WE NEVER NEEDED TO FLATTEN THE CURVE

Powerline ^ | APRIL 14, 2020 | JOHN HINDERAKER

[Hojczyk]

The theory behind curve-flattening is not that the virus will mysteriously disappear while we are all hunkered down, and we will emerge when it is safe to come out. That won’t happen. The point of curve-flattening is to prolong the epidemic, making it last longer than it otherwise would, as you can see in the curve-flattening diagrams. That way, more or less the same number will get sick and the same percentage will die, with one exception: our hospitals will not be overwhelmed by a crush of COVID-19 cases, and so ICU rooms and so on will be available for those who need them. That was the point of the shutdowns–to flatten the curve by stretching out the epidemic.

We know now, the COVID-19 virus was grossly overestimated, at least with respect to the demand its victims would place on hospitals. Weirdly, it is not easy to find a definitive figure for the number of hospitalizations to date. The Centers for Disease Control estimates, if you do the arithmetic, that as of April 4 around 41,250 people were hospitalized due to COVID-19, which seems too low. The COVID Tracking Project pegs it at 62,673 as of April 13. Does that sound like a lot of hospitalizations? As usual, the numbers need a context.

During last year’s flu season, according to the CDC, 490,561 people in the U.S. were hospitalized due to the seasonal flu virus. The prior year, it was 810,000 flu hospitalizations. This explains why, as we noted here, America’s hospitals have not been overwhelmed by the number of Wuhan flu sufferers, not even in New York City.

Once again, government officials are making decisions with catastrophic effects on many millions of lives, on the basis of models that have proved to be wrong. The shutdowns should end tomorrow.

[Phlyer]

Immunization or vaccine is the answer.

Maybe. It's an RNA virus and they mutate rapidly. There's no assurance that immunization - either through prior instance of the disease or a vaccine - will work the next time a slightly-mutated coronavirus comes through. It is suggested we get a new flu vaccine every year in an attempt to keep up with the mutations of 'ordinary' influenza.

It might work, but it's definitely not a guaranteed answer. And it might take a year to get enough vaccine distributed to be effective as 'herd immunity.'

What we need is a high-confidence treatment to control the odds of death or long-term adverse effects. That would also work immediately. Further, some of the mechanisms for this virus - things like attacking hemoglobin - can be interrupted with non-vaccine methods like chloroquine. Those are not dependent on the exact RNA of the virus and so would work regardless of mutations (as long as the basic hemoglobin attack mechanism remains).

[brownsfan]

“Don’t be so obvious with your Trump hatred.”

Too funny.

Trump is one of the few elected officials I feel is primarily interested in America and Americans.

How many politicians can you point to and say, that person is really bright, and cares about the country?

[DEPcom]

Are you referring to President Trumps daily briefings?
He is our national leader.

[faucetman]

“Shutdowns as they are being used right now are junk science. They are not proven to accomplish anything.”

Hydroxychloroquine is not PROVEN to accomplish anything.

[9YearLurker]

In this case I believe many of the decisions being made are not merely corrupt—they are evil.

And you are right anout how stupid we are in going along with it.

[Robert DeLong]

Percentage may be small, but numbers are the more important factor. Once the numbers, not the percentage, become more than a system can handle is when critical mass has been obtained, and quality care becomes impossible.

[faucetman]

“The theory of “flattening the curve” has never been about ...
... reducing the total number of infected, CORRECT
... or reducing the total number of hospitalizations, CORRECT
... or reducing the total number of deaths. DEAD WRONG!

The theory has always been about spreading those total numbers, except for deaths, out over time.”

[amihow]

So now we have fewer deaths and cases AND fewer people exposed who have developed immunity. If we reopen the country, we have huge numbers of peope still vulnerable and the numbers of diseased will rise again.

Were we to have made everyone wear masks and practice a more reasonable social distancing, we would have likely seen many more moderate cases because the viral load would have been less.

So, would masks make sense as we re-open country?

[brownsfan]

“Are you referring to President Trumps daily briefings?
He is our national leader.”

Sorry, you’re not the first to mistake my intent, so obviously my post was poorly written.

President Trump is more than I ever imagined he could be. I voted for him with reservations. This time, I’ll vote for him with enthusiasm.

The politician foremost in my mind was Ohio’s gov. DeWine. But in general, politicians aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed. Donald Trump isn’t a career politician which might explain his acumen.

[amorphous]

Lol, my wife just asked me who I was fussing with now, and I told her 'Buckeye McFrog'...

The "curve" is turning thanks to containment efforts. More specifically to each individual's efforts to prevent themselves from catching this.

My chart is just a simple mathematical projection based on current values of handful of metrics, one of which, the daily fatality index, I came up with.

[JediJones]

I’ll accept that correction. If overwhelming the health care system meant that some people wouldn’t be treated at all, then it’s possible that policy would’ve reduced deaths. In my mind, not overwhelming it meant health care workers wouldn’t need to work as long hours and officials wouldn’t have had to work as fast to expand capacity or spend as much resources transporting patients to other facilities.

[PeterPrinciple]

Most soothsayers should be shot on site. Cassandra did not get half the kicking around she disserved.

Heinlein.

[DEPcom]

“This is becoming the BIG LIE.” Is it?

“During last year’s flu season, according to the CDC, 490,561 people in the U.S. were hospitalized due to the seasonal flu virus.”

Is that a year 365 Days? The Wuhan flu as not been with us a year.

New York had over 195000 cases since March 1 (7 weeks). How many cases were reported of the Flu for the same time period last year in New York?

If New York city did not set social distancing and lock down rules, would the healthcare sytem been overwhelm?

Italy and Spain did not implemented social distancing and lock down until it was too late.

Can we use Italy and Spain as an example of what happens if you do not social distance and lock down?
Did the Flu overwhelm the hospital system last year in Italy and Spain?

Sweden’s situation very similar to every other country’s situation even though they didn’t social distance - so why do it? Sweden did encourage Social Distancing, they did not enforce it or force business to lock down. Note: Sweden is just getting started.

Worldometers Sweden currently have 1133 total cases/1M population and 102 total deaths / 1M population BNO has 8.39% death rate
Worldometers USA currently have 1786 total cases/1M population and 74 total deaths / 1M population BNO has 4.14% death rate

Those are interesting numbers. Does Sweden have a New York or other Big cites with people living on top of each other?

[faucetman]

EXCELLENT! Absolutely correct! One thing you said I hadn’t considered before and is a brilliant observation.

“Lots of people were going to self-isolate anyway, to an economy-damaging degree.”

I was never told by ANYONE to lock down. We did it all on our own! We saw what was happening and said why risk others or ourselves? We immediately quit our two card clubs, stopped going out to dinner (4 or 5 times a week), My wife quit her sewing/quilt groups, we abstained from going to church, (our pastor wisely cancelled in house church services, stopped all unnecessary in store shopping, reduced grocery shopping to ONE store Walmart, using the self checkout, interacting with NO ONE!

So, I agree, a slump in the economy was inevitable. You would think the “herd immunity” people prefer the immediate total economic shutdown to a slower lowering of the economic curve.

[DEPcom]

“The politician foremost in my mind was Ohio’s gov. DeWine.”

I was wondering. You are right, Trump is not being a career politician that enables him to see paths other politicians can not see. He will have the economy turn around in no time.

[JediJones]

And at the end you pin your whole argument on ridiculous models of millions of deaths that have been questioned and debunked almost since the day they came out. Models that defied the basics of mathematical science to suggest that what goes up must keep going up and up and up and up some more.

The evidence becomes clearer every day of just how many people get exposed to the virus without getting sick. And no matter what happened, treatments were going to be developed that would improve the prognosis of the hospitalized. We were talking about testing certain treatments almost before the shutdowns started.

We’re still waiting for Sweden to go extinct due to the unstoppable rampage of this apocalyptic virus. Ah, Sweden, we hardly knew ye.

[shanover]

It is one big roller coaster of incline,decline,slopes,curves and massaged numbers perpetrated by those who hate Trump and want to “transform” America.

[amorphous]

Nicolaus Copernicus, “This fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside down.” - Martin Luther’s underling.

[JediJones]

But it doesn’t require shutting down the economy to try it. We spent $2 trillion on a shutdown within a few weeks. How much more will we spend if this goes on? People are out of work and lining up at food banks. Businesses are considering bankruptcy.

[JediJones]

I definitely think if we were going to spend $2 trillion on anything, it should have been providing high quality masks to all businesses where people work in close quarters or where customers assemble in close quarters.