Choice.

To some extent as restrictions are lifted you get the feeling that a lot of people feel the danger of the virus has passed.  It hasn't.

The only real question is whether it will be a second wave similar to the first one or just a persistent background infection.  That is really up to all of us.

 

Some of the places where the pandemic did minor damage have assumed they are safe.  They aren't as we are seeing in some of the numbers. 

 

Viruses spread based on the number on targets available.  Clearly in large metropolitan areas it spread early and quickly.  It doesn't give up and unless you eliminate it, it will reemerge quickly.

 

It is entirely up to us.  Imagine you were forced to go to a country where a deadly virus was rampant and it was necessary to wear some protective equipment, avoid close personal contact and do things like wash your hands, dis-infect objects and exercise care to avoid it.

 

You are in that country.  If you ignore the warnings you still might be OK, most people survive the virus, but you might end up infecting vulnerable members of your family or friends.

 

Its your choice.

Best Strategy?

One of the things that we will never know is whether the actions we took in many states to flatten the curve were better than doing nothing.

Certainly it was better in saving lives, at least it would seem so.  Had we simply advised people to wear masks get tested and self isolate as needed, would we have had millions dead?

That estimate was based on doing nothing so any mitigation efforts would have had some impact.

It is most likely true that we aren't going to eliminate the virus and an effective vaccine will take some time, so since the vast majority of people who get the virus survive and most have mild to moderate symptoms, would more moderate responses have worked?

Sweden which is in many ways very different from the U.S. took the approach of advising citizens to be careful and never had a significant lockdown.  It has, at last reporting reached a level of 6.25 deaths a day per million people, the highest in Europe.

Still when you look at the statistics, Sweden doesn't look significantly worse than the other countries.

You see that Sweden had, so far 34 death per 100,000 residents while effectively continuing normal activities.  What is hard to determine is the effective date of the lockdowns versus the number infected.  It is very possible that Sweden's lack of protective measures will allow infections and deaths to continue while the countries that had those measures are going to see a significant reduction.

The only real use of this data is to consider what to do when the next virus comes.  It will come and we need to consider the best response to it.  We also need to have plenty of supplies and response plans for the various possibilities. 

This time we were a bit like a deer in the headlight, wondering about those bright lights as doom approached.

Social or Individual Welfare?

Is the virus a significant enough threat that we should continue the current lockdowns or should we resume the economy and put the onus on individuals?

The dynamic of who is responsible is fundamental to a lot of things and has clearly shifted during my lifetime.

It started shifting before that.

When America was settled by colonists it was really a brave new world.  The groups that came over did establish rules and laws, they often had a common set already, but many of them were hard to enforce as the whole continent was available to escape them.

We developed a culture where rugged individualism and individual responsibility were generally the rule.  As civilization spread we saw the Government grow and after other financial crises we saw certain social programs.  We started to consider education, health care and senior citizen security a Government concern,

It would be hard to imagine in our complex world requiring everyone to deal with those things on their own and most of us would be unable to.  Nor would we want to.

Still, we see changes and some reactions to those changes.  Medicare and Medicare provided healthcare to our senior citizens.  Social Security provided a certain level of financial support.  We generally provide free education up to grade 12 for everyone in this country.

The Affordable Care Act expanded health care to many who had no access to it and while certainly not perfect does provide a level of security to many of our poorest citizens.

We have programs that help with nutrition and that help farmers.

We have people who want to roll back many if not all of these programs, but for most Americans they serve an essential purpose.

Still our response to the current virus might represent a whole new level of Government.  Mandatory shut downs, social distancing and mask wearing are intrusive and in some ways destructive to many, especially small businesses.  Was this the way to go?

It saved many lives and if you think about that it seems good.  However, had we simply provided guidance about how to avoid infection, how to self care and when to seek medical help, would the outcome have been much different?

In New York a study of where new hospitalizations were coming from showed that the people most exposed, the essential workers and health care professionals are not the main patients, it is people staying at home, thinking they are safe.  The virus is being brought to them either by a family member who ventures out for food or by a delivery person who delivers more than wanted.

If everyone had access to effective PPE and knew how to behave what would be the risk?  Certainly some would ignore the guidelines and possibly get sick.  The real danger is they may spread it to innocent more vulnerable people unintentionally.

At some point people have to be responsible for behaving well.  Most of the early infections and probably later ones were the result of people not taking any precautions.  They didn't think they needed to.  Now they should know better.

Wht Panic?

When you watch certain movies or TV shows it depicts an unknown virus that decimates the human population or even worse turns them into zombies.

We have become aware of this danger and tend to believe it is a likely scenario.

Now there have been horrible plagues in our past some of which decimated large swaths of the population.  Obviously there could be a pathogen as dangerous or even more dangerous develop.

Of course we have come to understand the causes and have a much better idea of the causes of infection and how to avoid them.

Still we as humans have a tendency to overreact and to some extent panic.

The latest example is the coronavirus which has nothing to do with the beer.

It is essentially a virus that results in flu like symptoms and an unknown death rate.

When I say unknow, the estimates are somewhere between 2 and 3% but clearly until we have better testing we only can calculate a rate based on known cases.  Since its likely many cases were undiagnosed because the symptoms were mild or people self treated assuming a cold or flu it is almost certainly lower.

It could actually be similar to flu rates, but there simply isn't enough data.

We don't panic over the flu even though it kills 10s of thousands of people every year.  Yes we have a vaccine which helps somewhat, but even so flu is just something we accept.

Coronavirus isn't the end of the world as we know it, its just a new virus that joins a long list of viruses that can infect us.

Common sense, good hygiene and safe practices are the best we can do until a vaccine becomes available.