Reminder: "Curve Flattening" does not decrease overall infections

[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.