GeorgeBMac said: A major part of what you see as the problem was caused by Trump and his repeated minimization / marginalization of the danger of this virus. Until it was running out of control he was telling the American public not to worry about a thing. In fact, even today with over 100,000 infected, many continue to think its all a Democratic hoax to make the Fiddler in Chief look bad. Nobody has to do that for him. It's the one thing he's good at.
I think many think not that it is a hoax, but rather opportunistic political use of the situation. Want me to find a link to gov Cuomo promoting partying in Chinatown? Both sides of the isle were being rather, well political, in their initial response. But, to be fair, we also didn't have that much data at that point. It's kind of easy in hindsight to say they all should have known better. But, as for intention... isn't protecting the economy at least more honorable than virtue-signaling?
While the use is maybe justified just for now, the obvious danger is that this will be normalised. Turn off your cellular connection and use a VPN for data over wifi should suitably protect you? But we shouldn’t be forced to do stuff like that to stop the state tracking us.
The problem is that most of the eroding of our rights seems justified at the time. We just don't seem to be able to hold our governments accountable enough to make these seemingly real needs, truly temporary. How many years have our rights been trampled on, countries been taken down, millions killed, many millions displaced, etc. because of seemingly reasonable reactions to 9/11?
GG1 said: Read this NPR article. It says that the China tests may only be 30-50% accurate (in identifying an infected person). And China does NOT count asymptomatic people in their "infected" count.
My understanding is that most of the early testing was highly inaccurate. I'm not even sure the current testing is anywhere near as accurate as many of our other tests.
Prospect Park is .82 square miles (although some of that is lake). Just because a lot of people are going there doesn't mean that they're not practicing social distancing. In fact, it's easier to stay farther away from other people in the park than it is on a typical city sidewalk. Same is true for the Coney Island Boardwalk and the beach and places like it. The Boardwalk is far wider than any city sidewalk - it's about 100 feet wide. The danger isn't outside - it's inside. When you're walking in the park, as long as you don't go to the playground or sit on a bench, one is not touching anything.
No doubt. And, even if you are walking down a narrow hiking trail, unless this thing is SUPER contagious (and/or nearly everyone has it), your chances of getting it briefly passing by others is quite low.
GeorgeBMac said: So, what then is the alternative? Wishful thinking? An Easter miracle?
Social Distancing was never meant to stop it, simply slow it down so the health care system doesn't get overwhelmed.
Obviously what Italy did and we are doing is not working so well.
More information (which I'm sure everyone is trying to get), more accurate media (to keep people's reaction more rational), and hopefully a more measured response based on overall risk-assessment. The people, need to better understand the risks and implications of the various approaches.
Italy probably isn't a great analogy to what the USA faces.
GeorgeBMac said: So, you don't trust your own government?
... There's a remedy for that coming up in about 6 months
No... and it's been that way for at least several decades. Yes, we have the opportunity to fix it quite often, yet too few have tried so far. It would sure help if more than a few dropped the partisan-antics, though, and tried to be informed on what the actual problem is... cf. Congressional Dish podcast.
#1 scientists study data. Without data, they are studying the lack of data and simulating random possibilities. They typically take small sample subsets due to cost, time and availability, apply a bell curve, and just scale out the results. They use PhD level jargon to make it sound authoritative, but its Terrifying actually. Think of those small studies that proved drinking Radium was a wonder drug to cure all sorts of ailments. Or more recently, the study that showed Tryclosan was anti-bacterial led to it being everywhere in everything, and completely worthless. Leaving everyone unnecessarily exposed to past epidemics. Not to say all scientists don't know what they are doing, but recognize they need abundant information to process. Today they use peer review to see if that bell curve data matches someone else's study and give higher confidence to that lack of data. More data = better studies. better studies = better information to public policy makers.
Shoving aside the ever present possibility of abuse in any technology, lets think about what scientists can do for everyone when they have bulk location data.
Many scientific pathogen research studies focus on existing transportation patterns and the resulting pathogen transmission potential if nobody was aware or reacting to what was occurring. Every one of those 50+ studies I've read states they do not have enough data to accurately predict human changes to that pattern, where they go during a real event. So they provide a wide range of worst/best case possibilities to policy makers and news outlets.
If scientists can see societies adaptive behavior in near real time, they can provide better information on how to influence that response to policy makers. Hyper local quarantines, focused hospital responses, targeted testing and treatments. Better distribution of supplies, and staff. When scientists can't say where, when or how bad, policy makers just do whatever activist people want them to do.
#1 scientists study data. Without data, they are studying the lack of data and simulating random possibilities. They typically take small sample subsets due to cost, time and availability, apply a bell curve, and just scale out the results. They use PhD level jargon to make it sound authoritative, but its Terrifying actually. Think of those small studies that proved drinking Radium was a wonder drug to cure all sorts of ailments. Or more recently, the study that showed Tryclosan was anti-bacterial led to it being everywhere in everything, and completely worthless. Leaving everyone unnecessarily exposed to past epidemics. Not to say all scientists don't know what they are doing, but recognize they need abundant information to process. Today they use peer review to see if that bell curve data matches someone else's study and give higher confidence to that lack of data. More data = better studies. better studies = better information to public policy makers.
Shoving aside the ever present possibility of abuse in any technology, lets think about what scientists can do for everyone when they have bulk location data.
Many scientific pathogen research studies focus on existing transportation patterns and the resulting pathogen transmission potential if nobody was aware or reacting to what was occurring. Every one of those 50+ studies I've read states they do not have enough data to accurately predict human changes to that pattern, where they go during a real event. So they provide a wide range of worst/best case possibilities to policy makers and news outlets.
If scientists can see societies adaptive behavior in near real time, they can provide better information on how to influence that response to policy makers. Hyper local quarantines, focused hospital responses, targeted testing and treatments. Better distribution of supplies, and staff. When scientists can't say where, when or how bad, policy makers just do whatever activist people want them to do.
Great post! I think that would be a good middle road, here. Abstract the data so trends we wouldn't otherwise know can be brought to the information pool.
As for science and studies, this seems to be the case. The problem is that people have great confidence in the scientific method (which they should), but then forget it is operating in a human system with all the baggage that brings. Money, or lack of money, corrupts the data. Personal ideology or gain corrupts the data. Even peer review is problematic, in that it is also often influenced in the same ways. And, then there is the fact that while science can correct if other scientists reproduce the results, this often doesn't happen. Then there is downright cheating and playing dirty that sometimes goes on when there is controversy involved.
GeorgeBMac said: A major part of what you see as the problem was caused by Trump and his repeated minimization / marginalization of the danger of this virus. Until it was running out of control he was telling the American public not to worry about a thing. In fact, even today with over 100,000 infected, many continue to think its all a Democratic hoax to make the Fiddler in Chief look bad. Nobody has to do that for him. It's the one thing he's good at.
I think many think not that it is a hoax, but rather opportunistic political use of the situation. Want me to find a link to gov Cuomo promoting partying in Chinatown? Both sides of the isle were being rather, well political, in their initial response. But, to be fair, we also didn't have that much data at that point. It's kind of easy in hindsight to say they all should have known better. But, as for intention... isn't protecting the economy at least more honorable than virtue-signaling?
While the use is maybe justified just for now, the obvious danger is that this will be normalised. Turn off your cellular connection and use a VPN for data over wifi should suitably protect you? But we shouldn’t be forced to do stuff like that to stop the state tracking us.
The problem is that most of the eroding of our rights seems justified at the time. We just don't seem to be able to hold our governments accountable enough to make these seemingly real needs, truly temporary. How many years have our rights been trampled on, countries been taken down, millions killed, many millions displaced, etc. because of seemingly reasonable reactions to 9/11?
GG1 said: Read this NPR article. It says that the China tests may only be 30-50% accurate (in identifying an infected person). And China does NOT count asymptomatic people in their "infected" count.
My understanding is that most of the early testing was highly inaccurate. I'm not even sure the current testing is anywhere near as accurate as many of our other tests.
Prospect Park is .82 square miles (although some of that is lake). Just because a lot of people are going there doesn't mean that they're not practicing social distancing. In fact, it's easier to stay farther away from other people in the park than it is on a typical city sidewalk. Same is true for the Coney Island Boardwalk and the beach and places like it. The Boardwalk is far wider than any city sidewalk - it's about 100 feet wide. The danger isn't outside - it's inside. When you're walking in the park, as long as you don't go to the playground or sit on a bench, one is not touching anything.
No doubt. And, even if you are walking down a narrow hiking trail, unless this thing is SUPER contagious (and/or nearly everyone has it), your chances of getting it briefly passing by others is quite low.
GeorgeBMac said: So, what then is the alternative? Wishful thinking? An Easter miracle?
Social Distancing was never meant to stop it, simply slow it down so the health care system doesn't get overwhelmed.
Obviously what Italy did and we are doing is not working so well.
More information (which I'm sure everyone is trying to get), more accurate media (to keep people's reaction more rational), and hopefully a more measured response based on overall risk-assessment. The people, need to better understand the risks and implications of the various approaches.
Italy probably isn't a great analogy to what the USA faces.
GeorgeBMac said: So, you don't trust your own government?
... There's a remedy for that coming up in about 6 months
No... and it's been that way for at least several decades. Yes, we have the opportunity to fix it quite often, yet too few have tried so far. It would sure help if more than a few dropped the partisan-antics, though, and tried to be informed on what the actual problem is... cf. Congressional Dish podcast.
A hoax?
Sorry but it was Trump and his right wing propaganda machine that called it (or the response to it) that. You can't marginalize that politicization of this threat to our nation -- or use the "they all do it" excuse. Trump's hoax strategy is inexcusable - instead of leading in a time of crisis he was politicizing and finger pointing. But nice try!
Privacy rights? So you don't trust your government. Got it. So what are you doing about that?
Inaccurate tests? Yes, instead of using the test from the CDC we tried the right wing's "go it alone" strategy and our gutted CDC put out inaccurate tests while our FDA blocked private companies from creating their own. By the time those problems were ironed out (and they still aren't) the virus was in charge.
More information? For over 20 years Republicans have been attacking "Big Government" and transferring agency functions to for-profit organizations. We see now the fallacy of that strategy: Short term gain for long term pain.
Media exagerration? Sorry, but the mainsteam media has reported this correctly. It is our president who has been lying (as usual) to the American people and causing them to act inappropriately -- and his lies and actions made us #1 in the number of infections.
#1 scientists study data. Without data, they are studying the lack of data and simulating random possibilities. They typically take small sample subsets due to cost, time and availability, apply a bell curve, and just scale out the results. They use PhD level jargon to make it sound authoritative, but its Terrifying actually. Think of those small studies that proved drinking Radium was a wonder drug to cure all sorts of ailments. Or more recently, the study that showed Tryclosan was anti-bacterial led to it being everywhere in everything, and completely worthless. Leaving everyone unnecessarily exposed to past epidemics. Not to say all scientists don't know what they are doing, but recognize they need abundant information to process. Today they use peer review to see if that bell curve data matches someone else's study and give higher confidence to that lack of data. More data = better studies. better studies = better information to public policy makers.
Shoving aside the ever present possibility of abuse in any technology, lets think about what scientists can do for everyone when they have bulk location data.
Many scientific pathogen research studies focus on existing transportation patterns and the resulting pathogen transmission potential if nobody was aware or reacting to what was occurring. Every one of those 50+ studies I've read states they do not have enough data to accurately predict human changes to that pattern, where they go during a real event. So they provide a wide range of worst/best case possibilities to policy makers and news outlets.
If scientists can see societies adaptive behavior in near real time, they can provide better information on how to influence that response to policy makers. Hyper local quarantines, focused hospital responses, targeted testing and treatments. Better distribution of supplies, and staff. When scientists can't say where, when or how bad, policy makers just do whatever activist people want them to do.
They are using statistical modelling because, after our public health agencies have been decimated and we failed to prepare for the onset of the virus with personal protective supplies, tests and specific contact tracing abilities we are grasping at whatever straws we can find.
We need to catch up to where we should have been 2 months ago and do things right.
GeorgeBMac said: Sorry but it was Trump and his right wing propaganda machine that called it (or the response to it) that.
If you can find me a clip of that... Yes, the response is the hoax. The MSM has gone wild with 24/7 fear based off the worst possible projections, as usual.
So you don't trust your government. Got it. So what are you doing about that?
Listening to Congressional Dish and No Agenda, and awaiting a chance to FIRE THEM ALL when election time rolls around. Here's a bit of trivia for you... which candidate for 2020 wrote the Patriot Act? Sleep Joe or Orange Man Bad? One of our upcoming candidates has been neck-deep in most of what has gone bad in the world for decades now, and it isn't Trump.
GeorgeBMac said: ... our gutted CDC put out inaccurate tests ...
Oh, absolutely, it was because they were gutted, not because they were incompetent (or maybe wanted to make things go bad?).
GeorgeBMac said: For over 20 years Republicans have been attacking "Big Government" and transferring agency functions to for-profit organizations.
Ok, I'm somewhat with you on this one. As much as don't like big-government, it has to be big-enough to accomplish some things like that. But, hasn't been just Republicans. While that may be their talking point, plenty of your Democrat Congress-people are completely tied up in corporatization too. It's the one thing (well, that and war and globalism) that they agree on.
Sorry, but the mainsteam media has reported this correctly. It is our president who has been lying (as usual) to the American people and causing them to act inappropriately -- and his lies and actions made us #1 in the number of infections.
Comments
The problem is that most of the eroding of our rights seems justified at the time. We just don't seem to be able to hold our governments accountable enough to make these seemingly real needs, truly temporary. How many years have our rights been trampled on, countries been taken down, millions killed, many millions displaced, etc. because of seemingly reasonable reactions to 9/11?
My understanding is that most of the early testing was highly inaccurate. I'm not even sure the current testing is anywhere near as accurate as many of our other tests.
No doubt. And, even if you are walking down a narrow hiking trail, unless this thing is SUPER contagious (and/or nearly everyone has it), your chances of getting it briefly passing by others is quite low.
More information (which I'm sure everyone is trying to get), more accurate media (to keep people's reaction more rational), and hopefully a more measured response based on overall risk-assessment. The people, need to better understand the risks and implications of the various approaches.
Italy probably isn't a great analogy to what the USA faces.
No... and it's been that way for at least several decades. Yes, we have the opportunity to fix it quite often, yet too few have tried so far.
It would sure help if more than a few dropped the partisan-antics, though, and tried to be informed on what the actual problem is... cf. Congressional Dish podcast.
As for science and studies, this seems to be the case. The problem is that people have great confidence in the scientific method (which they should), but then forget it is operating in a human system with all the baggage that brings. Money, or lack of money, corrupts the data. Personal ideology or gain corrupts the data. Even peer review is problematic, in that it is also often influenced in the same ways. And, then there is the fact that while science can correct if other scientists reproduce the results, this often doesn't happen. Then there is downright cheating and playing dirty that sometimes goes on when there is controversy involved.
A hoax?
So you don't trust your government. Got it. So what are you doing about that?
Yes, instead of using the test from the CDC we tried the right wing's "go it alone" strategy and our gutted CDC put out inaccurate tests while our FDA blocked private companies from creating their own. By the time those problems were ironed out (and they still aren't) the virus was in charge.
For over 20 years Republicans have been attacking "Big Government" and transferring agency functions to for-profit organizations. We see now the fallacy of that strategy: Short term gain for long term pain.
Sorry, but the mainsteam media has reported this correctly. It is our president who has been lying (as usual) to the American people and causing them to act inappropriately -- and his lies and actions made us #1 in the number of infections.
Yes, the response is the hoax. The MSM has gone wild with 24/7 fear based off the worst possible projections, as usual.
Listening to Congressional Dish and No Agenda, and awaiting a chance to FIRE THEM ALL when election time rolls around.
Here's a bit of trivia for you... which candidate for 2020 wrote the Patriot Act? Sleep Joe or Orange Man Bad?
One of our upcoming candidates has been neck-deep in most of what has gone bad in the world for decades now, and it isn't Trump.
Oh, absolutely, it was because they were gutted, not because they were incompetent (or maybe wanted to make things go bad?).
Ok, I'm somewhat with you on this one. As much as don't like big-government, it has to be big-enough to accomplish some things like that. But, hasn't been just Republicans. While that may be their talking point, plenty of your Democrat Congress-people are completely tied up in corporatization too. It's the one thing (well, that and war and globalism) that they agree on.
http://adam.curry.com/enc/1585858524.926_meidasupercutsofwarningfluworsethancoronavirus.mp3