No spike in coronavirus in places reopening, U.S. health secretary says

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 4, 2009
34,576
15,790
136
As is often the case, there is some truth to what Trump says. Mistakes were made in the scientific community and demographically and culturally, we are dealing with factors that other nations aren’t. That doesn’t excuse Trump for the mistakes he made, and he is amplifying these factors to distract from them, but there is some truth behind it.

I was coming to clarify.
I sort of agree it is time to get back to a restricted “normal” obviously we cannot continue as we are indefinitely.
What we do need which we will never get.
Honest discussion about risks/costs/fatalities about reopening.
We need expert opinions which you can choose to ignore
We need a good discussion about medical supplies and hospital capacity and what happens if it becomes stressed AND what benchmarks will be used to judge.
People who are wrong ideally need to say they made a bad call on a difficult decision.
What we are doing to prevent immediate crisis and what we are doing differently not to end up in this position again

I can’t figure out why nobody thinks it’s strange that we have around 4% of the worlds population but have close to 25% of the Corona deaths.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,039
48,034
136
I was coming to clarify.
I sort of agree it is time to get back to a restricted “normal” obviously we cannot continue as we are indefinitely.
What we do need which we will never get.
Honest discussion about risks/costs/fatalities about reopening.
We need expert opinions which you can choose to ignore
We need a good discussion about medical supplies and hospital capacity and what happens if it becomes stressed AND what benchmarks will be used to judge.
People who are wrong ideally need to say they made a bad call on a difficult decision.
What we are doing to prevent immediate crisis and what we are doing differently not to end up in this position again
Getting back to normal means a vaccine or effective treatment for the virus.

I’m confused as to what people don’t get about this. Reopen bars and restaurants? You want to pack tons of people in small indoor areas for hours at a time breathing each other’s air? What do you think will happen? Some people offer alternatives of having them reopen but at 25% or 50% capacity. The thing is bars and restaurants can’t be profitable operating at that low capacity so in most cases they will choose to remain closed. If they did that then we still spread the virus and they still go out of business.

I think people feel there is a good answer here and there is, it’s just one that our government is unable to implement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uclaLabrat
Feb 4, 2009
34,576
15,790
136
Getting back to normal means a vaccine or effective treatment for the virus.

I’m confused as to what people don’t get about this. Reopen bars and restaurants? You want to pack tons of people in small indoor areas for hours at a time breathing each other’s air? What do you think will happen? Some people offer alternatives of having them reopen but at 25% or 50% capacity. The thing is bars and restaurants can’t be profitable operating at that low capacity so in most cases they will choose to remain closed. If they did that then we still spread the virus and they still go out of business.

I think people feel there is a good answer here and there is, it’s just one that our government is unable to implement.

First: “restricted normal” were my words
Second: have a talk about it, set benchmarks how success or failure will be tracked, have a plan for what to do next.

Currently our Federal Government has proved incapable of providing guidance so this has to be a local thing.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
14,107
12,209
146
Getting back to normal means a vaccine or effective treatment for the virus.

I’m confused as to what people don’t get about this. Reopen bars and restaurants? You want to pack tons of people in small indoor areas for hours at a time breathing each other’s air? What do you think will happen? Some people offer alternatives of having them reopen but at 25% or 50% capacity. The thing is bars and restaurants can’t be profitable operating at that low capacity so in most cases they will choose to remain closed. If they did that then we still spread the virus and they still go out of business.

I think people feel there is a good answer here and there is, it’s just one that our government is unable to implement.
Most people have never actually experienced a shit situation in their life, so now that they're exposed to one, they're just sure that there's a better way for it to be handled (aka one that makes them feel better). It's shit, it's shit for everyone, and will be shit for everyone until we have a vaccine or kill a bunch of people.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
27,287
36,413
136
Proud of Vermont, people have been taking it seriously since Day 1. One of the few places doing "good."


Texas, probably time to get your shit together. It's easier if you elect adults and sane people, just saying.
 

IJTSSG

Golden Member
Aug 12, 2014
1,115
276
136
Vermont has almost twice as many deaths/per million as Texas and is only doing slightly better in cases per million.

Team Phucktard should have the stats read to them before spouting ignorance, even in this echo chamber.

Stats for the phucktards.
 
Feb 4, 2009
34,576
15,790
136
  • Like
Reactions: jman19

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,817
9,027
136
You do realize the restrictions have broad public support, right?
But how would he know that without walk to wall coverage of protesters ignoring social distancing in order to...champion social distancing??? The counter-protest is silent and invisible.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,039
48,034
136

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,234
136
Sure, I would say that to anyone - it’s the truth after all. Do you seriously not understand that the overwhelming majority of these layoffs and furloughs would have happened anyway?

Take the airline industry for example, it is and has been 100% open for business this entire time. Air travel is down ~90% and only massive government bailouts are preventing the wholesale collapse of the industry. If the government closing things is the cause of layoffs and furloughs then why is the unaffected airline industry dying?

You can also just use common sense. If someone offered you a free ticket to the movies today would you go? I wouldn’t.



You do realize the restrictions have broad public support, right?
International air travel has most definitely not been "100% open for business this entire time."
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,141
24,073
136
I will never understand people who just occasionally pop in here to scream and rage about how stupid everyone is, refuse to engage in any conversation, and then leave again.

He's like the ATPN version of a screaming hobo on a street corner.
The hobo usually has more insightful observations though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,676
2,430
126
I hope so but Azar is one of the least trustworthy and least truthful members of the Trump Administration. I think I'm not alone among the American public in putting little reliance on any statements from this Administration that are not verified by a credible third party.

It's truly sad that this is depth that our government has sunk to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,298
1,234
136
Domestic travel has and its down more than 95%. Stop quibbling.
OK. It's "quibbling" to point out that you can't say the airline industry "has been 100% open for business this entire time" while ignoring severely-restricted international travel (not to mention mandatory post-travel quarantines and other such discouragement).

...

Take the airline industry for example, it is and has been 100% open for business this entire time. Air travel is down ~90% and only massive government bailouts are preventing the wholesale collapse of the industry. If the government closing things is the cause of layoffs and furloughs then why is the unaffected airline industry dying?

...

My Thai boss says they have to quarantine for 2 weeks after domestic travel within Thailand (Narathiwat to Bangkok).
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,141
24,073
136
OK. It's "quibbling" to point out that you can't say the airline industry "has been 100% open for business this entire time" while ignoring severely-restricted international travel (not to mention mandatory post-travel quarantines and other such discouragement).



My Thai boss says they have to quarantine for 2 weeks after domestic travel within Thailand (Narathiwat to Bangkok).
The simple point is that even without government restrictions on domestic air travel people are choosing not to fly.
 

eelw

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 1999
9,039
4,355
136
The protests we are seeing are fueled by people frustrated because they don’t fear the virus and reject the government imposed restrictions that are impacting their business and livelihoods.
So carrying guns are required during these protests? Waving confederate flags because they are frustrated of the restrictions? Declaring they are protected because they took hydroxychlorquine are the sane citizens protesting the closures and not in a full blown MAGA rally?One of the oddest demographics I’ve seen communicate strong opposition to the lockdown, and who are starting to echo Trump’s talking points, are salon owners.

At first thought you were a Bernie Bros. Then just never Bidener. Not you’re full blown MAGA Trumpard.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,141
24,073
136
So carrying guns are required during these protests? Waving confederate flags because they are frustrated of the restrictions? Declaring they are protected because they took hydroxychlorquine are the sane citizens protesting the closures and not in a full blown MAGA rally?One of the oddest demographics I’ve seen communicate strong opposition to the lockdown, and who are starting to echo Trump’s talking points, are salon owners.

At first thought you were a Bernie Bros. Then just never Bidener. Not you’re full blown MAGA Trumpard.
Starbuck isn't any of those things. He is just a full on contrarian who will bitch about anything and argue against any majority position in any dishonest way he can.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Sure, I would say that to anyone - it’s the truth after all. Do you seriously not understand that the overwhelming majority of these layoffs and furloughs would have happened anyway?
In America yes, but other countries are better equipped to manage the economic blow.

You can also just use common sense. If someone offered you a free ticket to the movies today would you go? I wouldn’t.
Depends. If the theater is following a cleaning regime between shows, and taking other precautions like only filling every third seat, and required all attendees wear a mask, yes I would. I will accept inconveniences to responsibly open the economy.

You do realize the restrictions have broad public support, right?
Yes, to a point. They may have broad support, yet I see people increasingly drifting from social distancing and other guidelines.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
So carrying guns are required during these protests? Waving confederate flags because they are frustrated of the restrictions? Declaring they are protected because they took hydroxychlorquine are the sane citizens protesting the closures and not in a full blown MAGA rally?One of the oddest demographics I’ve seen communicate strong opposition to the lockdown, and who are starting to echo Trump’s talking points, are salon owners.

At first thought you were a Bernie Bros. Then just never Bidener. Not you’re full blown MAGA Trumpard.
Welcome to concern squad!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,039
48,034
136
In America yes, but other countries are better equipped to manage the economic blow.

So then there's no dispute about the business closures in America, only an agreement that we should do more to aid those affected.

The governance failure here is our lack of social safety net, not that we are imposing restrictions to deal with a pandemic.

Depends. If the theater is following a cleaning regime between shows, and taking other precautions like only filling every third seat, and required all attendees wear a mask, yes I would. I will accept inconveniences to responsibly open the economy.

Do you honestly think a movie theater's business model works where every theater is 1/3rd full at a maximum? I find it highly unlikely that it does. Would content creators even put movies into theaters with such low viewership? I think there's a good chance no.

Also, I would not attend a theater now and I think a lot of people share this opinion. I don't even thing 1/3rd full would happen.

Yes, to a point. They may have broad support, yet I see people increasingly drifting from social distancing and other guidelines.

My point is the protesters are opposed by most people.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,017
2,860
136
I think the results are pretty interesting. The data is, of course, quite incomplete. And while we're seeing a lot more people out relative to before and locales with people completely disregarding public health advice, the behavior of people is still quite a lot different than the early stages of the pandemic. This would be a great time to have really good testing and contact tracing apparatus to study if outbreak containment is viable. Sadly, places where vulnerable populations are housed in close proximity (e.g. nursing facilities) are going to get intermittently hit and lack containment capability. Also, if you look at those who are behaving with the greatest risk, you could end up with a significant herd immunity among a subset despite relatively low overall population immunity which could very significantly alter spread.

I'm not expert enough in epidemiology to know if there are models out there which are better applicable to the current situation.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,678
13,432
146
So carrying guns are required during these protests? Waving confederate flags because they are frustrated of the restrictions? Declaring they are protected because they took hydroxychlorquine are the sane citizens protesting the closures and not in a full blown MAGA rally?One of the oddest demographics I’ve seen communicate strong opposition to the lockdown, and who are starting to echo Trump’s talking points, are salon owners.

At first thought you were a Bernie Bros. Then just never Bidener. Not you’re full blown MAGA Trumpard.
Possibly a dumb question. When does a group of armed men holding the flag of an enemy of our country storming a state capital stop being a first amendment issue of speech, assembly and redress of grievances?

If it does stop being a first amendment issue does that mean others could exercise their 2nd amendment right to defend the security of a free state?

It sure seems like the protestors should leave either the flag, the guns or both at home if they have a legitimate grievance to address.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,017
2,860
136
Possibly a dumb question. When does a group of armed men holding the flag of an enemy of our country storming a state capital stop being a first amendment issue of speech, assembly and redress of grievances?

If it does stop being a first amendment issue does that mean others could exercise their 2nd amendment right to defend the security of a free state?

It sure seems like the protestors should leave either the flag, the guns or both at home if they have a legitimate grievance to address.

The right to defend yourself isn't inherently connected to the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment constitutionally protects the right to possess a firearm for when its use is justified. Other laws establish how a gun may be used and when deadly force may be applicable. They may have a right to possess the firearm on the premises and open carry it or concealed carry it with permit, but wouldn't be able to point it at someone. And if they broke the law by restricting the movement of lawmakers, for example, you wouldn't be able to shoot them for it.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
15,454
7,862
136
It's only looking good because of the social distancing measures that have been in place. The potential for exponential spread didn't go away. It's kinda like Chernobyl- there's no going back if you fuck it up bad enough.
Hence my concern about interstate travel. If state X opens to fast and moves R0 back to ~2.2 there is some potential safety for other states if interstate travel (road, train, bus, airline) is still significantly depressed.
Where I live (So. NH), travel to MA along interstate 93 is way down - perhaps because Mass had a major outbreak. @Ichinisan hasn't seen that same level of decline (though both of these are anecdotes).

Anyway, but the end of the month we'll have a real clear picture of how this so called 'phase 1' opening has impacted infection rates in various states and localities.