Social Distancing is a multi-faceted bit of fake news

[Jack Hays]

A contrarian's view:

[h=2]Epidemiology Professor: Do Nothing, Coronaviruses End In 4 Weeks…Containment PROLONGS Death[/h]By Kenneth Richard on 9. April 2020
Share this...


[h=4]Dr. Knut Wittkowski, the former head of the epidemiology department at Rockerfeller University, says doing nothing would have been more effective – and ultimately cost fewer lives – than the “containment” strategy now in operation across the world.[/h]By restricting movement and confining people in their homes we are unnecessarily prolonging or widening the curve instead of just flattening it.
The only way to eliminate any respiratory virus is not by developing vaccines or with pharmaceutical intervention, but by natural herd immunity. This means we should be allowing children to attend school.
When 80% of the population becomes infected – and the vast majority of the population won’t even know it because they won’t have symptoms – a common coronavirus like this one can be exterminated within about 4 weeks.
By trying to contain the virus, we are practically ensuring there will be a “second wave” of infections in the Northern Hemisphere fall, as not enough people will have been infected in recent months to exterminate this particular coronavirus strain.
Dr. Wittkowski asserts he is able to talk candidly about what should have been done in response to this COVID-19 outbreak because he is not paid by the government and therefore he is able to “actually do science”. . . .

 

[ElChupacabra]

A contrarian's view:

[h=2]Epidemiology Professor: Do Nothing, Coronaviruses End In 4 Weeks…Containment PROLONGS Death[/h]By Kenneth Richard on 9. April 2020
Share this...


[h=4]Dr. Knut Wittkowski, the former head of the epidemiology department at Rockerfeller University, says doing nothing would have been more effective – and ultimately cost fewer lives – than the “containment” strategy now in operation across the world.[/h]By restricting movement and confining people in their homes we are unnecessarily prolonging or widening the curve instead of just flattening it.
The only way to eliminate any respiratory virus is not by developing vaccines or with pharmaceutical intervention, but by natural herd immunity. This means we should be allowing children to attend school.
When 80% of the population becomes infected – and the vast majority of the population won’t even know it because they won’t have symptoms – a common coronavirus like this one can be exterminated within about 4 weeks.
By trying to contain the virus, we are practically ensuring there will be a “second wave” of infections in the Northern Hemisphere fall, as not enough people will have been infected in recent months to exterminate this particular coronavirus strain.
Dr. Wittkowski asserts he is able to talk candidly about what should have been done in response to this COVID-19 outbreak because he is not paid by the government and therefore he is able to “actually do science”. . . .

What he doesn't address is what his strategy would mean for healthcare systems and their ability to manage the additional sick people if there were no containment strategy. He also states there are no new cases in China and South Korea which isn't true based on current data; while there are certainly far fewer, but not "none". It's also important to note that while China has eased restrictions in Wuhan, social distancing is still in effect and people are still wearing masks.

 

[Jack Hays]

What he doesn't address is what his strategy would mean for healthcare systems and their ability to manage the additional sick people if there were no containment strategy. He also states there are no new cases in China and South Korea which isn't true based on current data; while there are certainly far fewer, but not "none". It's also important to note that while China has eased restrictions in Wuhan, social distancing is still in effect and people are still wearing masks.

Fair enough.

 

[Mr Person]

I will use VIRUS for coronavirus and SD for Social Distancing.

Let's start with what is true about SD: SD lowers the peak of VIRUS cases
in the VIRUS curve of cases.

SD is a multi-faceted bit of fake news:

(1) That no one case of contracted VIRUS is acceptable.
Even though approximately 20% of the population which contracts
VIRUS acquires symptoms which need a hosptial.

(2) instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD actually artifically extends the VIRUS crisis because of fake news 1.

(3) Instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD will actually raise the chance of contracting VIRUS because of fake news 2.

(4) That SD is reportedly better for this VIRUS crisis than quarantining.

(5) That SD is reportedly less expensive to implement than quarantining.

I'm amazed at how comprehensively missed the point.

 

[Phys251]

I will use VIRUS for coronavirus and SD for Social Distancing.

Let's start with what is true about SD: SD lowers the peak of VIRUS cases
in the VIRUS curve of cases.

SD is a multi-faceted bit of fake news:

(1) That no one case of contracted VIRUS is acceptable.
Even though approximately 20% of the population which contracts
VIRUS acquires symptoms which need a hosptial.

(2) instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD actually artifically extends the VIRUS crisis because of fake news 1.

(3) Instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD will actually raise the chance of contracting VIRUS because of fake news 2.

(4) That SD is reportedly better for this VIRUS crisis than quarantining.

(5) That SD is reportedly less expensive to implement than quarantining.

Have you given a full apology for this disinformation yet, marke? Or will you continue to spew lies that endanger human lives?

 

[year2late]

You said it (and I agree). Your chances of getting coronavirus go down but don't go down completely.

Here we go again. You never learn.

Show me where the outcome expectation of social distancing was to completely stop coronavirus.

That is YOUR false narrative.

I told myself I would not tell you again. But I will.

Social distancing can reduce transmission events, prevent the rapid progress of an outbreak, and provide relief for an already overburdened healthcare system.

The expectation was NEVER elimination of possibility of getting coronavirus.

 

[beefheart]

I will use VIRUS for coronavirus and SD for Social Distancing.

Let's start with what is true about SD: SD lowers the peak of VIRUS cases
in the VIRUS curve of cases.

SD is a multi-faceted bit of fake news:

(1) That no one case of contracted VIRUS is acceptable.
Even though approximately 20% of the population which contracts
VIRUS acquires symptoms which need a hosptial.

(2) instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD actually artifically extends the VIRUS crisis because of fake news 1.

(3) Instead of SD reportedly lowering the chances of contracting VIRUS,
SD will actually raise the chance of contracting VIRUS because of fake news 2.

(4) That SD is reportedly better for this VIRUS crisis than quarantining.

(5) That SD is reportedly less expensive to implement than quarantining.

Stop making stupid threads.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Scientists don't have expertise on coronavirus. No one does.

Scientists didn't demand social distancing when the swine flu broke in 2008. Scientists didn't demand everyone practice social distancing to break the Ebola outbreak in 2016. Instead, scientists demanded those infected with Ebola to practice social distancing.

Coronavirus is no where as deadly nor as pernicious as Ebola. What scientists are doing, now, with coronavirus is entirely new...That everyone practice social distancing. Scientists are treating coronavirus as if it were as deadly as Ebola which also isn't true. I guess the Ebola outbreak made every scientist skittish.

the scientists perked up their ears when they learned that THIS virus spreads MUCH faster than most, infecting crowds so large that even the 20% that need hospitalization would overwhelm the hospitals and use up all the supplies we DIDN'T stockpile

 

[ldsrptcvt]

I'm whining that all is gone and all didn't have to be sacrificed to combat coronavirus which is a deadly pandemic TO CERTAIN PEOPLE.

Nearly 40 Percent of U.S. Hospitalized Coronavirus Patients Are Age 20 to 54 - The New York Times
"New C.D.C. data shows that nearly 40 percent of patients sick enough to be hospitalized were age 20 to 54."

stop pretending that young healthy people won't clog the system themselves

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Follow scientists' guidelines religiously. Well, I've discovered a new? religion...The religion of scientific adoration.

well science is the only way we can learn about diseases...........

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Social distancing is about worrying about hospital resources being overtaxed when that hasn't even happened? At least, social distancing is wildly paranoid.

If we had not been doing SD all these weeks, the hospitals would be toast

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Because it blows away your ridiculous and uneducated thought process that Ebola is like Covid 19. It is not at all like it. If it was we would be digging mass graves everywhere.

well, running out of morgue space and needing to bring in refrigerated trucks to throw the bodies into isn't a good sign

 

[ldsrptcvt]

Why don't you explain why scientists are 'experts' on a statistical and sociological concept like social distancing?

for christ's sake, these scientists are experts in EPIDEMIOLOGY! They spent years learning how EPIDEMICS spread, how to track them and find sources, how public mobility affects spread, AND the STATISTICS and MODELS that describe them - what better qualifications could anybody have?

From Wikipedia:"Epidemiology is the study and analysis of the distribution (who, when, and where), patterns and determinants of health and disease conditions in defined populations.

It is a cornerstone of public health, and shapes policy decisions and evidence-based practice by identifying risk factors for disease and targets for preventive healthcare. Epidemiologists help with study design, collection, and statistical analysis of data, amend interpretation and dissemination of results (including peer review and occasional systematic review). Epidemiology has helped develop methodology used in clinical research, public health studies, and, to a lesser extent, basic research in the biological sciences.[1]

Major areas of epidemiological study include disease causation, transmission, outbreak investigation, disease surveillance, environmental epidemiology, forensic epidemiology, occupational epidemiology, screening, biomonitoring, and comparisons of treatment effects such as in clinical trials. Epidemiologists rely on other scientific disciplines like biology to better understand disease processes, statistics to make efficient use of the data and draw appropriate conclusions, social sciences to better understand proximate and distal causes, and engineering for exposure assessment.[/B

Guess what - they know a lot...

 

[cabse5]

You still have not answered who is saying that social distancing is a magical pill. Who is passing on that narrative. I have heard no MD/epidemiologist speak to this.

I will say this again....

Social distancing can reduce transmission events, prevent the rapid progress of an outbreak, and provide relief for an already overburdened healthcare system.

The way this transmits makes it very possible that a person without symptoms can spread this to others without knowing. That is why it helps.

In hospital, we would isolate people with such symptoms.

But this virus is different, it can be transmitted before a patient is symptomatic ...which can make it quite insidious and give it great potential to cripple a health care system.

How many times have I heard on television and on DP to observe social distancing and, in some cases, observe strict social distancing by staying indoors? Those edicts to observe social distancing and strict social distancing is describing social distancing as a magic pill.

Side note: OK, I know social distancing's primary goal is to make sure the healthcare system isn't overloaded to the point of breaking. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that overloading of the healthcare system is being reached in the US.

Unfortunately, if you've paid attention, at all, to my posts concerning social distancing, you'd notice I've proposed an alternative AND BETTER way to social distancing which would prevent the overloading of the healthcare system AND actually protect those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus while allowing those who are asymptomatic or have sight reactions to coronavirus and not need a hospital not be caught up in the web and destruction of social distancing. That alternative is to quarantine those with pre-existing conditions and are most susceptible to coronavirus from everybody else. Instead of being interested in spread of coronavirus, one should be interested in casualty figures (deaths attributed to coronavirus and sicknesses with coronavirus as the main underlying reason for sickness) of coronavirus. Look, I buried the lead.

 

[year2late]

How many times have I heard on television and on DP to observe social distancing and, in some cases, observe strict social distancing by staying indoors? Those edicts to observe social distancing and strict social distancing is describing social distancing as a magic pill.

Side note: OK, I know social distancing's primary goal is to make sure the healthcare system isn't overloaded to the point of breaking. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that overloading of the healthcare system is being reached in the US.

Unfortunately, if you've paid attention, at all, to my posts concerning social distancing, you'd notice I've proposed an alternative AND BETTER way to social distancing which would prevent the overloading of the healthcare system AND actually protect those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus while allowing those who are asymptomatic or have sight reactions to coronavirus not to be caught up in the web and destruction of social distancing. That alternative is to quarantine those with pre-existing conditions and are most susceptible to coronavirus from everybody else. Instead of being interested in spread of coronavirus, one should be interested in casualty figures (deaths attributed to coronavirus and sicknesses with coronavirus as the underlying reason for sickness) of coronavirus. Look, I buried the lead.

No. It is not only the elderly and those with pre-exisiting conditions that die. It is not a better idea.

You need to pay attention to epidemiologists.

And yes, healthcare systems are being overwhelmed. Healthy hospital workers have died. Transportation workers have died (42 MTA workers have died). We do not have enough supplies. Hospital workers are risking themselves because they STILL lack sufficient PPE. We are wearing flimsy surgical masks for 12 hours -they were never intended to be used like that.

In hard hit cities, ERS are overloaded and patients are hanging out in in ER on vent as if it was an ICU. Thank God there is social distancing...less motorvehicle accidents and such - less major trauma - can you imagine if those patients had to go to one of those ERs?

With your idea of quarantining those with pre-existing conditions and those susceptible just doesn't make sense. Everybody is susceptible. Some just get hit harder by the disease.And frankly, those who don't show significant signs of the disease are the most dangerous. They can be a "Typhoid Mary" and never even know it.

Social isolating is showing clear signs of positive impact.

And stop with this "magic pill" crap. Nobody has said that. Nobody has insinuated anything even close to that.

I am curious. Have you at least learned why we are treating Covid 19 different from Ebola?

 

[CaughtInThe]

I absolutely love these types of threads so early on that are so wrong.

It's the egg on the face that's comical.

 

[ldsrptcvt]

I absolutely love these types of threads so early on that are so wrong.

It's the egg on the face that's comical.

Quite a valuable contribution to the conversation.

 

[cabse5]

Who would you quarantine? Unless you test every New Yorker,there is no way of telling who has it and who doesn’t

YOU DO NOT TEST EVERY NEW YORKER. YOU TEST THOSE WHO HAVE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT MAKE THEM MOST LIKELY TO SUFFER THE MOST FROM CORONAVIRUS.

Instead of recording cases of spread, record those cases where coronavirus is the underlying reason for death or hospitalization.

Recording spread was one of the first major mistakes epidemiologists made with coronavirus. The US didn't have to copy the way other countries tried to combat coronavirus because we knew of those groups most susceptible to coronavirus before coronavirus became pervasive in the US from data received from European countries like Italy and Spain and from Australia, for examples. We also prevented travel into the US from China.

We should've quarantined those groups most susceptible to coronavirus from the beginning. At least by quarantining those most susceptible, they could've been protected from coronavirus. With extreme social distancing, they aren't protected from coronavirus. And as a side note with quarantining of the most susceptible cases, hospital services wouldn't be inundated to the breaking point, either. And the economy wouldn't be wrecked as it is now with extreme social distancing. And society wouldn't be wrecked as it is now with extreme social distancing.

You need to keep up. I've posted these ideas in this thread more than once.

Extreme social distancing is a lose, lose. Quarantining is a win, win. But don't ask Cuomo. He wouldn't know. He's just a politician who would be a scientist.

 

[cabse5]

No. It is not only the elderly and those with pre-exisiting conditions that die. It is not a better idea.

You need to pay attention to epidemiologists.

And yes, healthcare systems are being overwhelmed. Healthy hospital workers have died. Transportation workers have died (42 MTA workers have died). We do not have enough supplies. Hospital workers are risking themselves because they STILL lack sufficient PPE. We are wearing flimsy surgical masks for 12 hours -they were never intended to be used like that.

In hard hit cities, ERS are overloaded and patients are hanging out in in ER on vent as if it was an ICU. Thank God there is social distancing...less motorvehicle accidents and such - less major trauma - can you imagine if those patients had to go to one of those ERs?

With your idea of quarantining those with pre-existing conditions and those susceptible just doesn't make sense. Everybody is susceptible. Some just get hit harder by the disease.And frankly, those who don't show significant signs of the disease are the most dangerous. They can be a "Typhoid Mary" and never even know it.

Social isolating is showing clear signs of positive impact.

And stop with this "magic pill" crap. Nobody has said that. Nobody has insinuated anything even close to that.

I am curious. Have you at least learned why we are treating Covid 19 different from Ebola?

Why do you insist people like us who want to quarantine those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus only want to quarantine the elderly? (1)The elderly is one group that is most susceptible to coronavirus but there are (2) those of any age with respiratory problems (3) those of any age with immune deficiencies and (4) those of any age with diabetes who are also most susceptible to coronavirus.

I can't get into the heads of epidemiologists on why they treated Ebola the way they did but I think they deliberately used the 'nuclear option' which is extreme social distancing to combat coronavirus because they were dismayed at the results of their treating of Ebola.

BTW, coronavirus is not nearly as deadly as Ebola.
BTW, extreme social distancing had never been used before. Was (and still is) theoretical and never been proven.

 

[Citizen]

YOU DO NOT TEST EVERY NEW YORKER. YOU TEST THOSE WHO HAVE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT MAKE THEM MOST LIKELY TO SUFFER THE MOST FROM CORONAVIRUS.

Instead of recording cases of spread, record those cases where coronavirus is the underlying reason for death or hospitalization.

Recording spread was one of the first major mistakes epidemiologists made with coronavirus. The US didn't have to copy the way other countries tried to combat coronavirus because we knew of those groups most susceptible to coronavirus before coronavirus became pervasive in the US from data received from European countries like Italy and Spain and from Australia, for examples. We also prevented travel into the US from China.

We should've quarantined those groups most susceptible to coronavirus from the beginning. At least by quarantining those most susceptible, they could've been protected from coronavirus. With extreme social distancing, they aren't protected from coronavirus. And as a side note with quarantining of the most susceptible cases, hospital services wouldn't be inundated to the breaking point, either. And the economy wouldn't be wrecked as it is now with extreme social distancing. And society wouldn't be wrecked as it is now with extreme social distancing.

You need to keep up. I've posted these ideas in this thread more than once.

Extreme social distancing is a lose, lose. Quarantining is a win, win. But don't ask Cuomo. He wouldn't know. He's just a politician who would be a scientist.

The problem with that is that everyone being hospitalized do not have pre-existing conditions

 

[cabse5]

The problem with that is that everyone being hospitalized do not have pre-existing conditions

All those hospitalized are serious enough to be hospitalized but not all will die.

An actual quarantine presents less of an overload to the hospital system than a lockdown since those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus aren't protected in a lockdown...Those with pre-existing conditions aren't even being accounted for in a lockdown.

 

[year2late]

Why do you insist people like us who want to quarantine those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus only want to quarantine the elderly? (1)The elderly is one group that is most susceptible to coronavirus but there are (2) those of any age with respiratory problems (3) those of any age with immune deficiencies and (4) those of any age with diabetes who are also most susceptible to coronavirus.

I can't get into the heads of epidemiologists on why they treated Ebola the way they did but I think they deliberately used the 'nuclear option' which is extreme social distancing to combat coronavirus because they were dismayed at the results of their treating of Ebola.

BTW, coronavirus is not nearly as deadly as Ebola.
BTW, extreme social distancing had never been used before. Was (and still is) theoretical and never been proven.

First of all, if you read what YOU quoted, I specifically said "It is not only the elderly and those with pre-exisiting conditions that die. "I did not exclude those with pre-existing conditions.

It is naive how you compare steps taken with Ebola as compared to coronavirus.

The reason epidemiologists have insisted on different steps to control lies in the mode of transmission. It is just not the same. But you have been told that already.

You have also been told why the epidemiologists have been more concerned about the transmissibility of Covid19 vs others (like usual flu strains)

How is Ebola transmitted?

How is Covid19 transmitted?

Are transmission rates higher than the flu?

Can a person be asymptomatic and transmit Covid 19?

The point of what we are doing is to buy time to avoid overwhelming healthcare system. While we are doing that try like hell to find a vaccine or perhaps cure.Give healthcare systems time to prepare for the next wave (if it happens). Hell, right now we cannot even manage to assure a healthcare worker gets a proper mask and gown.

Yeah, I will listen to the consensus of the epidemiologists.

 

[year2late]

The problem with that is that everyone being hospitalized do not have pre-existing conditions

And those same people are free to transmit the virus around. Unless someone is like that idiot governor of Georgia, they understand the virus can be spread by someone without symptoms.

And beyond that, it is transmissible for a longer length of time than the "usual" flu.

 

[Citizen]

All those hospitalized are serious enough to be hospitalized but not all will die.

An actual quarantine presents less of an overload to the hospital system than a lockdown since those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus aren't protected in a lockdown...Those with pre-existing conditions aren't even being accounted for in a lockdown.

Do you realize how cumbersome quarantine would be for those with pre-existing conditions. As unhealthy as Americans are, that would be about 1/2 the population.

Asthma, diabetes, heart conditions, obesity to name a few. And what about those who have pre-existing conditions who have not been diagnosed. Then the rest of the population would get sick, half would be severe enough to either stay home or be hospitalized. The economy would still be shut down. Not a well thought out plan. In fact not a plan at all

 

[cabse5]

Do you realize how cumbersome quarantine would be for those with pre-existing conditions. As unhealthy as Americans are, that would be about 1/2 the population.

Asthma, diabetes, heart conditions, obesity to name a few. And what about those who have pre-existing conditions who have not been diagnosed. Then the rest of the population would get sick, half would be severe enough to either stay home or be hospitalized. The economy would still be shut down. Not a well thought out plan. In fact not a plan at all

Those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus would be protected with an actual quarantine and not with extreme social distancing. And the economy and society wouldn't be ruined with an actual quarantine as it will be with extreme social distancing. Everything else is the same when comparing an actual quarantine to extreme social distancing. Sixteen states are locked down right now with extreme social distancing. That is 32% of states.16 states now on lockdown (full list of states) - UponArriving An actual quarantine of those with pre-existing conditions to coronavirus would prevent an overload of the hospital system, as well.