Touché, frank.

But just as the virus grows rapidly, so it can be killed off rapidly. That is done by eliminating all paths of infection and waiting a few weeks (the infectious period).
— Andrew M

I dont think that's going to happen. China came down off lockdown and went right back on. I think it has multiple options for transmission. — frank

It does, but China has time and options now for learning more about the virus, and figuring out what actions work and what do not.

If the virus spreads again in China, it does so from a small base and ideally within bounded geographical areas. So it will be easier to suppress again, whether by lockdown or test-and-trace.

This really comes down to whether countries have the collective will to do what it takes to stop the virus. If they do, then it will be much easier to contain the second time around.

The choice between stopping the virus or protecting the economy is a false choice. If the virus is not stopped, then health systems will be overwhelmed, the dead bodies will pile up, and economies will be devastated anyway.
— Andrew M

For the US, yes. For less developed countries? I’m far from convinced because they lack the basic infrastructures to police this or the beds, staff and equipment to treat the waves of patients. — I like sushi

I don't think they have a choice. If developing countries just let the virus run its course, then millions of people dying is the predictable result. People can either fatalistically accept that default outcome, or they can act now to try to change it. It's really up to a country's leaders to properly communicate what actions are needed and then help local communities do them effectively.

It does, but China has time and options now for learning more about the virus, and figuring out what actions work and what do not. — Andrew M

Yes. Hopefully their next attempts at easing off lockdown will work. If not, that will be worrisome. They will continue trying to discover the answer while knowing that their ability to stay in lockdown is limited.

This really comes down to whether countries have the collective will to do what it takes to stop the virus. If they do, then it will be much easier to contain the second time around. — Andrew M

If I could just vent for two seconds here. We hope it's a matter of human will. I don't think we know that yet because we aren't through it. The assumption that our leaders are supposed to be geniuses with time machines has us turning on each other already. If it turns out that nature really does have the upper hand here, the arrogance of assuming that humans were supposed to dominate it and just failed because they're stupid or evil can have potentially ugly consequences like scapegoating.

If I could just vent for two seconds here. We hope it's a matter of human will. I don't think we know that yet because we aren't through it. The assumption that our leaders are supposed to be geniuses with time machines has us turning on each other already. If it turns out that nature really does have the upper hand here, the arrogance of assuming that humans were supposed to dominate it and just failed because they're stupid or evil can have potentially ugly consequences like scapegoating. — frank

This makes zero sense.

You even have the premise of why it makes no sense in your previous paragraph.

Yes. Hopefully their next attempts at easing off lockdown will work. If not, that will be worrisome. They will continue trying to discover the answer while knowing that their ability to stay in lockdown is limited. — frank

Obviously, discussing whether easing the lockdown will work or not, presupposes the lockdown is working, and that "man can dominate it".

None of the steps that would have significantly slowed the growth of the pandemic, nor any of the steps taken that would have made better short-term preparation once it was clear containment was failing, nor even the "zeroeth step" of not disbanding the pandemic team, requires being a "genius with a time machine". It's laughable.

You don't even know who Boethius is, do you?

Don’t bother. They believe China is a race and the Politburo is a knight in shining armor. Then they’ll spin around and shit on Americans and call for the executions of their leaders.

Never forget that you are among those who opposed the measures that are now Americans' only hope of keeping the death toll under a million. Even Trump has come around on that. So, maybe show the proper level of humility at being hideously wrong and get in line.

Getting back to more serious stuff. One reason there are those among us appalled at the minimizing of the importance of 100,000 or more dead to this disease is the horrible way people die. Slow suffocation and organ failure while isolated from their families. You won't even get a proper funeral.

It’s a nice little racket. If your predictions are right you can say I told you so but if they’re wrong you can say your measures worked.

They believe... the Politburo is a knight in shining armor. — NOS4A2

Just to squash another lie.

It also plays right into the hands of PRC propagandists who would write off the protests as nothing more than an American neoimperialist plot. — StreetlightX

I hope they riot until Carrie Lam's head is on a stick.

Or more probably, until she flees to the mainland licking the boots of her autocratic overlords. — StreetlightX

I make my predictions distinct from my comments on what measures should be taken. And Trump has eventually fallen into line behind the likes of me and Street. Time for you to follow suit. There is no-one out there now arguing that measures aimed at enforcing social distancing are a bad idea.

NOS, you must understand, is selective about whose boots he licks. He's a man of refined taste in State leather - Trump's being of the highest quality, like his steaks.

Don’t bother. They believe China is a race and the Politburo is a knight in shining armor. Then they’ll spin around and shit on Americans and call for the executions of their leaders. — NOS4A2

Bad timing bro:

Don't see why we can't throw all of them into a firepit.
— StreetlightX

Guillotine would work for me too. Less greenhouse gases. — Nobeernolife

Then you should clarify that.
So, who in the Republican Senate and Congress are you ready to Guillotine?
— boethius
Probably a whole bunch. For starters, everyone who signed off on those, what, 800 pages of pork that they all squeezed into the Corona emergency fund. Anyone who signed off on that atrocity, no matter what party, deserves your bonfire or the French solution. — Nobeernolife

I make my predictions distinct from my comments on what measures should be taken. Trump has eventually fallen into line behind the likes of me and Street. Time for you to follow suit. There is no-one out there now arguing that measures aimed at enforcing social distancing are a bad idea.

No, sorry, I will not fall in line behind these authoritarian schemes. Street likes being told what to do; I don’t.

Probably a whole bunch. For starters, everyone who signed off on those, what, 800 pages of pork that they all squeezed into the Corona emergency fund. Anyone who signed off on that atrocity, no matter what party, deserves your bonfire or the French solution — Nobeernolife

I fully agree with this. Metaphorically, of course.

So, now that Trump has turned authoritarian, you're making a break with him?

Now that he has turned authoritarian, you support him?

Here's what I want to see: Everyone getting a gas mask and it being made illegal not to wear one for a period of time, so we gradually wean ourselves off lockdown, something no-one wants, but is simply necessary to save lives. In Thailand, you get fined if you don't wear a mask. That's the way to go.

Anyway, yes, I will support Trump whenever he does stuff I've been calling for him to do. Slow learning is better than no learning.

That would work. I just don’t think we need fines to wear masks. I would prefer a solution that is both effective and that doesn’t result in the suspension of rights and movement.

But if we acquiesce to such draconian measures who knows what else will slide down the slippery slope. :mask:

The reality is we need a combination of things to get back to full freedoms. But we need to err on the side of caution. Take the video above and multiply that pain by a million and it should be clear why.



Fines for bad haircuts?

Everything I've been whinging about, in a single video:

Oh, I'll take a look. Zizek, Chris Hedges, and Chomsky have all spoken on this. I'm on Chris Hedges now, which looks the most promising. I'll maybe link later.

Give me liberty or give [the old, the sick, and the poor] death!

Fines for bad haircuts? — Baden

I’d be immune.

In Thailand, you get fined if you don't wear a mask. That's the way to go. — Baden

Speaking of about faces, WHO and the CDC said masks weren't effective, which was the apparent lie told because they feared doctors wouldn't have enough if the average citizen did. The net result of a lie is distrust, which isn't what you need when you're trying to get the public to do as you ask because you lack the means of meaningful enforcement otherwise.

We're all excited about placing the corpses on the shoulders on someone, so to any public health official that has suggested anyone not wear a mask, how about them taking a visit to those suffering in the hospitals due to their not wearing a mask.

And this anti-malaria drug, it appears to be showing more promise every day. What are the chances it'd be getting this much attention had Trump not decided to make it his cause.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/23/covid-19-special-investigation-part-one-the-politicised-science-that-nudged-the-johnson-government-to-safeguard-the-economy-over-british-lives/

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/23/covid-19-special-investigation-part-two-government-documents-reveal-concern-for-economic-and-business-impacts-prevented-early-action/

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/03/31/behind-closed-doors-johnson-and-his-cabinet-do-not-applaud-the-nhs-they-ideologically-oppose-it/?fbclid=IwAR0Ya1alIzgZVvYJ0NYnxNT5MkbVn4Qh2EM-1PxAof7F3NyiGA77F04IihU

Yes, the militants in No10 put a hard Brexit before the health of the nation. The economy was key to that, because there was a risk that if the economy unraveled Brexit could be cancelled, or worse Corbyn could get in and deliver a soft Brexit and level up the country.

Speaking of about faces, WHO and the CDC said masks weren't effective, which was the apparent lie told because they feared doctors wouldn't have enough if the average citizen did. The net result of a lie is distrust, which isn't what you need when you're trying to get the public to do as you ask because you lack the means of meaningful enforcement otherwise. — Hanover

Not at all happy with that either. Needs to be investigated.

Give me liberty or give [the old, the sick, and the poor] death! — StreetlightX

I think you got that quote slightly wrong. The usual sentiment that I see has a conjunction, not a dysjunction.