Note: I started on this post yesterday afternoon but got pulled away. So, was just able to finish up. As with my previous post, it’s very long. Unfortunately, it’s a very nuanced topic. Plus, as in my previous posts, I tried to add links to some articles that support my thoughts/positions. I hope all of you give them a look as they do provide some good information. To clarify, the first half is mainly in response to “yoopskater’s” post from yesterday afternoon and, the rest in response to “7TIMESCHAMP” last night. I want to emphasize that I’m genuinely trying to respect everyone’s opinion on this but, despite the rules limiting “getting political”, in this case, it really is difficult as a large part of this is about what government is or isn’t doing. Which, in turn is almost impossible to avoid the politics involved. So, when you see me emphasize something with all caps, or other more strongly worded phrasing, I’m genuinely not trying to get personal with any of you. Finally, to “Wet Paint”, ‘yoopskater”, and “In the Pipes”, I see that not one of you have yet provided the name of any scientist or medical specialist with expertise in this situation that thinks it’s smart to “open things up” right now. I’ll continue to politely wait…
"Yoopskater", there isn't a single expert that's saying we will need to do shelter-in-place continuously for more than another year at most but, probably not more than 3-4 more months. You say we won't be measuring this in months but rather “in years”. Well, my definition of "in years" is a minimum of three and usually 4 or more. If you don't define it that way, then that's fine. But, when you make a statement like that, you really should define it more precisely because it's very likely we'll have an effective vaccine within 18 months or less. Here's a link to an article from Sunday in "The Guardian" regarding the latest updates on how efforts for a vaccine are progressing:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... e-have-one
Here's a couple paragraphs from the article I found interesting and hopeful:
When will we have a Covid-19 vaccine? Public-facing scientists such as the UK’s chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, and his US counterpart, Anthony Fauci, keep repeating that it won’t be before 12 to 18 months. But other voices – including some of those in the race to create a vaccine themselves – have suggested that it could be as early as June. Who is right?“ It really depends on what you mean by ‘having a vaccine’,” says Marian Wentworth, president and CEO of Management Sciences for Health, a Massachusetts-based global not-for-profit organisation that seeks to build resilient health systems, and a long-time observer of vaccine development. “If you mean one that can be used in a mass vaccination campaign, allowing us all to get on with our lives, then 12 to 18 months is probably right.”
But in terms of an experimental vaccine that is deemed safe and effective enough to be rolled out in a more limited way – to high-risk groups such as health workers, say – that could be ready within weeks or months, under emergency rules developed by drug regulatory agencies and the World Health Organization in the context of the recent Ebola epidemics in Africa. When the University of Oxford’s Adrian Hill told the Guardian that his group’s Covid-19 vaccine candidate could be ready by the summer, it was this kind of readiness to which he was probably referring. The group, led by Sarah Gilbert, has since stated that a vaccine shown to be effective in phase-3 clinical trials that could be manufactured in large quantities won’t be ready before the autumn even in a best-case scenario. And that scenario is “highly ambitious and subject to change”.
This is just one article from the last 10 days saying there's a chance we might be able to start mass producing one within 10-12 months. I agree, there are other experts that say that is very unlikely. Yet, there are obviously some who are experts in vaccine development saying it might actually happen. Thus, I simply disagree there's any chance we have to do strict shelter-in-place for "years"... I also disagree with your contention that unemployment will double if we continue with shelter-in-place for another 3-4 months. I spent quite a bit of time yesterday looking for any projections from a source I felt was worthy and there just isn't much projection on this out there right now. I agree that it might get as high as 35% and possibly, emphasis on possibly, as high as 40%. Is that extremely bad and horrible for our economy? Without a doubt. Still -- and this goes to a point "7TIMECHAMPS" stated in his latest response regarding inflation -- the feds seem extremely eager to spend whatever amount it takes too prevent the economy from significantly tanking for at least thru the next 12 months, the time almost every expert expects a mass-produced vaccine, to ensure the economy doesn't reach a scenario that makes any type of legitimate recovery take more than a couple of years to achieve. Does that guarantee we won't have an actual long-term recession/depression? Obviously not.
The reality is -- and that reality IS based on science and the experts who are trained in these areas -- if we don't significantly shelter-in-place for yes, potentially another 3-4 months and possibly longer, and yes, potentially damage the economy even more, we literally increase the chances of unnecessary and PREVENTABLE deaths by the thousands, perhaps even tens of thousands. As I'm quite confident you've heard numerous times, the main reason for continuing the shelter-in-place orders is to prevent the health care system from being overwhelmed. Most places around the country still don't have the necessary PPE if they see a significant surge of Covid patients. Let alone anywhere near the number of tests. They need another month or two to build up supplies to a point they could effectively handle a significant surge. Again, had this administration reacted in the manner South Korea did back in mid-January by getting a reliable, mass produced test available, doing contact tracing properly, along with using the Defense Production Act to immediately require corporations to start mass producing the ventilators and PPE and tests that we needed, we might've been able to prevent getting to the point we're now at.
As I said previously, but what you (or some others here) are not seemingly willing to genuinely consider or acknowledge, is that if we "open up" prior to having South Korea type mass testing and contact tracing capabilities, literally EVERY expert is predicting significant jumps in infections/deaths. Which WILL RESULT in an immediate re-lockdown of the entire country/economy. And THAT type of uncertainty/unpredictability could be as bad or worse for the economy in the long term than simply staying locked down for a slightly longer period of time until we truly have our act together nationally -- not just in a few states -- with testing and contact tracing. To be clear, if the scientific community is able to develop a treatment for those that develop significant symptoms which prevents 99%+ patients from getting to the point of needing to be admitted to ICU or put on a ventilator, then obviously we can immediately look at re-opening things up in a significant way. Until then, why aren't you guys willing to listen to/trust the medical and scientific experts?
You guys do realize that in areas where the virus hasn’t taken off yet, a significant number of nurses, doctors, specialists, and techs have been laid off in the last month? I have to assume all of them would prefer to be working than not. So obviously, if any of them really thought opening things back up was worth the possible worst-case outcome, don't you think there would be a number of those folks speaking out? And, most mid to smaller regional hospitals depend on elective surgeries to pay the bills. As I'm sure you're aware, those types of surgeries haven't been performed for going on a month now. So again, why isn't there a significant cry of "we need to open up" from more in the health care industry? Because they understand the science and how horrible this disease is for those that develop significant symptoms. Not to mention the fact that it's the health care workers on the front lines that have a much higher rate of infection. Which in turn is why it's so incredibly self-centered, egocentric, and demonstrating a complete lack of empathy for their fellow humans, regarding these idiots that are doing these mass protests to "open things up" and completely ignoring the shelter-in-place/social distancing guidelines and requirements. Remember, a person's right to free speech and assembly ends when their words or actions are clearly/unnecessarily jeopardizing another person's physical safety/health. And yes, the fact that these morons are drastically increasing both their own and others' chances of contracting the virus unnecessarily and, in turn, unnecessarily exposing health care workers when they are treated, should be cause for law enforcement to legally break up these demonstrations. Either that or, every person participating is required to sign a form stating that they revoke their rights to receive medical treatment for Covid based on their unwillingness to abide by the local, state, and federal social distancing guidelines...
Next, to "7TIMESCHAMP"... First, why are you laughing about the fact I've stated I've read as much as I have on the internet the last 60 days and watched as much cable news as I have? If you're laughing because that's where I'm getting my information, please -- and I'm dead serious, I want you to answer this in detail -- if not the internet or cable news, where pray tell do you recommend I go to get "better information"? Have you seen/read the daily paper of the average, mid-sized city in the last 10 years? And please also indicate which of the articles I've linked to in any of my more recent posts that can be claimed is from an untrustworthy source or, that you can definitively prove is inaccurate. Funny, those like yourself and others on the other side of this debate rarely, if ever, provide a link to a source that backs up any of the claims that are made.
You also state that, although South Korea is “off to a good start” – you’re darn right it is – it’s still “a bit premature" to hold them up as some type of positive example as they haven’t done it for 12-18 months? Interesting... I’lI ask, whose numbers and testing program would you rather have at the moment? Theirs or ours? I know what my answer is. Your darn right they're "off to a good start". Remember, they had their first confirmed case the same day as ours! As of this moment, the John's Hopkins tracker has them sitting at 10,674 confirmed cases and, only 236 deaths. You describe that as only "a good start"?1? Hmm, we're currently sitting at 759,676 confirmed cases, with 40,683 deaths. Well, if in your mind South Korea is only off to "a good start", what the hell would you call ours? 40,683 - 236. There simply aren't words to describe how badly we have failed our citizenry. It's beyond disgcraceful. Also, there isn't a choice but to get the testing system in place. IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO BE ABLE TO SAFELY REOPEN THE ECONOMY!!!!!!!
I’ll remind you I have been furloughed from my job for at least 6 months so, I am being directly affected by this. It’s definitely going to be a challenge if we have to social distance/shelter-in-place for another couple of months. Still, I will make it work and it’s not worth the completely unnecessary deaths of potentially thousands of others. You’ve made it clear in your last two posts that you believe opening up the economy is worth the degree of risk you think is out there in regards to potential extra/unnecessary deaths. Thus, my question to you is, how many preventable/unnecessary deaths are acceptable to “open up the economy”? Seriously…please provide a specific number or a range of numbers.
I will close my second novel in the last two days by responding to your question about how much can the U.S. government spend/borrow to bolster the economy while we social distance/shelter-in-place? From what I have read, there isn't a clear answer to that. Yes, the more money that gets printed, the greater risk of inflation. Still, here's a link to an article from Oct. 2018 that looks at this very question:
https://www.marketplace.org/2018/10/16/ ... -too-much/
Here's a section from the article in case the link doesn't work:
While there are economic limits to how much the U.S. government can and should borrow, what that limit is or how close it may be is tough to say. “There’s no quick and easy answer,” said Harvard economist Kenneth Rogoff. “It’s clear that the U.S. can bear a lot more debt than it has at today’s low interest rate.” Even with higher annual deficits spurred by tax cuts that will add over a trillion dollars to the debt in the next 10 years, the United States is not nearing unsustainable debt levels, said Stephanie Kelton, a professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University. “Some people would say the red lights are flashing, and we’re all sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring the clear and present danger,” she said. “I don’t see a clear and present danger.” Kelton said the United States, like Japan, will always be able pay its debts since it controls its own currency. It can simply create more money to pay its bills. Taken to an extreme, that strategy can lead to higher inflation. And Kelton said it matters what the government uses its borrowed money to do — whether or not the spending will make the future economy more productive.
Obviously, all of the extra spending we're currently doing is being done to help the economy. I'm not claiming this proves anything definitively in regards to your question, other than to illustrate there are economists that aren't sure just how far we can actually go without doing significant damage to the economy. Again, regardless of how many people become unemployed, if we just went to a temporary UBI program where we would pay every single adult living alone $3000 a month and, every family $2000 per adult couple, and $1000 for any other person living in the home, until we can safely send everyone out again, that would probably take care of the vast majority of poor and middle-income people in our country through the point we re-open. I know, I know...I said that would be it. But, just saw the following message on social media from a nurse in Michigan that I will leave you with for your consideration.
To those protesters of their personal freedom here is a reminder of why we are doing this: This was just posted seven minutes ago in Michigan from an exhausted nurse. She is responding to Michigan residents who want life to immediately go back to normal.
 This from a nurse on the front lines.
“I am posting, for once, about something other than my dog.
I have seen 4 patients die, 5 get intubated, 2 re-intubated, witnessed family consent to make 2 more patients DNRs, sweat my butt off during CPR, titrated so many drips to no avail, watched vent settings increase to no avail. We are exhausted and at a total loss.
All of this in two shifts in a row.
Some of you people have never done EVERYTHING you could to save someone, and watched them die anyway, and it shows.
I would have no problem if you fools worried about your "freedom" all went out and got COVID. If only you could sign a form stating that you revoke your right to have medical treatment based on your cavalier antics and refusal to abide by CDC and medical professionals' advice. If you were the only people who got infected during your escapades to protest tyranny, great. But that's sadly not how this works.
You wanna complain because the garden aisle is closed? If you knew a thing about gardening, you'd know it's too early to plant in Michigan. Your garden doesn't matter. If killing your plants would bring back my patients, I would pillage the **** out of your "essential" garden beds.
Upset because you can't go boating...in Michigan...in April...in the cold-*** water? You wanna tell my patient's daughter (who was sobbing as she said goodbye to her father over the phone) about your first-world problems?
Upset because you can't go to your cottage up north? Your cottage...your second property...used for leisure. My coworkers can't even stay in their regular homes. Most have been staying in hotels and dorms, not able to see their spouses or babies.
All of these posts, petitions online to evade "tyranny", it's all such bull****. I'm sorry you're bored and have nothing to do but ***** and moan. You wanna pick up a couple hours for me? Yeah, didn't think so. I wouldn't trust most of you with patient care, anyway. Not just because of the selfish lack of humanity your posts exude, but because most of those posts and petitions are so riddled with misspellings and grammatical errors, that it makes me question your cognitive capacity.
Shoutout to my coworkers, the real MVPs.”