Lessons from COVID-19

[sidd]

Forte on globalization:

"when people panic, they panic according to a template ... Sometimes the template is handed to us via mass-mediated popular culture. On other occasions, the template has been provided by the state. "

"panic-driven buying of toilet paper. Now why toilet paper? ... They cannot explain themselves in words, but that does not mean that they were acting irrationally. Instead, their action was “reasonable” given what, as a society, they had been conditioned to perceive and expect as the defining feature of an emergency situation ... what we observed here were the workings of a media-based cultural blowback from sanctions aimed at regime change in Venezuela, and the mass shortages that were provoked there ... for years international media propagated stories about “shortages of toilet paper” ...  throughout 2016 and again in 2018. The shortage of toilet paper appears to have become the new viral meme of crisis theatre. Having seen what happens when other countries faced a crisis, many in the US and here in Canada were thus trained to expect that we too would “naturally” face a shortage of toilet paper—because presumably that’s what always happens in a crisis."

"they were panic buying was because they expected everything around them to shut down. What they feared was a total shutdown of the economy, and its eventual collapse."

" it is in the interest of some to make sure that some type of fear retains a permanent presence"

"We are clearly being tested—even if not by conscious design—for our “resilience,” as individuals primarily. How good are we at following public health directives, and listening to the commands of our elected leaders?"

" The crisis is too good for neoliberalism to not use it to try to salvage itself, especially when its existence is what is immediately threatened. The fear, then, is on all sides."

"Fear maximizes regimentation. Fear dictates mass response. Fear can also increase trust in authority, out of a desire for protection, especially in societies that have long enforced processes of infantilizing and disempowering citizens. Fear renders those who normally live in a state of dependency—dependent on others for certification, for authorization, for jobs, for goods and services—even more dependent. Fear has people looking outwards and upwards. "

"the question cannot be one of whether we can escape the clutches of “big government”. Clearly, we cannot. The only question is which big government do we trust more—the one over which we might have some nominal control, or the one designed to answer no one except shareholders and serves the interests of profit for a few ...  that the corporations of the public sector are what we call political parties, whereas the political parties of the private sector are what we call companies; or that both business and government involve bureaucracy. "

" thinkers have a valid point is in alerting us to the risk of governments appropriating, exploiting, and abusing “public health risks” as a convenient means of increasing their power. This would actually be in keeping with a substantial amount of modern history, from colonialist “hygiene” campaigns to eugenics and class control in urban areas of Europe and North America."

"After 9/11, the state drew legitimation from the need to “protect” people and ensure their “security” and “safety,” which—very quickly—became a justification for permanent war, permanent occupation, regime change, mass surveillance, the curtailment of civil liberties, censorship, and persecution of dissidents. Fear of a “public health crisis” erupting in this or that locale (especially one conveniently situated atop massive oil or strategic mineral reserves), would be a crisis too good to waste."

" “public health” and “hygiene” can be revived in the cause of global recolonization. The hygienic narrative can easily be added to the repertoire of humanitarian interventionism. There will be no shortage of both racism and ethnocentrism. We may soon hear justifications for intervention on the basis of “preventing a public health catastrophe and a repeat of COVID-19”. Governments (“regimes”) allegedly failing to enforce public hygiene, will be treated as if they had forfeited sovereignty. "

"This crisis must be exceedingly embarrassing and inconvenient for the orthodox scribes who attend to the upkeep of the once dominant narrative. We are waiting to be reminded of how globalization has made the world more stable, and made our lives better. Behold how peaceful and prosperous is a world shut down and quarantined by capitalist globalization. Let’s hear three more cheers for capitalism, how it has made everyone safer, and remember: “capitalism works”. The coronavirus also works, and without any of the armies which capitalism used to annihilate alternatives."

"globalization, and the globalism that upholds it, have literally sickened people. All have been put in danger, many have already died, and more will die. Such a system cannot be allowed to continue, as a practical matter of survival. "

"another old realization will come back to the fore: we do not need any foreign master. We do not need any foreign master, whether new or old, whether it is China or the US. Some think (wishfully, not analytically) that it is only China’s alleged plan to become the centre of global power that will be harmed from this pandemic—but it is US hegemony that will now meet its fullest and most visible decline."

"I want to challenge readers to stop thinking of the world necessarily being polar, whether uni-polar, bi-polar, or multi-polar. The fact of the matter is that for the vast majority of the time that humans have existed on this planet, our planet was non-polar. Global “poles” are an invention of the last 500 years—not a particularly good invention, rarely a welcome invention, and clearly not a sustainable invention."

https://zeroanthropology.net/2020/04/27/globalization-in-the-widening-gyre-of-covid-19/

sidd

[sidd]

Work or starve: Iowa, Texas

"If you don't return to work in Texas and Iowa because you fear getting sick from the coronavirus you risk losing unemployment benefits. "

"If you're an employer and you offer to bring your employee back to work and they decide not to, that's a voluntary quit ... Therefore, they would not be eligible for the unemployment money."

"Businesses should report employees who refuse to return to work without good reason or who quit their jobs as soon as possible,"

"I feel like either I'm going to lose my business and everything I worked for, or I'm going to get sick,"

"The fervor to reopen—whether it's safe or not—will compel these workers to put themselves between the virus and people sitting on Zoom calls and ordering deliveries online."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/29/only-trumps-america-despite-covid-19-employees-texas-and-iowa-told-get-back-work-or

sidd

[kassy]

Removed a music video not related to any lessons. Such videos can be put in the music thread in The Rest with a byeline.

[Archimid]

Fear of globalization caused this problem. When the outbreak began in China, international health authorities should have worked together to contain the virus in place. Teams of nurses, doctors, and personal of international nature should have flown in with tons of equipment, and together with the overwhelmed Chinese authorities contain it in place.

The response has to be international because an outbreak can start anywhere in the world at any time. No one city in the world can maintain the resources required to battle this type of emergency.

Equally, cooperation and coordination on travel and maritime situations that arose with the pandemic was highly deficient and still is.

[blumenkraft]

American 'protesters' ladies and gentlemen.



Link >> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/02/auschwitz-memorial-condemns-nazi-slogan-illinois-coronavirus-rally

If you didn't already know, this should show you just how the neo-nazis and the reopen movement are in the same boat.

[Neven]

The best way to deal with that, is to not feed it, but that's a lesson for another day. This is something that has always been there and always will be, and thus it's not a lesson to be learned from COVID-19.

[blumenkraft]

Neven, you are right, i bet most people on this forum understand how those right-wing think-tanks influence public opinion like that. We have seen it for too long when it comes to climate change. As far as the general public is concerned though, i would say no more than 10% are aware.

Understanding and analyzing how it happens today, with this pandemic, might have the means to uncover this for other topics too.

IMHO there is indeed a lesson to be learned here.

[vox_mundi]

I agree with bk

Looking the other way just 'normalizes' it. That didn't work out so swell 80 years ago. If you don't learn from the past you set yourself up for a repeat.

[Archimid]

The best way to deal with that, is to not feed it, but that's a lesson for another day. This is something that has always been there and always will be, and thus it's not a lesson to be learned from COVID-19.

1. know your enemy is an important lesson.

2. The best way to deal with it is to let it happen and ignore it?

[Neven]

1. know your enemy is an important lesson.

Indeed it is, and if you think that people holding up an 'Arbeit macht frei' sign, is the enemy, you are not learning anything. I used to think that way, back in the GWB years, but now I know better.

There is only one enemy right now, and it's not a group of human beings. It's concentrated wealth. Deconcentrate it and you have a chance of solving things. Focus on 'knowing' some perceived enemy, which only says something about yourself, and you're in for lots of violence and a continuation of the vicious cycle.

2. The best way to deal with it is to let it happen and ignore it?

Focussing will necessarily involve ignoring, because ignoring is the best way to prevent yourself from getting distracted. Things like Trump and white supremacist protesters ('those people'), it's all a distraction. If you don't eliminate the root cause (=concentrated wealth), you won't beat those distractions.

[Tom_Mazanec]

Neven:
Has any society ever eliminated concentrated wealth? And even if, by some miracle, one did, immediately wouldn't differences in people's talents, ambition, luck, etc. immediately start reconcentrating it again?

[Neven]

Neven:
Has any society ever eliminated concentrated wealth?

I don't know, I'm not a historian. I vaguely remember reading about some era in Japan's history, and about tribes that chose leaders based on altruism.

And even if, by some miracle, one did, immediately wouldn't differences in people's talents, ambition, luck, etc. immediately start reconcentrating it again?

Yes, it would. s soon as a group of people undertake something, the dynamic is set in motion. Differences in people's talents, ambition, luck, etc. are actually a great way to produce progress and innovation. But when that is translated into wealth, and there is no limit to that wealth, that's when wealth starts to take over, moves beyond the control of its owners, and continues to grow exponentially, until it destroys itself and everything connected to it.

Hence the need for a cap on wealth. Not a tax, a cap. You could argue that a cap is a 100% tax.

[Tom_Mazanec]

What should that cap be, exactly?

[Neven]

That's of secondary importance, and off-topic.

[nanning]

I think you will find that most non-civilisation tribes were without concentrated wealth.

Concentrated wealth is a symptom of civilisations. The conquerors gain, either with or without physical violence. The rest gets conquered.

[Tom_Mazanec]

But even noncivilized tribes had their chiefs and shamans who had better lives than the regular guys.

[nanning]

/off-topic
Tom, please watch this youtube documentary about the San people from southern Africa and try to find a chief or a shaman. Or fathers. Or marriage.
Most non-civilisation tribes that were not nomadic didn't have separate houses like we think is 'normal'. Why would you if don't follow the unnatural fantasies of marriage and father/family. These fantasies came with civiliation, from powerful rich men.
People are always trying any which way to find the faults of civilisations also in non-civilisation tribes. That is the result of a strong cultural bias and a 'bubble'; to not want to see anything negative about 'normal' culture. I vividly remember how oren reacted to my monogamy post; wiping it from the table without any arguments. As if it was just an idea and not very thoroughly tought through and through. Another example of cultural bias and 'safety'-glass 'bubble'.
(27m06)


I will not respond further to this subject in this thread. My apologies to the moderators.

[Neven]

Will we learn from this, or will we just forget how it all started, after the crisis has been fully exploited by a system that only cares about increasing concentrated wealth?

Consent Factory:

Virus of Mass Destruction

There comes a point in the introduction of every new official narrative when people no longer remember how it started. Or, rather, they remember how it started, but not the propaganda that started it. Or, rather, they remember all that (or are able to, if you press them on it), but it doesn’t make any difference anymore, because the official narrative has supplanted reality.

You’ll remember this point from the War on Terror, and specifically the occupation of Iraq. By the latter half of 2004, most Westerners had completely forgotten the propaganda that launched the invasion, and thus regarded the Iraqi resistance as “terrorists,” despite the fact that the United States had invaded and was occupying their country for no legitimate reason whatsoever. By that time, it was abundantly clear that there were no “weapons of mass destruction,” and that the U.S.A. had invaded a nation that had not attacked it, and posed no threat to it, and so was perpetrating a textbook war of aggression.

These facts did not matter, not in the slightest. By that time, Westerners were totally immersed in the official War on Terror narrative, which had superseded objective reality. Herd mentality had taken over. It’s difficult to describe how this works; it’s a state of functional dissociation. It wasn’t that people didn’t know the facts, or that they didn’t understand the facts. They knew the Iraqis weren’t “terrorists.” At the same time, they knew they were definitely “terrorists,” despite the fact that they knew that they weren’t. They knew there were no WMDs, that there had never been any WMDs, and still they were certain there were WMDs, which would be found, although they clearly did not exist.

The same thing happened in Nazi Germany. The majority of the German people were never fanatical anti-Semites like the hardcore N.S.D.A.P. members. If they had been, there would have been no need for Goebbels and his monstrous propaganda machine. No, the Germans during the Nazi period, like the Americans during the War on Terror, knew that their victims posed no threat to them, and at the same time they believed exactly the opposite, and thus did not protest as their neighbors were hauled out of their homes and sent off to death camps, camps which, in their dissociative state, simultaneously did and did not exist.

(...)

It is the goal of every official narrative to generate this type of herd mentality, not in order to deceive or dupe the public, but, rather, to confuse and terrorize them to the point where they revert to their primal instincts, and are being driven purely by existential fear, and facts and truth no longer matter. Once an official narrative reaches this point, it is unassailable by facts and reason. It no longer needs facts to justify it. It justifies itself with its own existence. Reason cannot penetrate it. Arguing with its adherents is pointless. They know it is irrational. They simply do not care.

We are reaching this point with the coronavirus narrative. It is possible that we have already reached it. Despite the fact that what we are dealing with is a virus that, yes, is clearly deadly to the old and those with medical conditions, but that is just as clearly not a deadly threat to the majority of the human species, people are cowering inside their homes as if the Zombie Apocalpyse had finally begun. Many appear to believe that this virus is some sort of Alien-Terrorist Death Flu (or weaponized Virus of Mass Destruction) that will kill you the second you breathe it in.

This is not surprising at all, because, according to the official narrative, its destructive powers are nearly unlimited. Not only will it obliterate your lungs, and liquidate all your other major organs, and kill you with blood clots, and intestinal damage, now it causes “sudden strokes in young adults,” and possibly spontaneous prostate cancer, and God knows what other medical horrors!

According to all the “scientists” and “medical experts” (i.e., those that conform to the official narrative, not all the other scientists and medical experts), it is unlike any other virus that has ever existed in the history of viruses. It certainly doesn’t follow the typical pattern of spreading extensively for a limited period, and then rapidly dying down on its own, regardless of what measures are taken to thwart it, as this Israeli study would seem to indicate.

Also, “we have no immunity against it,” which is why we all have to remain “locked down” like unruly inmates in a penitentiary until a vaccine can be concocted and forced onto every living person on earth. Apparently, this mandatory wonder vaccine will magically render us immune to this virus against which we have no immunity (and are totally unable to develop immunity), which immunity will be certified on our mandatory “immunity papers,” which we will need to travel, get a job, send our kids to school, and, you know, to show the police when they stop us on the street because we look like maybe we might be “infected.”

Germany (where I live) is way out in front of this. According to the Süddeutsche Zeitung, the federal government plans to introduce a coronavirus “immunity card” as part of its “Infection Protection Law,” which will grant the authorities the power to round up anyone “suspected to be contagious” and force them into … uh … “quarantine,” and “forbid them from entering certain public places.” The Malaysian authorities have dispensed with such niceties, and are arresting migrant workers and refugees in so-called “Covid-19 red zones” and marching them off to God knows where.

(...)

They aren’t hiding the totalitarianism … they don’t have to. Because people are begging for it. They are demanding to be “locked down” inside their homes, forced to wear masks, and stand two meters apart, for reasons that most of them no longer remember.

Plastic barriers are going up everywhere. Arrows on the floor show you which way to walk. Boxes show you where to stand. Paranoid Blockwarts are putting up signs threatening anyone not wearing a mask. Hysterical little fascist creeps are reporting their neighbors to the police for letting their children play with other children. Millions of people are voluntarily downloading “contact tracing applications” so that governments and global corporations can monitor their every movement. In Spain, they bleached an entire beach, killing everything, down to the insects, in order to protect the public from “infection.” The Internet has become an Orwellian chorus of shrieking, sanctimonious voices bullying everyone into conformity with charts, graphs, and desperate guilt-trips, few of which have much connection to reality. Corporations and governments are censoring dissent. We’re approaching a level of manufactured mass hysteria and herd mentality that not even Goebbels could have imagined.

Meanwhile, they’re striking the mostly empty “field hospitals,” and the theatrical “hospital ship” is now gone, and despite their attempts to inflate the Covid-19 death count as much as humanly possible, the projected hundreds of millions of deaths have not materialized (not even close), and Sweden is fine, as is most of humanity, and … just like there were no WMDs, there is no Virus of Mass Destruction.

What there is, is a new official narrative, the brave new, paranoid, pathologized “normal.” Like the War on Terror, it’s a global narrative. A global, post-ideological narrative. It’s just getting started, so it isn’t yet clear how totalitarian this show will get, but, given the nature of the pilot episode, I am kind of dreading the rest of the series.

[oren]

We are reaching this point with the coronavirus narrative. It is possible that we have already reached it. Despite the fact that what we are dealing with is a virus that, yes, is clearly deadly to the old and those with medical conditions, but that is just as clearly not a deadly threat to the majority of the human species, people are cowering inside their homes as if the Zombie Apocalpyse had finally begun. Many appear to believe that this virus is some sort of Alien-Terrorist Death Flu (or weaponized Virus of Mass Destruction) that will kill you the second you breathe it in.

This is not surprising at all, because, according to the official narrative, its destructive powers are nearly unlimited. Not only will it obliterate your lungs, and liquidate all your other major organs, and kill you with blood clots, and intestinal damage, now it causes “sudden strokes in young adults,” and possibly spontaneous prostate cancer, and God knows what other medical horrors!

Nonsense. The official position of most governments and the scientific establishment is that this virus kills ~1% of infected persons, with a high skew towards the old and the sick. It can also overwhelm healthcare systems when it is allowed to spread unchecked. That is all. If anything, many try to downplay the risk, rather than overplay it. So when someone (as in the quoted article) drums up the official position as if it is a narrative of the zombie apocalypse, you bet they are promoting some kind of agenda.

[bluice]

Bullseye, Oren. If anything, the media hype or narrative has made us forget in the beginning nobody did shit about the epidemic. Even the Chinese were late and when they did act, us westerners thought they were crazy to take such drastic and draconian measures.

[Neven]

The official position of most governments and the scientific establishment

That doesn't constitute an official narrative. There is also the (mainstream) media and nowadays social media. The fear has been hyped up to the point that you get some really weird behaviour.

Next week, people will be allowed to engage in team sports again. My daughter plays basketball and the association has come up with advice, like when kids train with basketballs provided by the club, the balls need to be disinfected before and after training. 

It would be funny, if it weren't so scary to see how far people are taking the mesophobia and hypochondria.

If anything, many try to downplay the risk, rather than overplay it.

Not in the official narrative I'm witnessing.

If anything, the media hype or narrative has made us forget in the beginning nobody did shit about the epidemic.

Exactly, just like the official narrative for the Iraq War made people forget about WMDs and how it all started. Either you're with us, or you're with the terrorists.

[Archimid]

Despite the fact that what we are dealing with is a virus that, yes, is clearly deadly to the old and those with medical conditions, but that is just as clearly not a deadly threat to the majority of the human species, people are cowering inside their homes as if the Zombie Apocalpyse had finally begun. Many appear to believe that this virus is some sort of Alien-Terrorist Death Flu (or weaponized Virus of Mass Destruction) that will kill you the second you breathe it in.

Most rational people that are calling for extreme caution clearly state the risk is around 1%, skewed for age. 

The above paragraph is pure projection. The author feels great fear about what is being said, so much so that when a scientist says 1% (C19) the author understands "Alien-Terrorist Death Flu Zombie Apocalpyse".


To the author, I would advise to try and understand and explain the following.

Ebola kills up to 90% of its victims. Covid 19 kills 1% of its victims.

Last decade Ebola killed less than 50k people. C19 has killed 250k in a few months.

So what is more dangerous, Ebola or C19?

[NeilT]

Interesting job on offer today.

https://www.jobserve.com/gb/en/mob/job/D05DC6AA60FBB0FA7E?shid=7D3A960E0ED62BFD1F00&page=1

Whether this is due to lessons learned or not is debatable.

[Neven]

Come on, guys, don't tell me that the fear hasn't been ratcheted up. Just last week there was a minor scandal here in Austria because of a leaked memo about the chancellor musing during a meeting how the population could be made scared enough, so that they would meekly follow orders. An expert brought up an example from the UK where fear was stimulated during a measles outbreak.

Speaking of the UK:

UK:  People are so scared that neighbors will spread the virus that more than 200,000 have called the police to report rule breaking by their fellow citizens

A campaign to keep Britons locked down and protected from the coronavirus may have proved too successful, according to new research, with many now scared to leave their homes.

A leading Cambridge University statistician warned that the government’s stay-at-home message had caused many people to grow “particularly anxious” about going out.

“Many people are definitely overanxious about their chance of both getting the virus and the harm they might come to if they do get it,” Cambridge’s David Spiegelhalter told the BBC.
...
Keiran Pedley, research director at Ipsos Mori, said: “Clear majorities of Britons are nervous about using public transport again or going to bars, restaurants or live music and sporting events.

“These numbers suggest that it will take some time for parts of the British economy to return to any semblance of normality, even after lockdown has ended.” ...

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-day-after-elon-musk-denounced-coronavirus-lockdowns-as-infringements-of-freedom-research-shows-britons-are-too-scared-to-leave-their-homes-anyway-2020-05-01

Every day I read the articles posted by Vox Mundi in the COVID thread. If they aren't about Trump, they're about all kinds of anecdotal evidence or studies showing that the disease is even more dangerous than presumed, and that it's silently spreading everywhere, leaving behind a trail of corpses. When I watch the Dutch, Croatian or Austrian news, they constantly hammer on the fact that there will be a second wave, that things will be locked down again as soon as numbers go up too much (guaranteeing several more weeks/months of excessive focus on graphs and charts without context or perspective), and that this will never be over, until we will be redeemed by the Messias-vaccine.

Such an atmosphere, as described in the article, creates opportunities for all kinds of mischief. As I don't trust governments, I believe the primary function of the lockdowns has been to deflect any criticism for the unpreparedness and amateurishness in dealing with the epidemic, or criticism for the absolutely criminal failure of protecting the elderly and other risk groups.

At a close second comes the way the crisis is exploited, in some countries to transfer massive amounts of wealth from the lower and middle class to the 1%, in other countries to give authoritarian governments/leaders even more power. Off course, there is always the pressure from Big Pharma in the background, with its lackey the WHO to direct the show. If the virus doesn't fizzle out by itself (as viruses are wont to do), there's a good chance there will be large-sclae, mandatory vaccination schemes, with little to no liability, if things go wrong because there was no time to test.

And then all those opportunities for the unholy marriage of Big State and Silicon Valley to push for even more extreme forms of surveillance and censorship...

Hence the official narrative and my suspicion that a lot of it is overhyped. If it turns out that this is so, will we learn from it? I'm jealous of people who are so trustworthy of governments and media, given the path we're on. #StandTogether

[kassy]

Hence the official narrative and my suspicion that a lot of it is overhyped. If it turns out that this is so, will we learn from it?

Well we learn people are really good at focusing at one thing.

Also we lead a pretty sheltered life. If you had dengue before and you live in an area where it is endemic you are basically always living with a similar risk. And there are worse examples. Being born in areas were clean water is not available. Then again that kills you before you get to complain on the internet.

[Neven]

Next week, people will be allowed to engage in team sports again. My daughter plays basketball and the association has come up with advice, like when kids train with basketballs provided by the club, the balls need to be disinfected before and after training. 

Sorry to get back to this again. Today, my daughter read out the guidelines to me as proposed by the Austrian basketball season. I laughed so hard I was crying.

They say that balls need to be disinfected before and after training, and even in between, as much as possible (they advise after every 100 dribbles). If people are dunking, the ring has to be disinfected as well! And no high fives!   

This is so insane that I'm not sure whether they're serious or not. How much of this mesophobic craziness is going on all around the world, as we speak?

[NeilT]

Neven, this is political rather than scientific, I have noticed the need to say something which can be spun as "taking action", no matter whether it meets scientific scrutiny or even makes common sense.

If they were really serious every child would have to take an antibody test before returning to school and the remainder would have to take a covid test before every game.

Ergo the thinking mind must assume that they are only serious about image, not about actually combating the virus itself.

On another forum I wrote a short synopsis of the relaxation of lock down and what they really mean.  In short, it is accepted that people will continue to be infected, people will continue to die and so long as the volume of infections and deaths do not exceed a certain threshold, determined as either overwhelming the health system or likely to overwhelm it, then people being infected and people dying is an acceptable solution to keeping the economy running.

Everything else is politicking and spin!

I do hope, fervently, that this lesson does not seep into the climate change arena.

[kassy]

Well people die of particle pollution every day and that is fine too so why not?

Those basketball guidelines are pretty pointless but that is just clueless fucks doing anything they can to mainly cover themselves.

I do hope, fervently, that this lesson does not seep into the climate change arena.

Actually wasn´t that one of the reasons we would have liked to prevent climate change?

We are not ruing the demise of ice because we lose a chance to discuss linear vs polynomial fit but for the very real knock on effects to our lives.

With Covid you can steer the ship. Ignore it a bit then have everyone stay inside if too many people keep dying but that is never going to work with AGW.

What do you think that will happen too the billions living in areas which literally become unliveable...well they are not going to stay there. What will happen if stuck weather wrecks the food harvests in too many places at once? What is going to happen if even republics don´t want beachfront property anymore?

Everybody prefers a normal live to calamity and we are depriving the future generations of a chance to have a normal live.

[Archimid]

On basketball sterile techniques:


The choice to play basketball is where the risk assessment begins. Each society must ask itself, is a basketball tournament worth the risk?

Given the low prevalence of C19 in Austria, the answer in Austria may be yes, depending on their tracing capacity.  In NYC or Rio de Janeiro, the answer is very likely no.


But even in Austria, there is a small chance for outbreaks to start. So how do you reduce the probability of an outbreak starting in a basketball game? The measures must satisfy the following questions:

 What is the effectiveness of the measure?
 What is the cost of the measure?
 What are the side effects of the measures?


For example:
The primary measure should be that everyone in the tournament is aware of the epidemic. If any family member is sick, they should all self-quarantine and go get tested.

Effectiveness of self-quarantine? Maximal
Cost? high
Side effect? moderate.

They say that balls need to be disinfected before and after training, and even in between, as much as possible (they advise after every 100 dribbles).

I admit this seems excessive but the action of continually disinfecting the ball might lower the probability of infection by very few points, but the act may be a worthy reminder of the invisible threat and the importance of self-isolation and testing. I see the very little cost to disinfecting the ball as often as possible unless there is a shortage of alcohol and no side effects.

Effectiveness of wiping the ball? Minimal except for high awareness effects.
Cost? Minimal
Side effect? Minimal

If people are dunking, the ring has to be disinfected as well!

Effectiveness of wiping the rim? minimal.
Cost? Minimal.
Side effects? Minimal

And no high fives!

This should be a CARDINAL rule, yet you are poking fun at it. The palm of the hand is the dirtiest of places other than the mouth. No high fives is a brilliant and obvious rule.

Effectiveness of no high fives? high

Cost of no high five? None

Side effects of no high five? A bit of awkwardness until you figure out a way to celebrate without touching the hands.


In the search of eliminating this threat as quickly as possible, many actions will be taken that will be worthless. Some even counterproductive. But as long as the awareness is there and there's unity of purpose the epidemic can be controlled.


To be honest basketball tournaments seem like the wrong thing to do for now.

[SteveMDFP]

They say that balls need to be disinfected before and after training, and even in between, as much as possible (they advise after every 100 dribbles).

I admit this seems excessive but the action of continually disinfecting the ball might lower the probability of infection by very few points, but the act may be a worthy reminder of the invisible threat and the importance of self-isolation and testing. I see the very little cost to disinfecting the ball as often as possible unless there is a shortage of alcohol and no side effects.

Disagree.  Contaminated surfaces are a major route of transmission, not only for Covid, but other respiratory viruses, GI viruses, MRSA and ringworm.  This is why gym etiquette demands exercise equipment be wiped down between uses.

It's trivial to just have two balls for the game, disinfect frequently when balls are swapped.  Zero impact on play.  When the virus that spreads can kill vulnerable people, a few Chlorox wipes per game is a trivial cost.

[wili]

If the players all washed their hands before playing, and didnt' spit or cough on the ball, then it's not likely that the ball would get contaminated. But there's no harm in washing it off every once in a while.

It's much more likely that they will pass it on to other players through their breath. Are they all going to be wearing facemasks while playing?

https://www.livescience.com/how-covid-19-spreads-transmission-routes.html

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/02/studies-show-covid-19-virus-likely-has-multiple-infection-routes

[SteveMDFP]

If the players all washed their hands before playing, and didnt' spit or cough on the ball, then it's not likely that the ball would get contaminated. But there's no harm in washing it off every once in a while.

It's much more likely that they will pass it on to other players through their breath. Are they all going to be wearing facemasks while playing?

No.  Touching contaminated surfaces is the primary mechanism for transmission of these pathogens.  Merely breathing or coughing plays a secondary role for respiratory viruses only.  In wrestling, skin-to-skin contact is the major way to spread MRSA and ringworm.

Edit:  See, e.g.:

Fomite-mediated transmission as a sufficient pathway: a comparative analysis across three viral pathogens.
https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezproxyhhs.nihlibrary.nih.gov/pubmed/30373527

In the cited context, a contaminated basketball is a "fomite."

[wili]

"Touching contaminated surfaces is the primary mechanism for transmission "

Not for covid19

The virus is thought to spread mainly from person-to-person.

    Between people who are in close contact with one another (within about 6 feet)
    Through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/transmission/

I know what fomites are, and yes, care should be taken with those, too. But those are not the main way that the covid19 virus spreads, from pretty much everything I've read about it (and I've read quite bit).

[SteveMDFP]

"Touching contaminated surfaces is the primary mechanism for transmission "

Not for covid19

The virus is thought to spread mainly from person-to-person.

    Between people who are in close contact with one another (within about 6 feet)
    Through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/transmission/

I know what fomites are, and yes, care should be taken with those, too. But those are not the main way that the covid19 virus spreads, from pretty much everything I've read about it (and I've read quite bit).

Depends entirely on who is using what terminology.  if I'm infected and touch a doorknob, and then you touch that doorknob and get infected--is that "person to person spread"?  Yes, it is.  It's indirect person-to-person.  Direct person-to-person is if we shake hands (or if I cough in your face, which I promise I won't do).  If you've seen actual research to say that indirect person-to-person spread doesn't happen with Covid, I'd love to see the science.  I don't think such exists.

[blumenkraft]

Steve, but would you agree that the indirect person to person spread is less likely with Covid than an aerosol infection?

[SteveMDFP]

Steve, but would you agree that the indirect person to person spread is less likely with Covid than an aerosol infection?

I would imagine it depends entirely on context.  In that case of spread among a group during choir practice, I'm sure it was mostly aerosol.  In settings like taking public transit it may well be both.  In school settings, and office settings, I'd guess mostly by contact with surfaces.  Hard to guess.

A lot of the research on respiratory virus transmission has looked at rhinoviruses in particular, maybe also the minor coronaviruses.  As a best guess, I'd see no reason for transmission of Covid to be different from the other respiratory viruses.

[blumenkraft]

Interesting! Thanks, Steve.

[SteveMDFP]

Interesting! Thanks, Steve.

Happy to help.  On this note, I'm reminded of that case study of a cluster of transmission on that bus in China.  I think Vox posted a summary.  I believe the study was taken down, but not actually retracted.  One main takeaway is that nobody on that bus wearing a mask got infected. But another important detail was that someone getting on some minutes after the infected person got off also became infected.  It seems more than likely to me that that person got it by touching a contaminated surface.  It's possible that they all got it this way, and that the masks on others served mostly to prevent them from touching their mouth or nose.

[wili]

Sorry steve, but your just making shit up now.

person-to-person is clearly exactly what it means, direct transmission.

Indirect transmission is when a person touches an object and then someone else does. That's just the definition of these things, and you can't just say they mean something different.

https://www.healthline.com/health/disease-transmission#indirect-contact

And the droplets can stay in the air for three hours, so it is not necessary for the person who got on the bus to have gotten it from lingering droplets from the vector.

This is too serious to just make things up and hold positions that are not backed up by science just because you want to be 'right.' Leave that type of shit to the likes of Trump.

Again, that is not so say that we should not be very, very careful with potentially contaminated fomites. Just that they simply are not the primary means how the covid19 virus seems to be spreading.

Thanks,
Gotta go garden,
Stay safe
wili

[blumenkraft]

Thanks for the perspective, Steve. It was the chor and the bus stories that made me think an aerosol transmission seemed more likely while in the beginning, droplet transmission seemed more likely from what i heard.

It's a bummer we still know so little about this thing and how it really spreads. This is a lession to be learned still...

[kassy]

And thus we are going round in circles.

How many kids would still be carriers after a month at home? Probably zero so just let them play for now.

[wili]

Yes, there is much to learn.

But one thing we DO know is that the MAIN means of transmission is through droplets an infected person spews into the air when coughing (or even talking or breathing) and direct person-to-person contact. Getting it from objects touched by infected people is possible, but it's not the main means of transmission.

How does coronavirus spread?

The coronavirus is thought to spread mainly from person to person. This can happen between people who are in close contact with one another.

Droplets that are produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes may land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby, or possibly be inhaled into their lungs.


A person infected with coronavirus — even one with no symptoms — may emit aerosols when they talk or breathe. Aerosols are infectious viral particles that can float or drift around in the air for up to three hours.

Another person can breathe in these aerosols and become infected with the coronavirus. This is why everyone should cover their nose and mouth when they go out in public.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-basics

(But don't trust me, just google it. I don't want to spread inaccurate info, so do correct me if you actually have counter evidence. But this is one thing that we actually do seem to know something fairly certain about this otherwise rather cryptic virus. Let's be clear about what's clear, even as we struggle to figure out the less clear areas. Thanks, off to garden now, I promise )

[blumenkraft]

I think we talk past each other, Wili. The question i asked was about the likelihood of either of those ways of infection. Your source states both (aerosol and droplet spread)  but doesn't give hints on likelihood.

Anyhow, i don't want to disturb the thread anymore and will recede now too. (not into the garden though)

[Archimid]

Disagree.  Contaminated surfaces are a major route of transmission, not only for Covid, but other respiratory viruses, GI viruses, MRSA and ringworm.  This is why gym etiquette demands exercise equipment be wiped down between uses.

Yes, but in a gym, one would expect each piece of equipment to be wiped before anyone else touches it. A basketball will be touched by many between each wipe, thus even if it is sterile, if the players do not disinfect their hands the chains of infections will not be broken.

But honestly, even if it is just a ritual, it is the right mentality. The more people are aware of the danger the easier it is to avoid it.  Every little bit counts.

[wili]

I'm back

Good points, blum.

One lesson from covid19 is that I find it surprisingly comforting after gardening to be washing my hands just because they have plain old dirt on them, not to protect myself and others from a deadly virus!

I do wonder if gardening is something more people will re-discover as they have time on their hands, and perhaps some anxieties about food chain stability.

What are others finding to be welcome breaks from covid news?

[bluesky]

C40 statement today:
https://www.c40.org/press_releases/taskforce-principles

Let's hope the below statements of principales will be put into action before government and Central Banks bail out (through non discriminative Quantitative Easing) of oil and gas, airlines company and car manufacturers counteract this gesture of Goodwill, and that instead the so called governments will sustain economically the workers (but not the Directors) of these companies in view of readjustment (e.g. transforming car manufacturing plant into car retrofitting plant from thermic to electric) and reverse the bail out, but  we can always dream...and when I seen that M.  Bloomberg is the President of the board of the C40 I may cast some doubt, however local initiative in Milan , London, and elsewhere give some glimpse of hope...

"C40 mayors issue call for a healthy, equitable and sustainable economic recovery to COVID-19 pandemic.
Statement endorsed by mayors of Los Angeles, Athens, Austin, Barcelona, Bogotá, Boston, Buenos Aires, Chicago,  Copenhagen, Curitiba, Durban, Freetown, Hong Kong, Houston, Lima, Lisbon, London, Medellín, Melbourne, Mexico City, Milan, Montréal, New Orleans, New York City, Oslo, Portland, Quezon City, Rotterdam, Salvador, São Paulo, San Francisco, Santiago,  Seattle, Seoul, Sydney, Tel Aviv-Yafo, Vancouver

"Statement of Principles:
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted the world’s cities. It is not just a global health crisis, but a social and economic crisis, the effects of which will be felt for years to come. In many ways it is also an urban phenomenon, with its roots in environmental destruction and humanity’s relationship with nature.
As mayors, we are committed to supporting the residents of our cities and protecting their health, based on the guidance of expert advice. As members of C40 Cities, we are sharing what we have learned over the past months, and the knowledge we have gained in responding to other crises - public health, economic and environmental.
It is clear that the harm caused by COVID-19 has not been equitable. The most vulnerable and the most disadvantaged are being hurt the most by both the health and economic impacts of COVID-19. It is also clear that the world was not fully prepared for this crisis, despite lessons learned from SARS, MERS, Ebola and other recent public health and climate emergencies. This is, in part, a consequence of the undermining of international mechanisms and institutions which were built to bring peace and prosperity to all. It is, in part, a consequence of ignoring science-based knowledge.
We, as leaders of major cities across the globe, are clear that our ambition should not be a return to ‘normal’ – our goal is to build a better, more sustainable, more resilient and fairer society out of the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis. Therefore, our joint strategy to support the recovery of our cities and their residents from COVID-19 will be governed by these principles:
The recovery should not be a return to ‘business as usual’ - because that is a world on track for 3°C or more of over-heating;
The recovery, above all, must be guided by an adherence to public health and scientific expertise, in order to assure the safety of those who live in our cities;
Excellent public services, public investment and increased community resilience will form the most effective basis for the recovery;
The recovery must address issues of equity that have been laid bare by the impact of the crisis – for example, workers who are now recognised as essential should be celebrated and compensated accordingly and policies must support people living in informal settlements;
The recovery must improve the resilience of our cities and communities. Therefore, investments should be made to protect against future threats – including the climate crisis – and to support those people impacted by climate and health risks;
Climate action can help accelerate economic recovery and enhance social equity, through the use of new technologies and the creation of new industries and new jobs. These will drive wider benefits for our residents, workers, students, businesses and visitors;
We commit to doing everything in our power and the power of our city governments to ensure that the recovery from COVID-19 is healthy, equitable and sustainable;
We commit to using our collective voices and individual actions to ensure that national governments support both cities and the investments needed in cities, to deliver an economic recovery that is healthy, equitable and sustainable;
We commit to using our collective voices and individual actions to ensure that international and regional institutions invest directly in cities to support a healthy, equitable and sustainable recovery."

[Jim Hunt]

I guess this belongs in the "lessons" thread rather than the "science" thread?

"Messaging" in the UK mainstream media over the past few days.

Who do you suppose will take "the blame" for the second wave?

http://CoV-eHealth.org/2020/05/10/covid-19-messaging-in-the-united-kingdom/

[vox_mundi]

Accepting Death Is Not an Option
https://earther.gizmodo.com/accepting-death-is-not-an-option-1843251267

The worst-case scenario with coronavirus is not mass death. It’s that people come to accept mass death—to accept that someone will die in the U.S. every 30 seconds as “just how it is.” Yet that is the proposition being thrust on us now.

Yesterday, 2,746 people died of covid-19 in the U.S., the highest daily death toll recorded since the first confirmed deaths on American soil in February. That’s on the high end of leaked Trump administration forecasts for this time period and shows the 3,000 daily deaths come June in those forecasts might be wishful thinking. This is, in a word, horrific. But the Trump administration and its backers from conservative media to the small but vocal “reopen” movement are trying to convince people it’s not only normal but worth it.

They have turned the idea we should avoid the Bad Thing—namely, the needless deaths of thousands of Americans—on its head, arguing we should embrace it full-on and just plow forward with reopening the country. It’s a monstrous idea in the here and now, but it also sets up a dangerous precedent, priming people to accept policy failure—or, worse, reject legitimate policy solutions—on what remains the biggest issue facing humanity: climate change. Unless we demand more from our leaders and each other, we risk an even bigger catastrophe in our lifetimes.

There is nothing acceptable about 3,000 people dying every day from coronavirus. What’s so nauseating about this is that we know what it looks like to contain the virus. We’ve seen it in action. Countries as diverse as South Korea, New Zealand, and Vietnam have all successfully flattened the curve of death and suffering.

The U.S. could do this. Instead, next to none of it is happening, and the steps that are being taken are half measures at best for a country of this size and geographical scope. At best, we have a patchwork of state-level responses, and few if any can be called adequate. As David Wallace Wells writes in New York Magazine, “[t]here is still no plan for the end of the coronavirus crisis.”

Indeed, instead of taking steps to try to wind down the pandemic here, the plan is to use it as a bludgeon in the culture war. Donald Trump has recently and repeatedly described citizens as “warriors.” No doubt his word choice was influenced by the Call of Duty cosplay going on on the steps of state capitol buildings around the country, a movement to end the life-saving lockdown measures, which Trump has thrown his support behind. The president’s rhetoric only further turns coronavirus into a way to divide people, inviting them to take selfish measures under the banner of a nebulous concept of “freedom.”

In the narrow view of the “reopen” protesters, freedom means the government plays no role in protecting the greater good, that you don’t owe your fellow humans anything, that being able to get Chick-fil-A without wearing a mask is an essential expression of liberty and worthy of 3,000 people losing their lives. It also shows some kind of magical thinking that you or a loved one won’t be among the 3,000 people that die on a given day next month after succumbing to fluid filling their lungs or heart failure.

In some ways, it’s the logical extension of the conservative movement, which has put individualism and corporations over the public good. A “reopen” protester will argue that that the government should get out of the way and allow anyone who wants to go back to work, or to the store, or to a beach to do just that. Anyone who’s afraid of getting covid-19 is welcome to stay home. That reasoning, however, will lead to greater rates of infection, according to health experts, which puts everyone at increased risk regardless of how they feel about lockdown order.

The idea that there is an individualist solution to the pandemic is laughable, yet that is both what the Trump administration and rank and file conservatives have set their sights on. That’s why the movement to “reopen” plays down the death toll and plays up the perceived injustice of taking actions to not spread a deadly virus. In essence, it’s a rejection of society itself.

“Sometimes when people feel vulnerable or angry, their aggression can take the form of wanting others to suffer, like a sense of revenge or retaliation against perceived injustice,” Wendy Greenspun, a clinical psychologist practicing in New York who has focused on the climate crisis in recent years, tells Earther. “This is the darker side of our humanity, and not easy to look at. And sometimes that kind of aggressive wish is bolstered by others who band together, uniting against a perceived enemy.”

It’s depressing in any light, but especially as a climate person. For decades, climate action has been held hostage by a small minority of liars and Republican politicians to profit a few fabulously wealthy companies. Today, more than three-quarters of Americans are worried about climate change and want action. Majorities support a variety of policies under the Green New Deal and a green stimulus, including conservatives. Yet the federal government has shown no appetite to actually do that, remaining captured by fossil fuel interests, the status quo, and fear of the astroturf opposition.

The reopen movement provides the political cover for politicians to ignore the science and popular will to enact shortsighted policies—and throw up their hands when more people get sick and die. It also gives us a preview of how some people and leaders will respond to the steps necessary to address climate change, which will require similar bold actions that will upend the status quo.

[Jim Hunt]

"Messaging" in the UK mainstream media

After BoJo's speech to the nation last night, this morning on our virtual doormats we see (depending on the colour of our rosettes):

http://CoV-eHealth.org/2020/05/10/covid-19-messaging-in-the-united-kingdom/#May-11

[Sigmetnow]

https://twitter.com/xkcdcomic/status/1259914363227406336