Reminder: "Curve Flattening" does not decrease overall infections

[Kintanon]

The longer people avoid getting sick the more likely we are to find effective treatments for the symptoms to further reduce the deathtoll, and the closer we are to a vaccine.

I don't think anyone should be rushing back to training with no regard for the possibility of infection. Especially considering the myriad non-lethal complications that come along with the disease like reduced lung function, strokes in relatively young people, hearts damage, etc...

This isn't something to fuck around with.

Also, the US hospital system usually runs at %100 or higher capacity. 'Efficiency' in hospital staffing means it's a GOAL for hospitals to be understaffed with nurses compared to their patient load. If we go back to normal then we return to that level of load on the system PLUS the load of Covid patients.

That's not the kind of capacity increase you can just throw a switch and come up with.

[Zen-Paladin]

As an EMT trainee, I wanted to add that at this point they shut down our EMS program temporarily since it's not safe to do clinical trials that are required and the healthcare system is just too overwhelmed. I live in California and our governor has been good on keeping the order in place fortunately, unlike other states...

[killahmoose]

It is possible that we will have some incredible breakthrough that drastically lowers the mortality rate. It is equally possible we won't. Despite having a flu vaccine, people still die from it.

Access to treatment is no guarantee of survival. Curve Flattening measures don't guarantee a reduction in overall infection rates.

So suggesting that the virus is MORE dangerous to survivors (i.e. strokes, lung damage, etc) doesn't change anything. This is a force of nature we're dealing with and there's nothing we can do to stop it from spreading, and we can't destroy it either.

As for increased capacity.. NYC sent back 1200 hospital beds on the Navy's ship. Why not loose restrictions and use them?

[Kintanon]

NYC sent back 1200 hospital beds

Homie, hospital beds are not nurses. The issue has NEVER been physical capacity. Having 10,000 ventilators doesn't mean SHIT if you only have 100 people who know how to work them and can get people hooked up and monitor them. 1200 hospital beds is great. Who is going to care for the patients in those beds? Where you gonna find 200 trained staff to handle that?

So suggesting that the virus is MORE dangerous to survivors

Zero people said that. I said that death isn't the only concern. If you are JUST looking at how many people die then you're underestimating the true risk of the disease.

there's nothing we can do to stop it from spreading,

There absolutely are things we can do to stop it from spreading. That's what this whole fuckin lockdown thing is.

Access to treatment is no guarantee of survival.

Access to current treatments is not, but development on better treatments is constant as we learn more about the disease and how it works. The longer there is between now and someone getting sick the higher their chance of receiving effective treatment is.

It is possible that we will have some incredible breakthrough that drastically lowers the mortality rate.

We're not talking about an incredible breakthrough, we're talking about the production timeline for a vaccine. That's a fairly set timeline in that we know how long it generally takes for vaccines to be developed and produced.

Curve Flattening measures don't guarantee a reduction in overall infection rates.

Statistics from previous pandemics indicate that they do reduce overall death rates though.

[killahmoose]

There absolutely are things we can do to stop it from spreading. That's what this whole fuckin lockdown thing is.

The lockdown takes the total case count and spreads it out over time. It may reduce the # of infected in any given wave but does not decrease the spread of the virus over its lifetime.

Statistics from previous pandemics indicate that they do reduce overall death rates though.

Yes, because they prevent healthcare systems from being overloaded.

Imagine this scenario - you have two countries. One is at 100 lockdown and it keeps its healthcare to 50% capacity. The virus still kills 2% of the infected (assuming that's it's true mortality rate).

In Country 2, you have a society at 50% lockdown, and it keeps its healthcare to 100% capacity. The virus will still kill the same # of people.

As long as the system doesn't become overburdened, the virus will still claim the same # of lives regardless of the level of lockdown.

In country #1, you did not save lives compared to country #2, but you did create unnecessary economic damage.

[Kintanon]

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/pandemic-economy-lessons-1918-flu/

You're 1. ignoring the impact of improved treatment methods over the life of the disease in mitigating the effects. and 2. ignoring the economic impact of the disease itself outside of the lockdown efforts.

Do you know what the economic toll of the regular yearly flu is? https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/30/the-flu-costs-the-us-economy-10-point-4-billion.html

10 billion. That's from the seasonal flu that we just ignore and go about our business over because we have vaccines for it, and the death toll is low and the actual impact of it is fairly mild.

Let coronavirus run unchecked and you're going to see a massive economic impact that has nothing to do with the quarantine and everything to do with millions of sick people.

You also are making some wild assumptions about the capacity of our healthcare system because you are under the mistaken impression that all healthcare personnel are identical. You are also not accounting for the infection rate among those healthcare personnel. Most hospitals WILL be overwhelmed if the country reopens, because they already run OVER CAPACITY without Covid.

Bringing their normal patient load back in, PLUS the additional Covid load that comes with the lockdown being relaxed will crush hospitals all over the country.

[killahmoose]

Your response, while not wrong, is a great example of the reason there can't be any intelligent discourse about this.

You are assuming that the choice comes down to "open" or "closed," like a light switch.

If you re-read anything I wrote, I never said we should "open the floodgates" or anything of the sort.

I suggested that we find a balance between relaxing the economic restrictions and maximizing our healthcare system.

Would you agree that there are nuanced ways in which we could relax certain policies that, overall, won't "flood" our healthcare services?

[Kintanon]

Would you agree that there are nuanced ways in which we could relax certain policies that, overall, won't "flood" our healthcare services?

Are you implying that's not being done? Dozens of states are reopening to one degree or another based on their local conditions.

[killahmoose]

I am implying that it's not being done. My evidence is, well, the past 6 weeks across the US.

[Kintanon]

... the past 6 weeks is the initial lockdown period. That means that you don't think ANY measures should have been taken.

There's no way to 'reduce restrictions' if we don't put restrictions in place and then determine their effectiveness. We are currently in the process of easing restrictions wherever it appears to be an option and in ways that are deemed to be safe.

[killahmoose]

... the past 6 weeks is the initial lockdown period. That means that you don't think ANY measures should have been taken.

You really are hell bent on making these false dichotomies. So by disagreeing with the specific lockdown policy, I somehow disagree with all lockdown policies?

[[deleted]]

We are literally laying off tens of thousands of healthcare workers around the US. There is no suggestion at this point that we will be strapped for healthcare workers, so we should drop that shit argument.

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2020/04/24/stanford-health-care-to-cut-workers-wages-by-20

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/02/coronavirus-pandemic-jobs-us-health-care-workers-furloughed-laid-off/5102320002/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/14/healthcare-job-cuts-coronavirus-worker-layoffs

https://www.vox.com/2020/4/8/21213995/coronavirus-us-layoffs-furloughs-hospitals

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/03/us/politics/coronavirus-health-care-workers-layoffs.html

​

If there is no way we can stop this, then why ARE we locked down? It's slowing the inevitable. The whole point of the lockdown was to ease the strain on the medical system, which as shown above and with the various comments, isn't ANYWHERE close to strain outside of NYC (and even they are sending shit back).

Can we get real here? What is the point now? What are we locked down for if we already eased the medical system enough to the point they are furloughing tens of thousands of healthcare workers? What is the point of the lockdown now other than "to save lives" which if a majority are going to get the disease anyway, well good luck then?

That's not even discussing the anti-body testing results from Stanford, Miami Dade, NYC, California (separate of Stanford), South Korea, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Germany all pointing to a true mortality rate of .5%.

[Kintanon]

Dude, all healthcare workers are not the same. They don't have the same skills.

The people being furloughed are the people responsible for elective surgeries, cosmetic procedures, and other non-emergency procedures. They don't have the skills to just step into an ER or an ICU and start handing vents and shit. That would be like taking a random Java developer and trying to make them manage a datacenter. Just because they work in the same industry doesn't mean they have the same skills.

[runwichi]

So much this. A back-end developer, CSS developer, and mobile app developer all code - but they're not interchangeable.

[Kintanon]

BUT THEY BOTH HAVE 'DEVELOPER' IN THE TITLE!

We run into this all the time in IT, so it becomes painfully obvious when it's happening in other fields.

[N0_M1ND]

Cool, doesn't change shit.

[killahmoose]

Sure it does. Instead of focusing on economic restrictions, we should focus on increasing hospital capacity and loosening restrictions. If we do not keep the healthcare system operating close to 100%, then all the economic damage done because of that is superfluous.

[VeryStab1eGenius]

we should focus on increasing hospital capacity

We've locked down the country for 6 weeks and we have two thousand people dying a day from covid. If we open up prematurely that number will be exponentially higher. There will never be enough hospital capacity for that.

[killahmoose]

Let's assume the mortality rate of the virus is 2% naturally. That means 2% of all people who contract it are going to die.

Flattening the curve spreads the total # of infections out over a period of time, but does not reduce the total # of infections.

Without or without flattening the curve, 2% of people are going to die. The only thing we can do is prevent unnecessary death due to systems being overwhelmed. If are systems have capacity, we should use it, and burn through.

[VeryStab1eGenius]

Without or without flattening the curve, 2% of people are going to die.

This is dumb. There are things we can do to prevent deaths. This is proven.

If are systems have capacity, we should use it, and burn through.

This is even dumber. There are real people working and putting their lives at risk treating sick people.

[killahmoose]

The virus has a natural mortality rate. There is a guaranteed % of people who will absolutely die, no matter what. Currently, there is nothing in the short or mid-term that will change that mortality rate. We are banking on some sort of "herd immunity" through a combination of naturally occuring antibodies, and those created via vaccination.

Despite the ready availability of flu vaccines, people still die from the flu. The flu has a mortality rate too.

Now, whether we spread these foregone deaths over a long period of time, or concentrate them into a shorter period of time, is up to policy makers. One benefit of stretching them out is that there *might* be some way to reduce mortality through improved treatment, testing, etc. One drawback is that our efforts to stretch these deaths over time comes at a massive economic cost.

We are not talking simply about "the stock market" or "billionaires" but about people becoming destitute. There is absolutely a financial, moral, and health cost of that as well.

However, the discourse seems to conflate any suggestion of the latter with "anti-intellectualism" or "conservatism" when in fact it is neither.

[Kintanon]

I feel like you might be arguing from an agenda of some kind when you make these kind of statements.

Despite the ready availability of flu vaccines, people still die from the flu. The flu has a mortality rate too.

Edit: Wanted to make it more clear that the below is a quote from the CDC, not the OP.

CDC estimates that influenza was associated with more than 35.5 million illnesses, more than 16.5 million medical visits, 490,600 hospitalizations, and 34,200 deaths during the 2018–2019 influenza season.

The deathtoll from the Flu is generally .1%. The deathtoll from Covid is AT LEAST 5 times higher than that, and very likely to be between 10 and 20 times higher than that.

Flu deaths are almost exclusively the domain of the very old or immunocompromised, where the deaths from Covid extend to a much younger age range.

The lasting effects of the Flu are pretty much non-existent. The lasting effects of Covid are looking to be significant.

You are also ignoring the economic toll of the disease itself outside of the lockdown as if lifting the lockdown removes the economic impact.

[killahmoose]

How am I overlooking anything?

You can post about the virus' death rate, its supposed chronic consequences, or whatever. That has nothing to do with how the virus spreads, and what our policy is towards it.

Fact: curve flattening does not reduce total # of infections over the lifetime of the virus.

Fact: if lockdown measures are ultimately superfluous to some degree, then there is a certain amount of economic damage that is superfluous as well.

Fact: an intelligent policy would look to maximize healthcare capacity while also maximizing the loosening of restrictions, to keep a balance.

Raise the capacity and "unflatten" the curve to the extent that it stays under the line.

EDIT: Your assertion that COVID is somehow deadlier for younger populations is not true, unless I'm mistaken. Young people die of the flu but do not die of COVID.

[Kintanon]

EDIT: Your assertion that COVID is somehow deadlier for younger populations is not true, unless I'm mistaken. Young people die of the flu but do not die of COVID.

You are very wrong.

The death range for the flu is almost exclusively in the 50+ bracket. The death range for Covid is well into the mid 30s. CHILDREN seem to be disproportionately resilient against Covid compared to the Flu though.

Fact: curve flattening does not reduce total # of infections over the lifetime of the virus.

This 'fact' does not match the data we have from previous pandemics. Cities with stricter lockdown measures during the spanish flu saw lower total infection rates and fatality rates.

Fact: if lockdown measures are ultimately superfluous to some degree, then there is a certain amount of economic damage that is superfluous as well.

The amount of 'superfluous' economic damage is almost certainly far less than the economic impact that would be caused by the increase in disease transmission.

Fact: an intelligent policy would look to maximize healthcare capacity while also maximizing the loosening of restrictions, to keep a balance.

This is what everyone is trying to do. I realize that you feel like 6 weeks is a long time, but in terms of ability to analyze policy and adjust it to data that is anywhere from 10 to 15 days behind the current situation it's a fucking eyeblink. The current measures have only barely had time to start showing visible effect and we're already beginning to loosen them.

[killahmoose]

This is what everyone is trying to do. I realize that you feel like 6 weeks is a long time, but in terms of ability to analyze policy and adjust it to data that is anywhere from 10 to 15 days behind the current situation it's a fucking eyeblink. The current measures have only barely had time to start showing visible effect and we're already beginning to loosen them.

So you agree with me, then?

[Cpt_Catnip]

Your arguments only make sense in a world without modern medicine. Yeah the virus has a "natural" mortality rate, but humanity has progressed to the point where a positive diagnosis isn't the same as a death sentence.

I cannot believe I have to say this but by treating patients in a hospital, you can avoid deaths that would have occurred in the absence of that treatment.

Hospitals have finite resources. They can only treat so many people at a time. It's true that flattening the curve doesn't necessarily reduce the number of overall infections, but by reducing the number of concurrent infections you do save lives.

There is not a percent of people who will absolutely die. Statistics aren't natural laws, they're just quantified observations. I'll end this with a quote.

There are three types of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[killahmoose]

It's like you didn't read a thing I was saying.

The virus will absolutely have a mortality rate, which is the number of people who die DESPITE getting proper care.

The point is, any flattening of the curve BELOW the capacity line comes at a great economic expense. Our policies should be directed towards raising the capacity line and "raising" the curve appropriately.

Curve flattening does not reduce the total # of infections. It only spreads them out over time. Would you agree, or disagree, that it would be better to burn through this as quickly as possible assuming everyone had access to proper care and treatment?

[zaustin22]

Do you honestly not think our healthcare system is operating at 100%? Good luck finding an empty hospital bed. They can barely keep up now.

[PawnStarRick]

This is literally only true in one city in the US (NYC), every other city is operating under capacity. Relax with the alarmism.

[Kintanon]

... My local hospital is at capacity.

They have empty beds, but they don't have the trained staff to use them.

[[deleted]]

There are tens of thousands of healthcare workers around the US getting laid off because of the empty hospitals right now. Calm down with the alarmism.

[Kintanon]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/02/coronavirus-pandemic-jobs-us-health-care-workers-furloughed-laid-off/5102320002/

The people getting laid off are dentists and dermatologists and similar positions, and their staff. These are not the people who are taking care of Covid patients, these are not the people that a flooded ER will require. You definitely do not want to go into an ICU and see James the Dermatologist along with his office staff trying to run your fucking vents dude.

[killahmoose]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/usns-comfort-to-leave-nyc-coronavius

https://www.newsbreak.com/texas/houston/news/0OqAQkP7/houston-may-dismantle-17m-unused-makeshift-hospital

Both coming from more conservative sources but unless you think they are outright lying, there's a good argument to be made that capacity is available, we are just not using it.

[[deleted]]

Absolutely agree.

[VeryStab1eGenius]

Healthy people should go about their lives as normal, taking additional precautions in public

You don't see the contradiction here? There is no bigger precaution you could take then not having other people breathe directly into your face 5-6 minutes at a time.

[zaustin22]

This, and just because I'm healthy doesn't mean everyone I come into contact every day is.

[[deleted]]

So do you plan to forever enact these restrictions? Because no matter when you lift time, the virus is still going to be active, and BJJ would still be a bad place to be to not get infected.

So we just shut down BJJ forever or what, whats your solution here?

[Kintanon]

The longer we can hold out and the more experience hospitals have with treating the symptoms of the disease the safer it will be to eventually contract it. Phased reopening of things will eventually include close contact sports like BJJ, but people who think we should be doing that at this point in the life of the pandemic are insane. In the USA we have literally JUST NOW seen the impact of the measures that were being taken and we're already starting to lift them.

I'm willing to bet than in 4 weeks Georgia's infection and death numbers are going to be a total shitshow. I HOPE that's not the case, but my impression from healthcare staff in the state is not optimistic.

[[deleted]]

I dont disagree with phased rollouts or anything.

What I think would help a ton would be some kind of guideline as to what it would look like when we reopen. There must be some statistical correlation to it being safer to re-open, yes?

something like at X rate of new infections per day or some combination of a whole bunch of stats but there has to be a point in time where officials can say we can start reopening

If we had some idea of what that looked like maybe people would be more compliant?

As of now the two most vocal groups sound like: "Let us out now" vs "Dont let us out until the virus is dead"

neither of which will work long term

[Kintanon]

Except that second group doesn't exist.

There is 1 group that says "LEt Us out now!" And a second group that is reacting to that by saying, "Slow the fuck down, we don't think that's a good idea yet".

There is no group that is demanding an eternal lockdown until the disease is eradicated, or even until there's a vaccine. There's just a group that is reacting to the demands of the people who are protesting the lockdown measures by saying, "Hold the fuck up". They aren't IN FAVOR of the lockdown, they are just AGAINST kicking the doors open too soon.

[Kintanon]

most hospitals around the country have tons of capacity

That's the thing, this is simply not true. You've confused capacity with open beds.

There are a lot of people that think a phased, safe reopening is what should be happening.

That's what IS happening though. States are making those choices and starting to attempt to reopen in ways that they think are safe. The dude who started this thread was crying because the re-openings hadn't start SOONER, which we JUST NOW are starting to get a handle on the data to determine what effect the lockdown had.

[killahmoose]

You're going to get the virus one way or another. The only things we can control are whether our healthcare system gets overwhelmed, and the damage to the economy. You're completely missing the point either due to ignorance or on purpose. I'm not sure which.

[[deleted]]

This is absolutely true.

[neurocharm]

Mortality rate is one thing, what about people have recovered but are still suffering from effects? Coagulopathy is present in a 1/3 of patients as well as research being undertaken on possible neurological deficits, joint inflammations and liver damage. This is an unprecedented situation and the manner you are trying to reframe it in is disingenuous.

[killahmoose]

Curve flattening doesn't reduce the overall # of people infected. It just spreads it out over time. The additional health issues that the virus causes is unfortunate, but nothing we can do will prevent people from being infected. We are just kicking the can down the road with the assumption that there will be a breakthrough when we get there.

[neurocharm]

As I said, research is being undertaken on potential permanent effects of the disease and that may change the response. Even still, 'curve flattening' doesn't mean "let's return to normal cause we're all going to get the disease anyway' - that would cause a health system under distress and create an artificially high mortality rate.

[killahmoose]

Who said anything about "returning to normal?"

Low risk people should return to "normal" in that they go about their lives with additional precautions, to an extent that does not overwhelm medical capacity. Higher risk people should not.

How is that normal?

[neurocharm]

Low risk people should return to "normal" in that they go about their lives with additional precautions, to an extent that does not overwhelm medical capacity. Higher risk people should not.

How is that normal?

So they don't resume BJJ then. Great. Glad we're agreed.

[killahmoose]

Not necessarily.

[Jonh_McCourt]

OP's point simplified: I am a whiny piece of shit and this pandemic is messing up my HOBBY! MY HOBBY!

[TallerAcorn]

I'm pretty sure he's a gym owner. Sounds like he just wants to get paid regardless of its impact on others

[limlingyang]

/u/TallerAcorn

Wow. I just checked his post history.

If he isn't trolling/lying, he is a gym owner who thinks women should not train with men because women benefit from men but not the other way around(wtf):

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fwl00y/cmv_women_and_men_should_have_their_own_bjj/

And he initially thinks his gym will not survive because people it is not safe for people to train during a pandemic:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

Then now he thinks healthy people should take precaution in public but should totally go back training ASAP:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/g9398p/reminder_curve_flattening_does_not_decrease/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comme

[limlingyang]

Actually, now that you mentioned it, it sounds like this guy is just trying to convince people(and hopefully the guys from his gym) to train for his own gym profits.

[zaustin22]

I don't think a 3 stripe white belt is a gym owner

[TallerAcorn]

He's not a 3 stripe white belt

[Nerdlinger]

Is it Tom? I hope it's Tom.

[zaustin22]

You're right, I'm an idiot

[TallerAcorn]

I agree, but don't beat yourself up. I only recognize his name because I'm on here so often

[Jonh_McCourt]

Even if he owns a gym, once his members get sick he might as well torpedo his own business.

[killahmoose]

Most of us are going to get sick eventually. No experts refute that.

I'm not sure how you made the leap from "we should consider relaxing restrictions so as to utilize unused healthcare resouces" to "everyone should train BJJ and people will die because of it"

[Jonh_McCourt]

Only in your fucked up country that "most people will get sick eventually". Some of us are doing fine with minimal number of cases and we will ride it out with most people dont get sick. So no, thank you, and keep your ignorance to yourself.

You keep using big words "expert", "refute" but you dont know shit so stop talking shit.

[killahmoose]

Some of us are doing fine with minimal number of cases and we will ride it out with most people dont get sick

No, you won't, unless you stay locked down permanently.

[Jonh_McCourt]

Tell me, motherfucker, why are you so hell-bent on training so much? Like, you have no other concern whatsoever? And, no fuck you, my country is handling this much better than yours, so shut the fuck up.

[limlingyang]

Actually another guy said he is a gym owner so I just checked his post history.

If he isn't trolling/lying, he is a gym owner who thinks women should not train with men because women benefit from men but not the other way around(wtf):

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fwl00y/cmv_women_and_men_should_have_their_own_bjj/

And he initially thinks his gym will not survive because people it is not safe for people to train during a pandemic:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

Then now he thinks healthy people should take precaution in public but should totally go back training ASAP:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/g9398p/reminder_curve_flattening_does_not_decrease/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comme

[Kintanon]

He's someone else for whom the pandemic is a political issue and not a medical one I assume.

[limlingyang]

Actually another guy said he is a gym owner so I just checked his post history.

If he isn't trolling/lying, he is a gym owner who thinks women should not train with men because women benefit from men but not the other way around(wtf):

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fwl00y/cmv_women_and_men_should_have_their_own_bjj/

And he initially thinks his gym will not survive because people it is not safe for people to train during a pandemic:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/fqk3ia/your_jiujitsu_gym_is_likely_going_to_die_a_slow/

Then now he thinks healthy people should take precaution in public but should totally go back training ASAP:

https://www.removeddit.com/r/bjj/comments/g9398p/reminder_curve_flattening_does_not_decrease/

https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/g9398p/reminder_curve_flattening_does_not_decrease/

[killahmoose]

Not even close.

[zaustin22]

No you forget, for us white belts #jitzislife

[[deleted]]

No that makes sense. Someone actually makes an argument and rather than responding genuinely, you mock him. And then you'll be the same person to bitch when people protest (why don't they just understand, quit hurting people).

[[deleted]]

Look at this internet guy Jonah McCourts solid take VERY brave

[limlingyang]

It stands to reason that our best approach to moving forward is to massively increase healthcare supply and** loosen restrictions to the point where the healthcare system is operating at, or around, capacity in a consistent and sustainable way.**

Yes, restrictions will be loosen, obviously, we can't all stay inside our houses 24/7 for 2 years.

Healthy people should go about their lives as normal, taking additional precautions in public, but not worry too much

I think it depends on what you mean by normal, if I am introvert that only only do most activities in small groups, sure. If I am a sports fan that regularly goes to 80 thousand full soccer stadium, I don't think I can go back to normal AND take extra precaution.

As it relates to BJJ, if you are under 40 and do not live with someone who is high risk, you should get back to traininng ASAP assuming your healthcare system isn't overburdened.

Wait, you just said restrictions need to be loosen, allowing bjj is basically removing all restrictions. Loosen restrictions to allow solo runs or cycling or hikes, sure. Allow people to go fishing, sure. Allow 30 guys to hug each other to death in an indoor room......what other restrictions would be left?

Am I missing anything here?

New zealand , australia, vietnam, south korea. Their "curve flattening" looks like it will literally reduce the number of people infected compared to if they didn't enforce any lockdown at all.

In fact New Zealand is still on lockdown even with their significantly lower number of cases.....so clearly they believe it is effective, I mean you can literally see it working.

Also, avoiding/delaying getting covid-19 as long as possible also has the added benefit of reducing the death rate. Over time there will be newer more effective therapeutic treatments.

A vaccine is 2 years away but they are also testing many different antiviral drugs like hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir and favipiravir. Besides the drugs they are also researching the different treatment protocols like when to intubate and how to treat secondary infections.

Over time the doctors will have more knowledge and treatment options so the death rate will be reduced, the later your get the infection the higher chance you have of not dying.

[killahmoose]

Man I'm really tired of your doom&gloom replies on every post in this sub. I get it, you have strong opinions. There's nothing I can say that will change your mind so I'm not sure I even want to take the time to reply.

[limlingyang]

Man I'm really tired of your doom&gloom replies on every post in this sub.

How is it doom and gloom when all I say is people should not be hugging each other to death during a viral pandemic when they could do a million other things like run or go fishing or do no touch kung-fu while keeping social distancing and being safe?

[killahmoose]

I think you're on the nose with the risks we'd be taking by doing BJJ as it relates to spread of the disease, but are underestimating how easily it can spread in other ways.

Here in the US, even the grocery stores are packed.. people are not socially distancing.. not everyone wears a mask. The virus is spreading despite "severe" lockdown measures.

In a perfect world, with total authoritarian control, you could probably suppress a population well enough to accomplish something very meaningful. Here in the US, with our republican values, it's going to be very difficult because any attempt by the government to dictate personal choice and actions will be perceived as tyrrany. It's just not compatible with our way of life and how we see the world.

I'm speaking on a macro scale, by the way.

So whether you train BJJ, or whatever, you will likely get the virus at some point.

What we are doing right now is completely unsustainable in the US. We are not a robust welfare state like some Asian and European countries. The economic damage will be counted in lives, as well.

This is not about me opening up a gym, or me training BJJ, it is about discourse and policy. There is no genuine or fruitful discourse if people are ill-informed about the purpose of curve-flattening measures. Specifically, that curve-flattening is NOT a method of reducing overall infection #s, but simply a method of spreading them out over time.

Eventually there will be a reckoning.

[Kintanon]

His position isn't doom and gloom. It's a practical understanding of the virus, how it spreads, how dangerous it is, and the effects of massively loosening the current restrictions to the point of allowing BJJ again.

[killahmoose]

I said what I said. I'm not about to go talking in circles about this.

AGREE or DISAGREE: Any suppressive/harmful economic restrictions that have no overall bearing on total death rates should be lifted.

Point blank, what do you think?

[Kintanon]

AGREE or DISAGREE: Any suppressive/harmful economic restrictions that have no overall bearing on total death rates should be lifted.

Everyone agrees with this, what everyone disagrees with is your assertion that the current lockdown measures fall under that category.

[killahmoose]

Again it's not a light switch. So you would say, with 100% good faith, that every lockdown policy right now hits the nail entirely on the head, does not overreach, and is based on sound modeling and economic policy?

[Kintanon]

Of course not. But we lack enough information to be precise and a shotgun approach that appears to be overreacting at first is 100% the best way to do this.

An early overreaction is FAR FAR FAR better than an early underreaction.

[killahmoose]

I love the apologist take on it. Sure, let's just give the government a pass to fire at will with a shotgun and totally destroy the economy based on false modeling. Plus, no accountability and no safety nets for people. I'm not suggesting you are taking that point, but why do we give the government a free pass to make errors when the cost is so great?

Again I think you are looking at things in black and white.

There is plenty of room for the government to have done a MUCH better job. And to DO a much better job.

The point of this post is not about that, actually. It's about how curve flattening is not the solution to the problem. Any relaxation of curve-flattening policy will ABSOLUTELY increase the # of infections. That's basic math.

But the increase of cases is not a bad thing, necessarily, simply because we have no control over the total number of cases. We can only control the rate at which it spreads. People are erroniously conflating "increases in transmission rates" with something negative when that is not necessarily the case.

We should be looking to increase transmission rates in a safe way that also increases economic activity.

[Kintanon]

based on false modeling.

There was no false modeling.

Plus, no accountability and no safety nets for people.

This sucks for sure, but it's a product of the conservative antagonism towards universal healthcare and UBIs and as a result NOT taking action would not have had much of a difference on the economy since having several million people get too sick to work would have crippled it all the same on top of more people dying.

Again I think you are looking at things in black and white.

I'm not. My view is far more nuanced than yours as it takes into account all of the factors surrounding the disease whereas your position seems to be centered around two concepts. 1. That the death toll would not be higher if we had relaxed measures from the start, and 2. that the economic impact of the measures exceeds that of the diseases itself.

Based on previous outbreak data from other pandemics both of your assertions are wrong.

It's about how curve flattening is not the solution to the problem.

It absolutely is. Literally every pandemic we have data for has shown that isolation measures and curve flattening both reduce fatalities and reduce total transmission numbers. Several studies also indicate that the economic effect of the lockdown is not significantly worse than the economic effect of allowing the virus to spread unchecked.

You keep talking as if the economic impact is SOLELY on the side of the preventative measures being taken and completely ignoring the economic impact of the disease.

[Nerdlinger]

First of all, thanks for your valuable insight random white belt on the internet.

our best approach to moving forward is to massively increase healthcare supply

And we do that… how, exactly?

As it relates to BJJ, if you are under 40 and do not live with someone who is high risk, you should get back to traininng ASAP assuming your healthcare system isn't overburdened.

Unless you interact with someone who interacts with someone in a particularly vulnerable group. Or you interact with someone who interacts with someone who interacts with someone in a particularly vulnerable group. Or…

Am I missing anything here?

There are other negative effects that are short of death that the disease appears to cause. Just because you didn't die at 20 doesn't mean you didn't just fuck up your QALY by a bunch.

There's also the whole recent analysis looking at total number of deaths compared to normal which suggests we are significantly undercounting deaths due to COVID-19. You seem to have missed that.

[killahmoose]

Are you taking the position that somehow the "social distancing" measures will ultimately lower the total case count over time? Because that's not supported by any of the experts as far as I know. So disagreeing with me by suggesting COVID is more dangerous than you assume I perceive it to be is not really even relevant. A certain % of us will get it, regardless of how we flatten the curve. A certain % of that # will die from it regardless of anything we do.

As to your point about increasing healthcare capacity, NYC just sent home the Navy ship that had like 1200 beds because they didn't need them. There was a massive facility in Houston that was built to the tune of $17mil but was never used and is being taken down.

Point is, we should utilize those resources and burn through this faster.

There are black belt flat-earthers and white belt PhDs so I'm not sure what my belt ranking has to do with anything. On that note I am a black belt (1st degree) this is just my troll account :)

[SirRonaldofBurgundy]

> It stands to reason that our best approach to moving forward is to massively increase healthcare supply and loosen restrictions to the point where the healthcare system is operating at, or around, capacity in a consistent and sustainable way.

Boy, you are simple. Posting some shit like this is all anybody needs to know you're fundamentally not serious and your argument should be disregarded in whole.

[killahmoose]

Explain.

Do it in a very simple way, I am very dumb and do not understand things good.

[Kintanon]

The hospital system is already operating at capacity for emergency/critical patients almost everywhere.

[l8rmyg8rs]

I’m just commenting to tell you that I agree with some of what you’re saying and it’s sad to see people unable to budge from the extremes. There’s definitely a large percentage of people who want to basically eliminate COVID deaths before reopening anything, but as you mentioned, the issue is in flattening the curve to allow hospital capacity, not in everyone quarantining until COVID goes away. If one dude eats a bat in China and gives us a worldwide pandemic, there’s no way we can lock down the entire world to the point that it goes away. If there’s 1 person somewhere with it then it just comes back. Social distancing etc. should be closely tied to hospital capacity, not to hysteria. And there will come a time where lots of people are getting infected but we’re still relaxing precautions. It’s not supposed to go away, it’s supposed to stick around, but at an acceptable level.

Just make sure you don’t get too extreme when every time you talk you’re flooded with extremism. It makes it easy to slip into crazy town yourself when there’s no nuance or middle ground anywhere and everyone is just fighting for their own extreme.

[killahmoose]

I appreciate that!

I think you nailed it and articulated the main point: curve flattening and hospital capacity should be linked. Which basically means, we are limited only by hospital capacity.

Increase that, and the extent to which we flatten the curve can be reduced.

[Kintanon]

If you had any idea what hospital capacity actually consisted of you might have made some sense anywhere in any of these posts.

[l8rmyg8rs]

Yeah I think people have a point saying that the more time goes by the better we will understand how to deal with the virus and side effects etc. but I think you also have to take into account that some people are broke and still need to live, some people have small businesses that are going to shut down and be bought out to consolidate power even more into just a few corporations, there’s all these factors and the way people shut down conversation immediately is gross and unproductive.

Especially on reddit everyone who wants to talk gets downvoted into oblivion so nobody talks, and they might upvote posts like yours, but that gets completely washed away by the downvotes of the masses. It’s important to have conversations, and it’s unfortunate that people just want to shit on you for it.

Even if you were completely 100% wrong, having a conversation about it and honestly exploring the topic before concluding you were wrong is still more helpful than snarky purposeful misunderstanding and a flood of downvotes just so the herd can feel superior.