[FRIAM] Covid and Politics

[Prof David West]

Nick,

3.5 million deaths is perfectly acceptable. Mostly because that total will accumulate at a rate of 150-170,000 per year which puts COVID in the lower half of the top five causes of death in the US.

 It is acceptable and it will be accepted. The fact that many find this morally reprehensible is pretty much beside the point.

Contributing to the acceptance will be numbers like Italy just reported, 96% of the deaths suffered from other illnesses. This will translate into, "they would have died anyway."

Add the fact, again based on Italy, 1.1% of the fatalities will be in people under 50 and 66% of the US population is under that age. So if the old folk are the ones to bear the brunt of the disease and we already care so little about them that we are happy to warehouse them out of sight, then, for most folk it will be really, really, acceptable.

Bleak cynicism? Yep.

BTW - your white van policy could not be 100%, so its most likely outcome would be a September with a few, non-recognized, likely asymptomatic, cases still out there; putting us in pretty much the same situation as prevailed in December of 2019. Merrily, merrily up the exponential curve once more.

Cassandra



On Tue, May 26, 2020, at 12:00 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> Merle,

> 

> So, we flattened the curve. Good. That’s done. But the whole metaphor of flattening the curve has an implication that has never been explored. Other than the excess deaths that occur because intensive care fails, a flattened curve has just as many deaths as a peaky curve. So if we only **flatten** the curve, then somewhere around 1 percent of the population dies. That’s 3.5 million people. Is that tolerable? If yes, then our policy consists of letting people go back to work and jumping on any outbreaks that occur before they can get “peaky”.

> 

> If no, then what? The next policy down, it seems to me, or “up” in terms of invasiveness, is what I have been calling the “white-van policy”. Every suspect case or contact is tested and those people who cannot show a negative test or immunity are *immediately *isolated and cared for at government expense until they show negative. Such a policy, paired with a limitation on large gatherings, would probably eliminate the virus from being a major consideration by september. But the only state I know of that has even GESTURED in that direction is Massachusetts, and they are no-where NEAR getting there. Mortality under half a million, all in? 

> 

> What frustrates me to distraction is that Santa Fe is not exploring such a strategy right now. At two cases a day, how many contacts could these cases possibly have? Hire a bunch of young folks to do contact tracing and isolation support and then gradually open up.

> 

> There’s a third strategy which nobody has considered out loud, call it the “Isolate the Vulnerable Strategy”. Since something like 80 percent (?) of those who die are vulnerable, suppose you isolate people like me (like us?) and let the rest of them pass the disease around pretty freely. Let’s say we isolate 150 million people and let the others roam free. We could probably get to herd immunity in the 200 million by December at a cost of a million deaths? That would imply 8 million hospitalizations over six months? Is that tolerable?

> 

> Do you remember the good old days when the notion of “death panels” sent the right wing into a frenzy. Hell, now we are talking about “death trenches”. 

> 

> I dunno. 

> 

> Nick

> 

> Nicholas Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

> Clark University

> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

> 

> 

> 


> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Merle Lefkoff
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:52 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* [FRIAM] Covid and Politics

> 

> Democrats are far more likely to live in counties where the virus has ravaged the community, while Republicans are more likely to live in counties that have been relatively unscathed by the illness, though they are paying an economic price. Counties won by President Trump <https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/elections/donald-trump.html> in 2016 have reported just 27 percent of the virus infections and 21 percent of the deaths — even though 45 percent of Americans live in these communities, a New York Times analysis has found.

> 

> --


> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
> President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy
> emergentdiplomacy.org

> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA


> merlelefkoff at gmail.com <mailto:merlelefoff at gmail.com>
> mobile: (303) 859-5609
> skype: merle.lelfkoff2

> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff

> -- --- .-. . .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... -..-. .- .-. . -..-. - .... . -..-. . ... ... . -. - .. .- .-.. -..-. .-- --- .-. -.- . .-. ...
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200526/ae7573a5/attachment.html>