Coronavirus COVID-19

[kalm]

Small business requiring skilled labor. One case threatens the entire workforce. Symptoms occur which may or may not be Covid. Negative test gets the skilled employee back to work quicker. “Phew”. Positive test allows the remaining employees to at the worst quarantine and avoid further exposure or return immediately if they are tested. As a result they too get back to work sooner and without causing an outbreak which permanently closes the business.

Ok, so your workforce will have to be tested weekly, monthly to keep this theory from breaking down in the real world? One employee with one missed test (or false negative) and the whole idea goes out the window. And that small business is supposed to pay for these tests?

Oh and good luck getting a union to go with this if you're dealing with organized labor.

EDIT: Also where does HIPPA stand with all of this? I know workplaces require certain vaccinations, but testing is not a vaccination so what legal standing does a company have for demanding medical information from employees?

It’s not an all or nothing proposition and the article which apparently you didn’t read, mentions costs.

We already have state guidelines for Hippa. Work is voluntary. Kind of like testing for weed.

Let’s start with “show symptoms (temperature readings, etc.), get tested” as a baseline.

It’s like some of you don’t want people to go back to work unless...2019 level freedom!

[89Hen]

We already have state guidelines for Hippa. Work is voluntary. Kind of like testing for weed.

Let’s start with “show symptoms (temperature readings, etc.), get tested” as a baseline.

It’s like some of you don’t want people to go back to work unless...2019 level freedom!

I wasn't going to jump in the middle of this, but haven't we found out that a LOT of folks who have it are asymptomatic? I agree if you have a fever, you shouldn't go to work. But that's ALWAYS good protocol. Are you saying employers should have thermometers next to the time clock?

Not sure what you were getting at "work is voluntary" either. If your office is open, aren't you required to go unless you take leave, either sick or annual?

[kalm]

We already have state guidelines for Hippa. Work is voluntary. Kind of like testing for weed.

Let’s start with “show symptoms (temperature readings, etc.), get tested” as a baseline.

It’s like some of you don’t want people to go back to work unless...2019 level freedom!

I wasn't going to jump in the middle of this, but haven't we found out that a LOT of folks who have it are asymptomatic? I agree if you have a fever, you shouldn't go to work. But that's ALWAYS good protocol. Are you saying employers should have thermometers next to the time clock?

Not sure what you were getting at "work is voluntary" either. If your office is open, aren't you required to go unless you take leave, either sick or annual?

Fair points.

1). This is not the flu. We know what to expect from the flu. It may end up being similar in the end which is what I’m hoping for but it also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

2). Work imposed guidelines and testing are common. Don’t like it, find another career.

[89Hen]

I wasn't going to jump in the middle of this, but haven't we found out that a LOT of folks who have it are asymptomatic? I agree if you have a fever, you shouldn't go to work. But that's ALWAYS good protocol. Are you saying employers should have thermometers next to the time clock?

Not sure what you were getting at "work is voluntary" either. If your office is open, aren't you required to go unless you take leave, either sick or annual?

Fair points.

1). This is not the flu. We know what to expect from the flu. It may end up being similar in the end which is what I’m hoping for but it also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

2). Work imposed guidelines and testing are common. Don’t like it, find another career.

I never took you for a heartless, free market kind of guy.

It would seem you want all employers to follow this protocol, no?

And the only way this devastates the economy further is if we stay closed.

[BDKJMU]

That seems like a pretty superficial summary. To be intellectually honest you would need to consider a host of other factors such as population density. Large cities are more likely to be in states with Donk governors and that will skew the results.

Also it's right leaning media. I'm not really surprised a right wing news site has an article saying red states are better than blue states.

The data came from Real Clear Politics Tracker.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/coron ... ed-states/
Its similar if you use Johns Hopkins/Arcgis, or Worldometer. Are the data sights right wing?

[BDKJMU]

Also it's right leaning media. I'm not really surprised a right wing news site has an article saying red states are better than blue states.

I wonder how their narrative will change if there's a surge in outbreaks in red states that opened up earlier.

Some of those red states (5) never even closed in the 1st place. So what if there is a surge in the others. The blue states are running about 3x the death rate of the red states. Even if the red states have a surge, they're not going to come close to catching up to the blue states.

[Ibanez]

Also it's right leaning media. I'm not really surprised a right wing news site has an article saying red states are better than blue states.

The data came from Real Clear Politics Tracker.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/coron ... ed-states/
Its similar if you use Johns Hopkins/Arcgis, or Worldometer. Are the data sights right wing?

No but they're assigning political reasons to why Red/Blue states have different levels. This virus doesn't attack Reps less over Dems. It seems their analysis isn't taking demographics, urban/rural, etc.. aspects of the states into consideration and it's more "Democrats have screwed up their states. Republicans are star-spangled awesome with stronger immune systems."

Why does it matter that Red states have fared better? Is it because of the politics? I doubt it.

[kalm]

Fair points.

1). This is not the flu. We know what to expect from the flu. It may end up being similar in the end which is what I’m hoping for but it also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

2). Work imposed guidelines and testing are common. Don’t like it, find another career.

I never took you for a heartless, free market kind of guy.

It would seem you want all employers to follow this protocol, no?

And the only way this devastates the economy further is if we stay closed.

Thank you for catching that.

Of course. But not all will which goes into the calculations. Enough compliance and the spread is kept in check.

There’s no one on earth who knows whether that last statement is correct so while it might end up being true, it’s utterly still useless at this point.

[89Hen]

Hogan just opened our golf courses effective tomorrow!!!

[UNI88]

It also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

There’s no one on earth who knows whether that last statement is correct so while it might end up being true, it’s utterly still useless at this point.

[Aho Old Guy]

[kalm]

It also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

There’s no one on earth who knows whether that last statement is correct so while it might end up being true, it’s utterly still useless at this point.

Yes?

[UNI88]

It also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

There’s no one on earth who knows whether that last statement is correct so while it might end up being true, it’s utterly still useless at this point.

Yes?

Just pointing out that your response to 89's statement that "the only way this devastates the economy further is if we stay closed" also applies to your own statement that "it also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully."

[UNI88]

Got this from Professor Chaos on AGS ...

Can We Discuss Flatten-the-Curve in COVID19? My Eight Assertions

What was once flatten the curve to prevent over-running hospitals has changed to flatten the curve to save lives. Some likened moderation of social distancing to human sacrifice.

That change in framing, I believe, is misleading. I will argue that the cumulative deaths from COVID19 will not be reduced significantly by flatten-the-curve policies. And that this virus will be as dangerous to vulnerable patients in 6 months to a year. We should be allowed to debate this.

My case has eight assertions ...

Excellent and informed (he's a doctor, we have to believe him) commentary.

[kalm]

It also may devastate the economy further and on a longer timeline if we don’t take precautions until we understand it fully.

There’s no one on earth who knows whether that last statement is correct so while it might end up being true, it’s utterly still useless at this point.

The difference between 89’s statement and mine is “only” vs. “may”.

[Gil Dobie]

I wonder how their narrative will change if there's a surge in outbreaks in red states that opened up earlier.

Some of those red states (5) never even closed in the 1st place. So what if there is a surge in the others. The blue states are running about 3x the death rate of the red states. Even if the red states have a surge, they're not going to come close to catching up to the blue states.

Some of the states didn't specifically lock down, but they practiced the social distancing that was recommended by the task force. Businesses were closed, restaurants had delivery and curb-side pickup, just like the states that were locked down. That's why there were not more cases in those state than what they had.

[89Hen]

The difference between 89’s statement and mine is “only” vs. “may”.

Also, my statement is one more decimal point accurate. The virus doesn't impact the economy. The closure to prevent the spread does. There IS a difference.

[UNI88]

The difference between 89’s statement and mine is “only” vs. “may”.

So you're saying that because your statement isn't as definitive that it isn't "utterly useless?"

Both were statements of opinion.

[UNI88]

The difference between 89’s statement and mine is “only” vs. “may”.

Also, my statement is one more decimal point accurate. The virus doesn't impact the economy. The closure to prevent the spread does. There IS a difference.

Wrong (again - you're having a bad year ). The virus and people getting sick and dying does impact the economy just not as directly as the "closure."

[89Hen]

Also, my statement is one more decimal point accurate. The virus doesn't impact the economy. The closure to prevent the spread does. There IS a difference.

Wrong (again - you're having a bad year ). The virus and people getting sick and dying does impact the economy just not as directly as the "closure."

Explain. Most of those impacted are retired.

[UNI88]

Wrong (again - you're having a bad year ). The virus and people getting sick and dying does impact the economy just not as directly as the "closure."

Explain. Most of those impacted are retired.

People getting sick and dying impacts the economy whether they're retired or not. Every person who dies is one less consumer. Every worker who dies means their production is lost. Sick people consume healthcare resources. People dying means that wealth is redistributed and people who inherit money might change their consumption (buy a car or a house). A virus impacts the economy in positive and negative ways, it might be a blip compared to the "closure" but it is an impact.

[UNI88]

Got this from Professor Chaos on AGS ...

Can We Discuss Flatten-the-Curve in COVID19? My Eight Assertions

What was once flatten the curve to prevent over-running hospitals has changed to flatten the curve to save lives. Some likened moderation of social distancing to human sacrifice.

That change in framing, I believe, is misleading. I will argue that the cumulative deaths from COVID19 will not be reduced significantly by flatten-the-curve policies. And that this virus will be as dangerous to vulnerable patients in 6 months to a year. We should be allowed to debate this.

My case has eight assertions ...

Excellent and informed (he's a doctor, we have to believe him) commentary.

1. The virus will not be contained.
2. Tests will under-perform.
3. US hospitals are now prepared and in little danger of being over-whelmed.
4. Americans are not stupid. People socially distance not because police are bearing down on them, but because it makes sense.
5. Public-health surveillance has improved. Tests may underperform but they will not be useless.
6. Social distancing will not lower the infection fatality rate or IFR.
7. The more we test, the lower the IFR goes.
8. The endpoint of this crisis is not next month but in 1-2 years. And when we get there, we have to count people who died from COVID19 and those who died from other causes.

[AZGrizFan]

Aside from telling us who has/had the Chinese Flu (ignoring false positives and all that), how does testing change the current situation?

Small business requiring skilled labor. One case threatens the entire workforce. Symptoms occur which may or may not be Covid. Negative test gets the skilled employee back to work quicker. “Phew”. Positive test allows the remaining employees to at the worst quarantine and avoid further exposure or return immediately if they are tested. As a result they too get back to work sooner and without causing an outbreak which permanently closes the business.

no, it does not. 85% of cases are mild to unknown in nature....meaning, 85% have very light symptoms or don't even know they have it at all. It does not "threaten an entire workforce".

[89Hen]

Explain. Most of those impacted are retired.

People getting sick and dying impacts the economy whether they're retired or not. Every person who dies is one less consumer. Every worker who dies means their production is lost. Sick people consume healthcare resources. People dying means that wealth is redistributed and people who inherit money might change their consumption (buy a car or a house). A virus impacts the economy in positive and negative ways, it might be a blip compared to the "closure" but it is an impact.

[Gil Dobie]

Explain. Most of those impacted are retired.

People getting sick and dying impacts the economy whether they're retired or not. Every person who dies is one less consumer. Every worker who dies means their production is lost. Sick people consume healthcare resources. People dying means that wealth is redistributed and people who inherit money might change their consumption (buy a car or a house). A virus impacts the economy in positive and negative ways, it might be a blip compared to the "closure" but it is an impact.

The over 60 crowd has a big impact on restaurants. Who else packs a place at 4pm, so people have to wait in line at 6pm and beyond.