[BostonCard]

Teejers that's an oddly fatalistic outlook.  Like, "we shouldn't do things to prevent spread of COVID-19 because we are muddling through"

I'm thinking more along the lines of "we don't have to just muddle through, but to do so we would need to actually take steps to stop the spread".  Early in the pandemic, I made two points, which I think have held up pretty well.  The first is that COVID-19 was serious, and that it will spread rapidly.  I don't think we have anyone here who disagrees with that, though of course there is reasonable disagreement on how serious it is.  The second is that we are not powerless to slow the spread of the virus.  And we were somewhat successful in slowing it down, but pandemic fatigue and monetary concerns (exacerbated by a congress that is too paralyzed by division to help the individuals and businesses most affected by the pandemic and efforts to slow the spread), have made that much less effective.  But I do wonder what would happen if people actually advocated taking steps to reduce the spread instead of giving up.

With a vaccine EUA imminent, and the strong possibility that the situation will be much better in the spring (the weather will be better so transmission will probably go down, and the most vulnerable groups will have been vaccinated), I honestly don't get why we don't make a big push to reduce the spread until we get there, including having collegiate sports go on a 3-4 month pause and restart in the spring season.  Between now and the summer, when Slaoui believes we might have herd immunity, there are about 180 days.  If we average 1000 deaths between now and then, that's 180,000 more deaths, many of which are preventable.

Unlike back in March, we are not being asked to hunker down indefinitely; it's just another few months.

BC

---

Should add, the US now looks like Europe did a few weeks ago.  Europe placed some modified lockdowns that were less restrictive than the ones imposed in April.  And, they worked.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working

If you look at the figure titled "Changes in viral spread rate ® caused by shifts in mobility", you can see that the biggest drop in R comes from decreases in trips from one area to another (more than the effect of restrictions on going to bars, restaurants and shops).  You know what involves a lot of travel from one region to another?  Intercollegiate (and professional) athletics.

BC

[BostonCard]

Teejers that's an oddly fatalistic outlook.  Like, "we shouldn't do things to prevent spread of COVID-19 because we are muddling through"

I'm thinking more along the lines of "we don't have to just muddle through, but to do so we would need to actually take steps to stop the spread".  Early in the pandemic, I made two points, which I think have held up pretty well.  The first is that COVID-19 was serious, and that it will spread rapidly.  I don't think we have anyone here who disagrees with that, though of course there is reasonable disagreement on how serious it is.  The second is that we are not powerless to slow the spread of the virus.  And we were somewhat successful in slowing it down, but pandemic fatigue and monetary concerns (exacerbated by a congress that is too paralyzed by division to help the individuals and businesses most affected by the pandemic and efforts to slow the spread), have made that much less effective.  But I do wonder what would happen if people actually advocated taking steps to reduce the spread instead of giving up.

With a vaccine EUA imminent, and the strong possibility that the situation will be much better in the spring (the weather will be better so transmission will probably go down, and the most vulnerable groups will have been vaccinated), I honestly don't get why we don't make a big push to reduce the spread until we get there, including having collegiate sports go on a 3-4 month pause and restart in the spring season.  Between now and the summer, when Slaoui believes we might have herd immunity, there are about 180 days.  If we average 1000 deaths between now and then, that's 180,000 more deaths, many of which are preventable.

Unlike back in March, we are not being asked to hunker down indefinitely; it's just another few months.

BC

---

Should add, the US now looks like Europe did a few weeks ago.  Europe placed some modified lockdowns that were less restrictive than the ones imposed in April.  And, they worked.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working

If you look at the figure titled "Changes in viral spread rate ® caused by shifts in mobility", you can see that the biggest drop in R comes from decreases in trips from one area to another (more than the effect of restrictions on going to bars, restaurants and shops).  You know what involves a lot of travel from one region to another?  Intercollegiate (and professional) athletics.

BC