Working From Home - Impacts of Coronavirus

[nctnico]

As an engineer you should realise that this is a great example of delayed feedback. There is around 2 weeks between stuffing a beach with bodies and seeing an increase in cases.

I'm well aware of that. We have had schools back fully for almost a month now, and gyms back for two weeks, plus a ton of other stuff open, people packing restaurants again for many weeks now. essentially zero new cases.
The great fear was schools, being the germ breeding ground that they are, but nothing has happened so far after that time, so seem to be saying something.
Based on the data we have now and the measures in place and general awareness (and fear), I can't really see any major wave up again here. But we'll no doubt be playing whack-a-mole for a long time. Although if we let 100,000 Chinese students back in, well...
Most of our new cases for the last month have been overseas travelers coming in, except for a recent spat in Victoria in the last few days.
If anyone is going to propose some 2nd wave doomsday scenario here based on the data we have now and the size and circumstances of our first wave, then they'd want to come up with a damn good hypothesis of how that's going to magically happen.

Yep. You can take Germany as an example: they have localised areas where Covid-19 flares up again but with lots of testing in place it is possible to do targeted local lock-downs which seem to be effective (combined with social distancing in general). All in all I tend to agree a second wave is unlikely to happen in countries which have Covid-19 under control and people adhere to social distancing rules and do large scale testing. For a second wave to happen a really large number of people will have to abandon the social distancing.

[EEVblog]

One really interesting thing is that the WHO are supposedly now saying that transmission via surfaces is uncommon, as is transmission from asymptomatic people. If so then that should make it pretty easy to contain in places that have already contained it through whatever mechanism.
Although again, there seems to great differences between counties that doesn't seem correlate with that, so it's still puzzling. I don't get the US stats at all, they seem crazy high, and from what I gather everyone over there is wearing masks like crazy.
I think there is likely to be a whole lot more going on with how this whole mechanism works that we don't know about yet, and why countries like Australia have been hardly hit at all. It's not like we have small cities and are ultra-paranoid about it, quite the opposite.
It's fascinating stuff, an analytical statisticians wet dream.

[tom66]

The case rate for Florida doesn't look great:

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/7572b118dc3c48d885d1c643c195314e/

4th July is coming up, too.  And people are protesting over the requirement to wear masks (the fact that POTUS has said they are "stupid" really doesn't help)

[nctnico]

One really interesting thing is that the WHO are supposedly now saying that transmission via surfaces is uncommon, as is transmission from asymptomatic people. If so then that should make it pretty easy to contain in places that have already contained it through whatever mechanism.
Although again, there seems to great differences between counties that doesn't seem correlate with that, so it's still puzzling. I don't get the US stats at all, they seem crazy high, and from what I gather everyone over there is wearing masks like crazy.

You have to realise that a mask only helps against transmitting Covid-19; it doesn't help against receiving it because a mask doesn't cover your eyes. Eyes are (internally) directly connected to the nose. In theory one infected person without a mask can infect several people wearing a mask. For example if they travel together in a bus or visit a crowded place. I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

[bd139]

All praise sneezus 

[coppice]

You have to realise that a mask only helps against transmitting Covid-19; it doesn't help against receiving it because a mask doesn't cover your eyes. Eyes are (internally) directly connected to the nose. In theory one infected person without a mask can infect several people wearing a mask. For example if they travel together in a bus or visit a crowded place. I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

If a mask doesn't give 100% protection its useless is really dumb thinking. Most infections start through the nose, so even if you haven't protected your eyes you have still reduced the likelihood of getting infected when you apply a suitable mask correctly, especially of you make the mask fit snuggly above your nose, ensuring the air flow due to breathing is not being drawn past your eyes. Partial protection is all any single measure gives you. Some reduce it a lot. Some reduce it a little. A surgeon doesn't say "I've got gloves on, so I don't need to wash my hands" (well, perhaps a few do, but I'd really try to avoid them letting them treat me). A mask on an infected person reduces their transmission rate far more than a mask on a healthy person protects them, but they both help. Because no one measure is 100% effective, you eliminate these infectious diseases by a package of measures that aggregate to a very low transmission rate.

[EEVblog]

I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

I live and work within a stones throw from the Hillsong mothership church here in Sydney, filled with thousands of hugging touchy feely christian teenagers (most American students BTW) every day, and they all live and work in the local shopping center next door. I was absolutely sure we'd get a hotspot there, but it never happened, not a single case, I was stunned. Still can't explain why.

[nctnico]

You have to realise that a mask only helps against transmitting Covid-19; it doesn't help against receiving it because a mask doesn't cover your eyes. Eyes are (internally) directly connected to the nose. In theory one infected person without a mask can infect several people wearing a mask. For example if they travel together in a bus or visit a crowded place. I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

If a mask doesn't give 100% protection its useless is really dumb thinking.

You are mistaken. Just read up on the how and why of masks and what kind of protection they offer. The key reasons to make masks mandatory is to prevent infected persons to spray the virus around. But since you don't know who is infected or not everyone should wear them. The non-medical / surgical masks are not designed / intended to keep stuff out. Try and use one while drilling in or grinding concrete and check your nose afterwards. You'll see it will do very little for keeping the dust out. Now imagine how well it works to keep a virus out.

I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

I live and work within a stones throw from the Hillsong mothership church here in Sydney, filled with thousands of hugging touchy feely christian teenagers (most American students BTW) every day, and they all live and work in the local shopping center next door. I was absolutely sure we'd get a hotspot there, but it never happened, not a single case, I was stunned. Still can't explain why.

With only a few infections out there the chance is low. But it isn't zero. It only takes one infected person to attend. There are plenty of examples to be found world wide where people wheren't so lucky. In the Netherlands one of the hot-spots is an area with a relatively high number of religious people.

[rdl]

Many people in America think wrapping any random piece of just about anything across your face counts as a mask. A new fashion industry has sprung up making masks by attaching elastic strips to stylishly printed and colorful cloth. The ability to contain aerosol spray from the mouth or trap incoming matter is not a consideration.

[SilverSolder]

Many people in America think wrapping any random piece of just about anything across your face counts as a mask. A new fashion industry has sprung up making masks by attaching elastic strips to stylishly printed and colorful cloth. The ability to contain aerosol spray from the mouth or trap incoming matter is not a consideration.

Some of the "fashion masks" have double lining and a pocket to put a filter in... 

[DrG]

One really interesting thing is that the WHO are supposedly now saying that transmission via surfaces is uncommon, as is transmission from asymptomatic people. If so then that should make it pretty easy to contain in places that have already contained it through whatever mechanism.
Although again, there seems to great differences between counties that doesn't seem correlate with that, so it's still puzzling. I don't get the US stats at all, they seem crazy high, and from what I gather everyone over there is wearing masks like crazy.
I think there is likely to be a whole lot more going on with how this whole mechanism works that we don't know about yet, and why countries like Australia have been hardly hit at all. It's not like we have small cities and are ultra-paranoid about it, quite the opposite.
It's fascinating stuff, an analytical statisticians wet dream.

The WHO backed off, or reinterpreted, their statements on the asymptomatic issue https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/09/who-comments-asymptomatic-spread-covid-19/

They have done these re-interpretations several times, most notably with face coverings https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks I am still steamed about that issue because we were initially told NOT to wear masks beacuse they wouldn't do any good and would make things worse because you would touch your face. The truth was, there were not enough medical masks and the fear was that those needing them the most, would not be able to have them. That situation was NOT unique to the WHO. Also, I expect guidance to be evidence-based and with more evidence, guidance can certainly change.

One problem with the asymptomatic issue is, as usual, a lack of operational definition.

Take an infected individual who will show symptoms. We know that there will be some period of time (an incubation period, if you will) where they have not yet shown symptoms. They *should* be capable of spreading the infection by virtue of their viral load, but they are not sneezing and snorting and coughing, so there spreading ability is different than the symptomatic infector.

Then there are those individuals who stay asymptomatic for the duration of the infection. Same questions can be asked about their ability to infect. I do remember that several cases have been shown to have viral loads equivalent to symptomatic individuals. Then also, one can safely assume that some asymptomatic cases (of all kinds) have, at least at some point, some very mild symptoms.

It does seem like the estimated proportion of asymptomatic individuals that have a significant role in spreading the infection, differs between the USA team and the WHO. The former saying as high as 20% and the latter much lower (by my recollection).

[Zero999]

I thought we were still working under the assumption that everyone will catch it and we just want hospitals available for when people need them? If that's still the modus operandi then I don't see how new cases matter. We can have a million cases a day if they don't overwhelm the hospitals.

Because it's a boogeyman, and people from all walks of life and the media and especially politicians have realised that fear gives them various powers, and people like power and being seen to "do things". And of course it can kill the elderly and other vulnerable people (just like the flu), so if you don't support all draconian measures to stop it then you must like people dying, obviously.
No one was thinking that when millions died of the flu every year, because, reasons...

My state NSW has single digit cases a day (and many zero days recently), yet it's still managed as if it's a crisis that will spiral out of control and infect everyone and kill X percent of those if it's not micro managed. This could go on for years. Open your borders and you are guaranteed a little spike again and the cycle repeats.

Most of the stuff was justified at the start because we knew very little about it, but as time goes on and we learn more, at some point we are just going to have to start treating this as just yet another seasonal flu type thing, otherwise we require that "new normal" society were no one shakes hands or hugs any more etc, and that's depressing. I don't see that happening in practice though, eventually people are just going to say "bugger it" and life will return to relative normality.
But yes, realistically it seems that everyone will eventually catch it whether they know it or not.
Quite some time back I tweeted about those "social distancing" floor stickers in shopping centres etc and pondered what we'll think in 20-30 years time if you find one in an old abandoned shopping mall and you think, "wow, remember back when social distancing was a thing!"

Of course, YMMV. Easy to say in a country that has had little impact from this of course.
I'm not sure about overseas, but here practically zero resources have been spent on protecting the vulnerable. All the effort seems to go into stopping Joe Average getting it. Seems arse backwards to me 

Australia has done a very good job of containing the disease, so it's understandable many who live there won't be able to see what all the fuss is about and think it's all been a big overreaction.

This is still a new illness. One of the concerning potential issues is the long term effects and whether this virus can later on bite you on the bum, like polio, which is also a mild illness for most people. There have been reports of lung scaring, damage to the kidneys, heart and brain and very delayed effect on children, who originally had an asymptomatic or very mild illness, only later going on to develop paediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome several weeks later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paediatric_multisystem_inflammatory_syndrome

I understand your concern about governments having too much power, but even the most authoritarian regime isn't going to close off a large proportion of the economy, it costs enormous amounts in lost tax revenues.

I agree with you about protecting the most vulnerable, but older people catch it from the young, so we need to limit community spread to protect them. I'm moderately worried about catching COVID-19. Although I'm in a relatively low risk group, no underlying conditions, fix, active and in the healthy weight range, I worry about spreading it to others and there's still a risk I could die from it. As I mentioned in another post, I know of a 20 year old woman, with no co-morbidities nearly dying of COVID-19 and she still might have long term health problems: it's far too soon to know.

I don't know what we should do. Clearly we can't all lock ourselves away forever, but letting the disease run riot is also not an option either. We need a happy medium between keeping the number of infections down and being able to go about our daily lives.

[DrG]

I think that localities, including as large as countries, can be meaningfully compared by the measure of positive rate, toward understanding how the infection can be controlled in one place and yet be so out of control in another.

The strategy of identification by testing and quarantine, contact tracing (and testing) is a sound one. Add to that social distancing, sanitary practices, and yes, face coverings, and we (everybody) have the means to control the infection until more effective treatments, including effective vaccines become available. We WILL have effective treatments like plasma-based and monoclonal antibodies and we WILL have vaccines.

Positive rate is simply the number of positive tests as a percentage of total tests administered. Look here, for this measure in each US state https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states/usa



Here is the state of Maryland. New cases rose, positive rates increased to well over 10%, they installed NPI, then testing dramatically increased and stayed increased. positive rate dropped to ~5% and new cases to 300-400. They still have a ways to go, but it is under some level of control and a slow and cautious reopening is in progress.

Here is the state of Florida. Clearly it became untethered and they have an unacceptably high positive rate and daily new case rate.



I have a pretty good idea of what happened - lapsing or otherwise insufficient NPI. Whether I am right or not about that is not the most relevant issue. The critical issue is that they are not doing enough testing.

Wherever it is, if the positive rate is high, not enough testing is being done to allow the strategy of identification (by testing) and quarantine, contact tracing (and testing), social distancing, sanitary practices, and yes, face coverings, to be successful. THAT is what we are seeing in the US. The most powerful country in the world (IMO) and we can't master testing four months into the greatest pandemic the country has seen in 100 years.

I don't give a rat's ass that the US has done more testing than anyone else in the world, it is distinctly irrelevant.

In Wyoming, maybe the infections are under control and their testing is sufficient - and you don't see 10% positive rates. In Australia positive rates are less than 1%. Good for them, I am happy for the folks in all of those areas.

It is not that everybody has to do the same amount of testing, it is that if the positive rate in a locale is too high, you need to do MUCH more testing. Period, beginning, middle and end of issue. I ulcerate hearing all the subterfuge and obfuscation around some very simple and basic concepts.

If you do not do enough testing, you can't control the spread. It is not rocket science. The virus is not alive, it is a hunk of crap that does exactly what it does without fail (except for some mutating).

Yet, in the US we tolerate BS at the highest levels that say we should slow down testing or that testing will produce more cases so we shouldn't be concerned about a rise in cases. Or that it is our constitutional right of assembly, so we are supposed to be fine having political rallys in hot spots.

Pure unadulterated bullshit. Bullshit that smells so bad, you would never accept something like that in the EE world, yet it is met with far too much acceptance. Let's just wait for herd immunity and resign ourselves to the idea that everybody will get infected....while the economy and healthcare get flushed down the toilet...and it really doesn't have to be that way.

[coppice]

You have to realise that a mask only helps against transmitting Covid-19; it doesn't help against receiving it because a mask doesn't cover your eyes. Eyes are (internally) directly connected to the nose. In theory one infected person without a mask can infect several people wearing a mask. For example if they travel together in a bus or visit a crowded place. I suspect that a large number of people are still attending large gatherings like churches in the US. Ofcourse the total lack of leadership in the US doesn't help either to make people understand what they should or shouldn't do.

If a mask doesn't give 100% protection its useless is really dumb thinking.

You are mistaken. Just read up on the how and why of masks and what kind of protection they offer. The key reasons to make masks mandatory is to prevent infected persons to spray the virus around. But since you don't know who is infected or not everyone should wear them. The non-medical / surgical masks are not designed / intended to keep stuff out. Try and use one while drilling in or grinding concrete and check your nose afterwards. You'll see it will do very little for keeping the dust out. Now imagine how well it works to keep a virus out.

Virus laden aerosol isn't dry dust. Estimates vary, not least because mask quality varies. Much of the garbage out there is governments trying to make masks look useless because they have a shortage of them. If you look for studies quoting real data a typical properly manufactured and worn mask seems to reduce the risk of causing infection to about 3% to 5% of the risk without a mask. The same mask reduces the risk of getting an infection to about 50% to 70% of the risk without a mask. So, the mask is not super effective for the person trying not to get infected, but combine that modest reduction with a spacing and other precautions, and the benefits really add up. Where things get more problematic is people thinking any of piece of cloth vaguely covering their mouth constitutes a meaningful medical mask.

[nctnico]

50% to 70% is still worse than a 1 in 4 chance. Besides that I wonder if those studies only looked at the mask and not the combination where the eyes are left unprotected. And then there is the matter of wearing it correctly. It seems you are ending up with the exact same conclusion as I wrote a few posts earlier.

[rdl]

"Some". I don't doubt that is true. However, the ones I've seen for sale at the checkout counter in gas stations/convenience stores for $1.99 are just a single layer of cloth. I have actually seen people wearing folded bandanas, western movie desperado style, instead of a real mask. Better than nothing I suppose.

Many people in America think wrapping any random piece of just about anything across your face counts as a mask. A new fashion industry has sprung up making masks by attaching elastic strips to stylishly printed and colorful cloth. The ability to contain aerosol spray from the mouth or trap incoming matter is not a consideration.

Some of the "fashion masks" have double lining and a pocket to put a filter in...

[Zero999]

I think that localities, including as large as countries, can be meaningfully compared by the measure of positive rate, toward understanding how the infection can be controlled in one place and yet be so out of control in another.

The strategy of identification by testing and quarantine, contact tracing (and testing) is a sound one. Add to that social distancing, sanitary practices, and yes, face coverings, and we (everybody) have the means to control the infection until more effective treatments, including effective vaccines become available. We WILL have effective treatments like plasma-based and monoclonal antibodies and we WILL have vaccines.

Yes, testing, contact tracing and quarantine are effective, as well as social distancing but I'm cynical about how well people will cooperate, especially in areas where people don't trust the authorities. Most people in the UK have complied with the social distancing so far, but recently it's started to deteriorate, with the disgraceful no lives matter chaos and this week people crowding the beeches on the first 90°F day of the summer. Even if people do comply with contact tracing, large crowds can quickly lead to greater infection rates, than any contact tracing system can cope with. Hopefully the increase in infections will be mitigated somewhat by the fact that most gatherings have been outdoors, which carries a low risk. The test will be during the run up to Christmas, when everyone will want to party indoors, when it'll be pouring with rain.

[maginnovision]

I live in LA county(California) in the San Fernando valley and everything is still basically closed. I go out to Riverside, San Diego, SLO... Only thing you notice is some people wearing masks. By and large it's all back to normal. It's like going to another country when I leave the county.

[PlainName]

Around here pretty much no-one wears a mask now. Even the little lady in the supermarket who would have a fit if you had line of sight of her without at least one layer of perspex in the way seemingly doesn't care now.

The exception is the health service. I happened to warrant a sound'n'lights trip to the local A&E the other night and the paramedics were very conscientious about maintaining both distance and masks. I got given a disposable en route and, frankly, my Amazon washable seemed to be better (didn't have a chance to grab it though).

[EEVblog]

Given that everyone capable has been able to go back to work for like a month now here in Sydney. I note that in three commercial building carparks I frequent in my business park, the number of cars is still about half of what it was pre-covid.
And I note an uptick in offices for lease and know of several companies downsizing (plus myself). Although we won't see the real numbers on vacant commercial offices for at least 6-12 months as more leases come up for renewal. I suspect there are many companies that wish they could get out of their long term leases as they realise the world didn't end when people worked from home and are happy to continue doing so.

[tom66]

A major newspaper here has reported that the government expects that people who can work from home will be requested to do so until at least the end of the year.

[DrG]

I think that localities, including as large as countries, can be meaningfully compared by the measure of positive rate, toward understanding how the infection can be controlled in one place and yet be so out of control in another.

The strategy of identification by testing and quarantine, contact tracing (and testing) is a sound one. Add to that social distancing, sanitary practices, and yes, face coverings, and we (everybody) have the means to control the infection until more effective treatments, including effective vaccines become available. We WILL have effective treatments like plasma-based and monoclonal antibodies and we WILL have vaccines.

Yes, testing, contact tracing and quarantine are effective, as well as social distancing but I'm cynical about how well people will cooperate, especially in areas where people don't trust the authorities. Most people in the UK have complied with the social distancing so far, but recently it's started to deteriorate, with the disgraceful no lives matter chaos and this week people crowding the beeches on the first 90°F day of the summer. Even if people do comply with contact tracing, large crowds can quickly lead to greater infection rates, than any contact tracing system can cope with. Hopefully the increase in infections will be mitigated somewhat by the fact that most gatherings have been outdoors, which carries a low risk. The test will be during the run up to Christmas, when everyone will want to party indoors, when it'll be pouring with rain.

Yes, re: cynicism. The usual response to that is to point to the leadership, or lack of leadership. In the US, the messaging is so incredibly divisive that to wear a mask, means that you are a Democrat and refusing to wear a mask, means that you are a Trump Republican. I know that is simplistic, but mask wearing has become just that in the US. The same divisiveness holds true for re-opening - how soon and how much. Rather than using evidence-based decisions, it was too often made along political lines, at least to a some extent.

A tipping point may result from the new hot spots. That is, the US is now entering a new stage of "cooperation", as you put it. where many states have had to pause their reopening schedules and some have rolled back restrictions to some degree, e.g., the Texas Governor admitting that maybe he opened up the bars too soon...and in other news, water is wet.

I should also clarify my earlier post a bit. I do think that we (all of us) have only the strategy of identification by testing and quarantine, contact tracing (and testing), social distancing, sanitary practices, and yes, face coverings, to successfully control the virus. That will change at some point, but for now if any of those pieces are failing, the whole circuit will suffer. I view testing as the CPU of the circuit. If the testing component fails, the circuit will fail.

[rstofer]

Any reasonable person, viewing the latest US data, would come to the realization that we are losing the battle.  The number of cases is continuing to grow without bound (Florida had 5000 new cases yesterday) and in my backward county we are similarly out of control at a smaller scale.

We closed the country in early March when the new cases per day (nationwide) was around 2000.  Now that the new cases per day is around 40,000, people are whining about wearing a mask and the government is scrambling to open things back up.  People are stupid!  Not just ignorant, that could be cured but factually stupid for which there is no cure.

Anybody notice the spike in cases within 2 weeks of Memorial Day?  Nobody will attribute the newest outbreaks to the protests but it is happening anyway.

i don't know if masks are effective and we sure got mixed messages early on re: whether to wear masks but at this point I think the health care people are unanimous:  Wear a mask!

If you look at the US data, you can see where daily cases start to pick up on June 12th, just about 2 weeks after Memorial Day.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

In some ways, it is Karma.  That bunch of kids that simply had to spend their spring break in Mexico brought back 64 cases of Covid-19.  I wonder if it was worth it...

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6926e1.htm

Maybe Covid-19 is Mother Nature's way of adding Chlorine to the gene pool.  In the meantime, I'll continue to wear a mask when I'm out and about.  It may not protect me but it might prevent me from infecting someone else.  If everybody worked the same way, masks would suddenly become effective.  Everybody protecting each other!

Not going to happen!  We have to remember:  We are all in this separately!

[james_s]

Yes it's not looking good, and it's frustrating how poorly we have done as a nation. It didn't take long for it to become extremely politicized and partisan which makes no sense at all to me, a virus doesn't care about anyone's political views. The complete lack of coordination between states and lack of coherent leadership is appalling. The utter failure of the USA to deal with a pandemic that is far less deadly than a virus could be is disappointing, in fact it's massively embarrassing. It's the sort of thing I'd expect to see in some 3rd world dump run by an inept and self serving dictator. The protests strike me as absolutely stupid when there's a virus spreading around killing thousands of people, especially when that virus is hitting those the protests claim to advocate for the hardest. Then the political rallies are equally stupid and arguably far less necessary. I don't really understand the point of those at all, we've already narrowed down the field to the two final contenders, anyone who is going to go to a Trump rally during a pandemic is obviously already going to vote for him anyway so what's the point of a rally? Is he hoping to kill off as many of his fans as possible?

At this point my view is that we failed, the war is lost. All there is to do now is look out for ourselves as best we can and watch the body count climb.

[tom66]

That seems to have been the worst thing about the pandemic in the USA.

Responses to the crisis have varied considerably across states, with certain states not locking down anywhere nearly as seriously as others, and the President refuses to wear a mask in public which would set a good tone for the rest of the country.

I have no idea why it has become so politicised but I suspect by the time it has torn through the country it will be easily 500k deaths, ICUs will be overloaded and there will be nearly a million other "related" deaths as the consequences of lockdown, family/business breakdown due to loss of key members/staff, and economic stress take their toll.

I also don't see transatlantic flights resuming any time soon if the USA does not control the epidemic.