around 10% when you count surge capacity that has been added [1]. Meanwhile, da…

I've seen you say similar things in a few other threads, and myself and others have said, every time: the risk to everyone is that the hospitals become overwhelmed. They are not right now because of stay-at-home orders. What you think of as failure - hospitals currently low utilization - is in fact success .

If many people get very sick simultaneously, they would not only overwhelm hospitals, they would also inflict a disorderly, involuntary shutdown of large swaths of the economy, driven by fear -- instead of the orderly, voluntary shutdown we have at present, driven by government mandate.

We all want to avoid a disorderly shutdown driven by fear.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#105

Post by mindslight »

code_chimp wrote: post #31
jamroom wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our society includes people who are over 50 - how do ensure that YOU do not transmit coronavirus to them if you are under 50 and asymptomatic? I know a lot of people are pretty upset but it's not just about YOU. It's about everyone you come in contact with.

I am over 50 and asthmatic - if I feel that I am in danger I am free to self-quarantine. There is no need to impinge on everyone else's freedoms to ensure my safety - I am a big boy and able to take care of my own health decisions.

You can only choose to self isolate if you have the means to give up income. Needing to come up with necessary expenses like food and utilities would be understandable, but the largest bill is rent which is a mostly product of our financial system rather than an intrinsic requirement of existence.

I could be in favor of lifting shutdown orders if there were a corresponding federal push to either halt such payments or reimburse people (federal is where the bulk of the money is distributed/printed). But without that, it's disingenuous to frame the situation as some kind of choice, when it's really the same unempathetic turning of the screws on the marginalized.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#106

Post by jkasdflklzxcv »

chrisseaton wrote: post #33
marcell wrote: post #5

Blanket lockdown has to end. This policy has outlived its usefulness, and is harming people's quality of life without a clear goal. The initial premise of the "flatten the curve" memes was to avoid overwhelming hospitals. The shelter-in-place has not only had this effect, it's been too effective. Hospital utilization in the bay area is at around 10% when you count surge capacity that has been added [1]. Meanwhile, da…

> The initial premise of the "flatten the curve" memes was to avoid overwhelming hospitals. I don't think it was a 'meme' - if you're thinking it was just something on Facebook or something like that. It was and still is a government goal informing their policy.

fuck the government and fuck you if you support this

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#107

Post by skellington »

newacct583 wrote: post #83
crocodiletears wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can ease up on the lockdown without ending it. That's what I read the parent to be implying.

Ease up how? I mean, what's the specific proposal? The lockdown isn't "total" anyway -- very large numbers of people are still working at full salary (including, it must be pointed out, probably more than half the readers of this very site). There's little to no low hanging fruit of safe jobs that can be reopened. Just go look at the California list of "essential" jobs and tell us what needs to be added. Fundamentall…

Are you not aware that "lockdown" covers a wide continuum of practices?!

Ease up can mean a lot of things between what we have now and no lockdown whatsoever.

What level of easing depends on the goal and the data showing what level of control is being achieved.

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#108

Post by [deleted] »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #67
tptacek wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps when the data starts showing it.

There is dated data (from 1981) showing a 37,000 increase in deaths for each percentage-point rise in the unemployment rate. It comes from a book called “Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation” by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker. From the article citation below: > Here’s the paragraph from Thomas’ book that applies: “According to one study [the one by Bluestone et a…

[deleted]

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#109

Post by rbritton »

tptacek wrote: post #69
toomuchtodo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is dated data (from 1981) showing a 37,000 increase in deaths for each percentage-point rise in the unemployment rate. It comes from a book called “Corporate Flight: The Causes and Consequences of Economic Dislocation” by Barry Bluestone, Bennett Harrison and Lawrence Baker. From the article citation below: > Here’s the paragraph from Thomas’ book that applies: “According to one study [the one by Bluestone et a…

Then what's happening right now is a refutation of that data, right? Because we have sky-high unemployment and nothing resembling those numbers. It's almost as if unemployment in ordinary circumstances is not the same as unemployment caused by a discrete, universally-applicable crisis.

This study suggests that the resulting rise in deaths isn't immediate. That it isn't measurable now does not mean it isn't coming.

>1 %-point rise in the unemployment rate raises the risk of dying next year by 6%.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02779...

Re: The San Francisco Bay Area shelter-in-place order is being extended through May

#110

Post by marcell »

scott_s wrote: post #29
marcell wrote: post #5

Blanket lockdown has to end. This policy has outlived its usefulness, and is harming people's quality of life without a clear goal. The initial premise of the "flatten the curve" memes was to avoid overwhelming hospitals. The shelter-in-place has not only had this effect, it's been too effective. Hospital utilization in the bay area is at around 10% when you count surge capacity that has been added [1]. Meanwhile, da…

I've seen you say similar things in a few other threads, and myself and others have said, every time: the risk to everyone is that the hospitals become overwhelmed. They are not right now because of stay-at-home orders. What you think of as failure - hospitals currently low utilization - is in fact success .

What is your evidence that hospitals in America in general, and in California, are anywhere near being overwhelmed? I've cited evidence which shows the opposite--they are very far from being overwhelmed.
Post reply on HN