Airborne_Again wrote:
I would say that’s what everyone expects
Not anymore, and it was never “everyone” to begin with, only the UK and possibly Sweden. What is becoming more and more evident now is that there is little immunity to this disease. You can get it over and over, thus herd immunity goes out the window. At the moment there simply is no other way than to crush it as much as possible and still maintain a somewhat normal life.
Silvaire wrote:
You might be interested in comparing the rates of those three countries and others, third column from the right.
Ehm, if you want to suggest that the rate is not that high in USA, its simply because the rate of infection in USA is very heterogenous and only few places has (so far) been hit very hard. That is actually true for other countries as well (even China).
Nevertheless, the point stands (for USA as well) – few are testing those that died at home and including them in the COVID-19 statistics. Hence, the true extend is not really captured in the current statistics.
Indeed. If you were to consider US states as geographically analogous to European countries, the comparison of rates and distances would roughly align New York state with Spain and California with Romania. I think your comparison and conclusion may therefore be applicable to New York state.
Silvaire wrote:
Excepting island countries, it won’t be economically acceptable or practical for each little European country to lock itself up like a gated homeowners community, even for a relatively short period. The Schengen zone still exists and the economies are too intertwined – I think they will have to resume proper cooperation quickly or face economic suicide.
That is exactly what is happening and NEEDS to happen in order to stop the spread of this plague. Those countries who have done so decisively and with harsh measures will be the first to emerge from the brink of collapse, due to the fact that the more consequent the measures, the shorter the time. Unfortunately most of Europe has missed that bus and will bear consequences. Trade per se does not have to suffer, only the free circulation of people has to be stopped. Obviously, those who are in a lockdown can not travel anyhow.
Countries who now are on the way to recovery would be stupid to open their borders to people who are not. Borders however are simply the easiest kind of seregation mechanism, in fact borders may make sense in small countries like Switzerland, but even here, it would have been better to lock off the most affected areas early on. However, those who are recovering may have a quicker restart of their economy, yet they need to make sure that the plagued people who have not been under their jurisdiction and therefore locked down won’t spoil the whole success by infesting the country again. Schengen is suspended for all practical purposes and it won’t come back before it is safe to do so. In the face of what happened (e.g. Italy, Ischgl spreading disease all over Europe) it might be a good idea to question the concept of free movement of people anyhow.
Silvaire wrote:
It also presents a likely unacceptable issue for repatriation of its own citizens, especially given that some countries (e.g. Slovenia) have a substantial fraction of people living around the world.
It does not matter what citizens people are but that they are locked down whereever they are. The repatriation business was one which often enough got people from a better place in terms of conditions right into the center of the pandemic. What sense that makes is beyond me. This illness has nothing to do with citizenship but only where you are at a given point. Anyone out of the focal centers Italy, Switzerland, NY, UK, e.t.c. should be locked up in their homes plus a maybe 5 mile radius for shopping and doctors visits and those who still need going to work. The US will pay dearly for not immediately shutting state borders when there was time still.
Slovenia, well, it appears FLOTUS has to stay away from home for a while. So do many others. My wife also can not travel to her country of origin right now, lest she would (rightly) face a one month quarantaine which is severely enforced. That country has done really well in stopping the pandemic so far, and the last they need is citizens returning infesting that place which is not capable of taking care of thousands of ICU patients.
We have to forget the right to travel for right now, in any case, those who are locked down in their flats, the question is mute. I would expect the earliest that borders may be crossed without massive restrictions will be once a vaccine is available, so certainly not in 2020, maybe in 2021. I would not be surprised if you will find yourself locked into the community you live in for quite some time, let alone travel anywhere. Apart, the way things are going, I don’t expect any country on the way to recovery letting any Americans (or others) in until well into Fall 2020 or even later.
@BeechBaby, you might need to read up what a total lockdown means. Check out Austria and Bulgaria, who have done their homework on this. Obviously vital services stay operational, obviously people can get food, obviously they can visit doctors. But that is it, and that is also quite adequate, as the figures show.
hmng wrote:
https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/
That site has gems like this: “According to all findings to date, Covid-19 is no more dangerous than previous influenza epidemics.” and “life must continue as undisturbed as possible and immunity must be built up in the population as quickly as possible”.
People believe what they want to believe …
Its not that long ago that Boris Johnson was talking about herd immunity.
That site has gems like this: “According to all findings to date, Covid-19 is no more dangerous than previous influenza epidemics.”
Please present your evidence (data) to the contrary then.
Don’t forget that influenza is quite deadly and a real flu (not a little cold) is quite a serious illness.
The thing is that we don’t know the denominator, but emerging data hints at between 1 % (Iceland) and 15 % (Switzerland and elsewhere) of the population being infected already. If you then count 50 % of deaths as being “with Coronavirus” and not “of Coronavirus”, the current measures seem unjustified. No to say this isn’t a serious disease, but people’s lives are being destroyed with every day of global lockdown and we will all be paying for this for decades to come.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Borders however are simply the easiest kind of seregation mechanism
Assuming they don’t actually want to commit economic suicide in what admittedly seems to have become the 21st century European knee jerk reaction to any crisis real or imagined, one would think that it’s in the interest of small countries to work together in this situation, versus in isolation. On the other hand it’s interesting to see how it takes so very little to trigger the reemergence of simmering dislike of neighboring countries, totalitarian mindset etc in Europe. With that in mind, it may well be back to the dark ages… 
Until wiser minds do prevail.
My tendency based on data versus hysteria is to believe that in the US this situation is going to be largely over and done by August or so, with the economy building again by then. Yesterday was the day in which US fatalities exceeded the 2009-2010 H1N1 number in the US (about 12,000) and while the total is clearly going to be high in comparison it is not going to be the end of the world unless what I’ve seen termed “the largest and most expensive public health intervention experiment in the history of mankind” takes on a life of its own under the influence of small minded government driven chaos.
15 % (Switzerland and elsewhere) of the population being infected
Is there antibody test data supporting 15%?
Before there was an antibiotic to cure it, or the BCG vaccine, tuberculosis sufferers were kept in special hospitals, until they died.
There were regular chest x-rays to detect it. Until an antibiotic was found, it was a death sentence. Afterwards it still meant a long time in hospital.
When vaccination started, over half my school class, including me, were already immune and didn’t need the jab. That was in a fairly prosperous village community, far from city slums.
We may have to live with an infectious disease again.
Is there antibody test data supporting 15%?
No, that is the percentage of positive test results in Switzerland. For the “highest spread” scenario, I assumed that if this were spread widely and not causing symptoms in most carriers, the percent of positives in people getting tested is not much different from the general population. But that is why the range must be between 1 and 15 %, the latter being the upper bound.
Also assuming the tests work well and don’t underreport, otherwise it cold be even higher than 15 %.
Coincidentally, any of the four common Coronaviruses was prevalent in 7-15 % of patients every year in the Glasgow study.
