Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings • Hacker News Board

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#271

Post by diffrinse » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:53 PM UTC

protoman3000 wrote: post #240

diffrinse wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need to face the reality that on average people make bad choices which leads to substantial negative outcomes for any group. In particular, the COVID-19 pandemic again confirms empirically that humans on average don’t have self-responsibility. None of this has to be accepted or conceded to, somehow East Asian countries are able to do to this right, even New Zealand just so we don't start hovering on West vs East…

I would love to agree fully with you but even in China they had to weld people into their apartments because they would go out. But you’re right that culture can bring out the worst out of people and that we are getting the bill now.

But I bet they had their mask on when they tried. I could look outside my window in my urban American city and see people walking around without a mask, especially when the weather is nice. Last night my downstairs neighbors had a big loud party and another tenant yelled at them to turn the volume down. In the summer, not one pre-teen or teenager was wearing a mask in my neighborhood. Are we really gonna compare the limited instances of people being weld into their apartment to sheer collective wantonness going on stateside? And I live in a blue city.

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#272

Post by cglace » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:54 PM UTC

jlarocco wrote: post #257

ceejayoz wrote: post #5

It also demonstrates why the "personal choice" stuff is BS here. I see a lot of folks going "why are you worried if you're following the rules yourself?", and yet... > None of the victims who lost their lives had attended the party.

I don't think this is evidence for or against that, though. The wedding attendees used their "personal choice" to attend the wedding and get sick. But we don't know how they transmitted it to people once they left. Were the people they infected taking precautions? Or were they also using "personal choice" not to?

Precautions are not perfect. Just because your personal choice is to wear a mask does not mean you are 100% immune from the flocks of people that choose not to. As the numbers of infected grows so too will your chances of being infected, even if you take precautions.

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#273

Post by NotTheDr01ds » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:54 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #57

NotTheDr01ds wrote: post #41

Isn't the long-term care facility link a little implausible? 4 days seems like a bit short for the child to be infected, incubate to the point of being contagious, pass it to the parent, then incubate again to the parent being symptomatic. Regardless, the wedding and reception behavior was entirely irresponsible. But the link between it and the long-term care cases seems tenuous, at best.

*tenuous

That's the one I was looking for - Thanks :-)

Edited

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#274

Post by dougmwne » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:55 PM UTC

war1025 wrote: post #249

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can you accept people dying, but not accept the economy not doing well? The economy goes up and down. It's a fact of life. Why worry about it?

> Why can you accept people dying, but not accept the economy not doing well? In the grand scheme of "the economy", my portfolio is up something like 8% for the year last time I checked. My job is stable. In the locality of "the economy", I have heard multiple businesses in my area say that they are barely hanging on by a thread and will be forced to close permanently if the state forces them to shut down again. Peop…

People are almost certainly dying from the shutdowns. Hopefully less than we save from virus, but this is a difficult thing to measure.

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#275

Post by cglace » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:57 PM UTC

protoman3000 wrote: post #201

spidersouris wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can we live good if there exists a significant amount of people rejecting seatbelts? Is there really? One thing that has always struck me since the beginning of this pandemic is precisely why people would be more willing to attach their seatbelts than to wear a mask. Perhaps not the best comparison to make, though.

> Is there really? From personal experience and the experience of many friends I can confirm (anecdotally, but still) that in Eastern Europe there exist many societies where putting on a seatbelt is socially stigmatized.

As in wearing a seatbelt is seen in a negative light?

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#276

Post by modzu » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 5:57 PM UTC

totalZero wrote: post #259

modzu wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your comment is fair, but the LA times article is about super-spreaders.. remember super-predators? the fearmongering pumped out of mainstream media, which well predates covid, isnt why any of us read hn. if a covid topic is to remain on hn until the pandemic is resolved, there could be better sources.

The term "super-spreader" was used to describe certain individuals in past disease outbreaks, including SARS. It means that there are some people who produce and share far more viral material than average (right-tail individuals, so to speak). There is no more a connection between "super-spreaders" and "super-predators," as there is between either of those two terms and "superman." https://www.technologyreview.com/20…

im familiar with the pareto principle. the point im trying to make is just that its usage by the la times is intended to trigger fear. super-man doesn't trigger fear -- thats the difference in analogies. it would be equally valid to say, "virus spreads via supertypical method around a supertypical gathering", imo

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#277

Post by jliptzin » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #236

jliptzin wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wear a piece of cloth in front of your fucking face until a global pandemic gets under control != “control people’s lives”

Wear a mask, don’t go to restaurants, don’t go to your family gathering, don’t go on vacation, don’t go on work trips, don’t go to the office....

If everyone actually wore a mask during all those things and kept distance then more drastic measures such as total shutdowns wouldn’t be necessary as the virus would not be spreading so fast. But people can’t be bothered to even wear a mask (some are proud of their mask avoidance) so here we are.

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#278

Post by tomp » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 6:01 PM UTC

lostlogin wrote: post #231

tomp wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your choices and decisions are what threatens your life. If you don't want to be exposed to Covid, don't leave your home. I don't see why others shouldn't walk around / party, if they're themselves willing to take on the risk of infection.

Those killed in the story didn’t go to the party. As well as those who died, some number will have long term disability and illness. Many of them won’t have been guests at the wedding.

They still made choices to get in close contact with people who did go to the party, without having vetted them sufficiently. I'm not saying it's easy to avoid such choices, but even things like going out to buy food - how many layers of mask are you wearing? What hours do you go shopping? How many months of food do you have stored at your home (inb4 "survivalists are just paranoid")?

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#279

Post by GuB-42 » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 6:03 PM UTC

greggman3 wrote: post #155

First off let me make it clear (1) I've mostly stayed entirely isolate since March. (2) I plan to stay isolated. So don't shoot the messenger please. Anyway, I live in Tokyo. Tokyo Metro area has basically all of California (SF, SD, etc..) squeezed into an area the size of Los Angeles. 34 million people. Tokyo has been mostly unlocked since June. Theaters and other venues are open (every other seat), clubs are open (…

Knowing what I know about Japan, I expect both cases and deaths to be underreported.

Other factors I can think of is that the Japanese are particularly obedient. Tell them to wear a mask and they wear a mask, they don't organize protests instead. They also take hygiene seriously in their day to day life.

Another thing is that despite the population density, the Japanese naturally keep their distances. Not much handshakes, hugging, and touching each other unless it can't be helped.

As for a "different virus", it is very unlikely, but a different population, that's possible. As I understand it, the Japanese population is relatively homogeneous, and they may have a genetic advantage.

Re: Super-spreading wedding demonstrates Covid-19 risk posed by holiday gatherings

#280

Post by tomp » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 6:03 PM UTC

craftinator wrote: post #233

tomp wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your choices and decisions are what threatens your life. If you don't want to be exposed to Covid, don't leave your home. I don't see why others shouldn't walk around / party, if they're themselves willing to take on the risk of infection.

I waited too long to post my rant and the comment got killed, so you've become my rant-patsy, and I'm pasting it below. Also, yeah, things like choosing to eat, just choose not to go get food and you're good, right? Jeez, what a short-sighted, selfish, impatient, and entitled point of view. I'm guessing you haven't spent much time living anywhere that's actually dangerous? A large percentage of people in the world ha…

I'm not sure if you meant to write this sarcastically, but it kind-of sounds like you're comparing COVID with third-world countries full of Ebola and tribal killings? You do realize you're the comparison is a bit ridiculous?

Ultimately, it's a question of value. How much do you value not getting an illness with 99.9% survival rate, vs. living your life. And then imposing your own value system onto others (or not).