Corona Virus: It's a Marathon, Not a Sprint

[Little Raven]

They pulled back because they are predicting how the court is going to rule.

If you're confident a Court is going to strike down your law, it was a bad law, and you should never have passed it. If you pass a law, you should be willing to defend it. Hell, even when Southern states play dumb games with abortion law, they're generally willing to go to Court. States should absolutely get their hands smacked when they pass bad law.

I'm not looking past the ruling. I'm literally quoting blocks of the ACTUAL RULING and analysis arguing why it isn't what you say it is. In fact, what you are saying pretty much flies in the face of what the experts are saying.

Not in terms of the actual regulation, you aren't. We both agree that this ruling is moot, and isn't going to have any immediate effect on the law. You and the experts are having lots of fun anticipating what this new majority means for the future of the Court, and I'm down with that, but this ruling is pretty darn narrow.

I'm saying corrosive rulings that'll continue to be corrosive to national unity.

I don't know what this even means. Given how split the country is, isn't ANY ruling "corrosive to national unity?" SOMEONE is guaranteed to be unhappy no matter what the Court does.

This is a weird take. This likely had nothing to do with Gorsuch convincing anyone. The vote changed.

Justices aren't robots with pre-ordained decision trees. They converse, argue, and attempt to convince each other. Amy sided with Gorsuch this time around.

[Zarathud]

Gorsuch is the new leader of the Federalist takeover of the SCOTUS, flexing his newly found political muscle. Amy was sent in to be a solider in the army, with no hint of being independent or persuadable on “religious freedom” as a member of a radical religious sect. It’s a disgrace.

[malchior]

They pulled back because they are predicting how the court is going to rule.

If you're confident a Court is going to strike down your law, it was a bad law, and you should never have passed it. If you pass a law, you should be willing to defend it. Hell, even when Southern states play dumb games with abortion law, they're generally willing to go to Court. States should absolutely get their hands smacked when they pass bad law.

The Southern States aren't just playing dumb games. Far from it. That is (was?) part of their court politicization strategy and overall political strategy. They were writing extreme laws to test the courts. To borrow a military term, they were probes in advance of an assault. They wanted to see how far they can push, test resistance, find weakensses, and then plan their next move. It goes way beyond good/bad laws here. This is realpolitik time. They have been chipping away at abortion rights, voting rights, and more through this technique. And it has helped them drum up political support from their base and driven real political action. It has worked for them splendidly.

I'm not looking past the ruling. I'm literally quoting blocks of the ACTUAL RULING and analysis arguing why it isn't what you say it is. In fact, what you are saying pretty much flies in the face of what the experts are saying.

Not in terms of the actual regulation, you aren't. We both agree that this ruling is moot, and isn't going to have any immediate effect on the law. You and the experts are having lots of fun anticipating what this new majority means for the future of the Court, and I'm down with that, but this ruling is pretty darn narrow.

Don't you see how this cuts against your argument. They handed down a meaningless narrow decision as a message. And it wasn't that NY needed to have their hand slapped. They broadcast loud and clear that they were in charge and to ignore Roberts instructions to defer to the States on these issues.

I don't know what this even means. Given how split the country is, isn't ANY ruling "corrosive to national unity?" SOMEONE is guaranteed to be unhappy no matter what the Court does.

That's not the point. The GOP has loaded up the Supreme Court, placed over 30% of the Appellate level during the 4 years of the Trump administration, and been conducting all these legal probes and have essentially whittled away voting rights, gerrymander protections, and more. This isn't a matter of people being upset. Eventually they will do something so nakedly political that it will threaten the legitimacy of the court. This year we've seen two Democratic Governors now give sharp rebukes to the Supreme Court. Eventually someone may get more than wordy and start defying.

In any case, this is a long-term prediction here. I'm pretty confident of it because we're already seeing it start to happen. I see this as being like 10-12 years ago when some of us saw the GOP become far more extreme in a short period. We had warning signs earlier but when they lost in 2008 they really started on the warpath to building out a 1-party state. Many people didn't see what was coming. That is what I'm seeing now. I think sometime in the near future the US will be having discussions about a heavily politicized SCOTUS. And it'll be measurable - what we'll see is an erosion in the trust in the institution. The Supreme Court enjoys being the branch with the highest confidence with the public right now. As we see rulings like this splash out on the front pages of the newspapers what will likely happen is that we'll see an erosion of that level of confidence over time.

Justices aren't robots with pre-ordained decision trees. They converse, argue, and attempt to convince each other. Amy sided with Gorsuch this time around.

No one is calling them robots but they certainly have ideologies. I am arguing that this was a politicized, activist result and it presages more turbulence ahead. This was so obvious that the professional 'bury your head in sand' types are saying this was highly political. And the idea that "Amy sided with Gorsuch" isn't impossible but it is sort of a fantasy. Was there any real doubt she wouldn't vote this way? She was picked by the Federalists because she already had these views on her own.

[Smoove_B]

COVID-19 is so bad in North Carolina prisons, they're shutting them down and transferring inmates to other locations:

Three state prisons have been closed, with hundreds of inmates being transferred to other facilities across the state, as COVID-19 continues to spike within the prison system.

Inmates at Randolph Correctional Center in Randolph County, the minimum custody unit at Southern Correctional Institution in Montgomery County and the minimum custody unit at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Rowan County have been moved.

State prison leaders outline the moves in a briefing to staff on Wednesday.

In the briefing, leaders said the move was due to both an increase in COVID-19 cases among inmates and the number of staff that have been out of work at some facilities.

The state has also maxed out on hospital bed capacity for inmates, the briefing said.

[Little Raven]

The Southern States aren't just playing dumb games.

Eh, I agree with you as to their intent, but I still think they're mostly dumb in their execution. But at least when they play these games, they're willing to go the distance. I'd have much more respect for New York if they were willing to actually try to defend their nonsense in Court. Instead, they tend to rescind the law and then say "Hey...no fair calling us on that! We already took it back! No harm, no foul!" I find that approach particularly annoying.

And it wasn't that NY needed to have their hand slapped. They broadcast loud and clear that they were in charge and to ignore Roberts instructions to defer to the States on these issues.

I agree with your second sentence, but not your first. Two things can be true at once.

Eventually someone may get more than wordy and start defying.

Wouldn't be the first time. We know how to deal with that situation.

Was there any real doubt she wouldn't vote this way?

There's always doubt. You never know what you're getting with a Justice. Remember Eisenhower's thoughts on the subject?

[malchior]

The Southern States aren't just playing dumb games.

Eh, I agree with you as to their intent, but I still think they're mostly dumb in their execution.

Dumb except for the fact that they've been wildly successful.

Eventually someone may get more than wordy and start defying.

Wouldn't be the first time. We know how to deal with that situation.

I have a feeling that'd turn out far differently nowadays.

Was there any real doubt she wouldn't vote this way?

There's always doubt. You never know what you're getting with a Justice. Remember Eisenhower's thoughts on the subject?

Doesn't it strike you that you keep having to go back to the late 50s and 60s to make examples? It makes sense because that was the time we were closest to anarchy. And yet somehow the threat is very much more real now. At least then we didn't have a country on the edge of autocracy.

Still these last 3 justices were pushed forward by an extremist Conservative society because of their alignment with the political agenda of one of the most right-wing parties in the world. That doesn't mean they'll vote in lock step on everything but she just gave us a hint that everything we worried about is a real problem. It is clear that they aren't afraid to be political which again isn't the Supreme Court acting as it should.

[Little Raven]

I have a feeling that'd turn out far differently nowadays.

What, someone is going to start shooting at the Feds? Unlikely, but we have precedent for dealing with that too.

Doesn't it strike you that you keep having to go back to the late 50s and 60s to make examples?

Ike just had the best quote. ("I have made two mistakes in my Presidency, and they are both on the Supreme Court!") But there have been plenty of surprises more recently. Heck, Roberts was a member of Federalist Society. Wasn't he supposed to be a good foot soldier?

[malchior]

I have a feeling that'd turn out far differently nowadays.

What, someone is going to start shooting at the Feds? Unlikely, but we have precedent for dealing with that too.

Maybe but that is the extreme side of things. In the end this system is breaking down and unpredictable things will continue to happen. Would anyone think that the entire Conservative party would throw down their principles to join an anti-elitism cult of personality. But here we are. More pressure on this system is not going to lead us in good directions.

Ike just had the best quote. ("I have made two mistakes in my Presidency, and they are both on the Supreme Court!") But there have been plenty of surprises more recently. Heck, Roberts was a member of Federalist Society. Wasn't he supposed to be a good foot soldier?

I mean sure but he wasn't chosen in one of the most politicized climates in our nation's history. The last three were positioned over time for this role. That is also the troubling part. Roberts isn't a moderate by any means. That implies there is more chance that there will be a 'landmark' political case that'll erode confidence in the institution. Still he also has a bigger job. He is clearly worried about the wheels coming off the bus at this point. I wager he knows more than most that he is fighting a losing battle and he'll continue to try to act as a brake to try to temper the Conservatives. We'll see over time how successful he'll be.

Edit: Anyway, fun discussion but this isn't really going anywhere. You are entitled of course to your opinion but I just can't understand how anyone could look at present state and think things are in good working order. I suspect we aren't going to get any closer on this.

[Moat_Man]

By my count ~22,805 people died in the US of COVID-19 in October. That puts your total count conservatively at ~280,000 by the end of the year. If the death rate increases a bit as it is likely to do because of the increased case counts you might have upwards of 290,000 deaths by year's end.

The CDC is predicting a total of 294,000 to 321,000 COVID-19 deaths will be reported by December 19th.
Source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... ng-us.html

[Formix]

COVID-19 is so bad in North Carolina prisons, they're shutting them down and transferring inmates to other locations:

Three state prisons have been closed, with hundreds of inmates being transferred to other facilities across the state, as COVID-19 continues to spike within the prison system.

Inmates at Randolph Correctional Center in Randolph County, the minimum custody unit at Southern Correctional Institution in Montgomery County and the minimum custody unit at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Rowan County have been moved.

State prison leaders outline the moves in a briefing to staff on Wednesday.

In the briefing, leaders said the move was due to both an increase in COVID-19 cases among inmates and the number of staff that have been out of work at some facilities.

The state has also maxed out on hospital bed capacity for inmates, the briefing said.

My facility is starting to provide healthcare to inmate COVID patients at a nearby hotel that has been taken over for this purpose here in NC. As you could imagine, finding a hotel willing to play host has been . . . difficult.

[msteelers]

We had thanksgiving home alone while our neighbors threw a huge party. I counted at least 7 cars in the driveway, and zero masks.

Not that I’m bitter or anything.

[raydude]

We had thanksgiving home alone while our neighbors threw a huge party. I counted at least 7 cars in the driveway, and zero masks.

Not that I’m bitter or anything.

If it makes you feel better, all the neighbors on my block appear to have spent Thanksgiving by themselves. I saw no unrecognized cars or people. Just neighborhood kids outside yesterday. Although we're still the only folks on our block who wear masks when outside. The other kids are younger than 5 so I guess they're not at high risk, and our family makes sure we stay around 6 feet from the adults.

[Little Raven]

Experts question bans on small family gatherings.

As states struggle to contain the resurgent coronavirus, many officials are laying the blame on an unexpected source: people gathering with family and friends.

Household get-togethers undoubtedly do contribute to community transmission of the virus. Canada’s recent Thanksgiving certainly added to its rising cases; such an increase may happen here, too, as the United States embarks on a holiday season like no other. That’s why the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday warned so strongly against gathering with others outside the household during Thanksgiving.

But are dinners and backyard barbecues really the engine driving the current surge of infections? The available data do not support that contention, scientists say. Still, the idea has been repeated so often it has become conventional wisdom, leading to significant restrictions in many states.

...

“Somebody says something, and somebody else says it, and then it just becomes truth,” said Julia Marcus, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Harvard University. “I worry about this narrative that doesn’t yet seem to be data-based.”

Most states don’t collect or report detailed information about the exposure that led to a new infection. But in states where a breakdown is available, long-term care facilities, food processing plants, prisons, health care settings, and restaurants and bars are still the leading sources of spread, the data suggest.

...

In Colorado, only 81 active cases are attributed to social gatherings, compared with more than 4,000 from correctional centers and jails, 3,300 from colleges and universities, nearly 2,400 from assisted living facilities, and 450 from restaurants, bars, casinos and bowling alleys.

In Louisiana, social events account for just 1.7 percent of the 3,300 cases for which the state has clear exposure information.

“It’s important to give good public health advice about what’s coming in the holidays, no doubt about it,” said Dr. Tom Inglesby, director of the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “But it is not good to suggest that they are now the preponderance of the source of spread.”

Social gatherings have become a convenient scapegoat for political leaders flummoxed by the steeply climbing numbers, some experts said.

...

Dissonant policies also run the risk of fueling mistrust and resentment in a public already beset with fatigue from the pandemic and politics, Dr. Tuite warned.

“If you’re an average person looking at what’s allowed and what’s not allowed, it may not make a lot of sense,” she said. “I can get together with nine of my best friends and sit around a table at a restaurant. So why can’t I do that in my house?”

This is just more of what Smoove's been saying for weeks - public response to the epidemic is fractured at best and nonsensical at worst, mostly because politicians see no good options anywhere.

[Smoove_B]

This is just more of what Smoove's been saying for weeks - public response to the epidemic is fractured at best and nonsensical at worst, mostly because politicians see no good options anywhere.

I said it earlier, but I think when the tale of COVID-19 in America is written, it's going to be a story with at least 3 acts. Each act will detail the regional spread that was seen and what was driving it at the time.

I honestly don't now what's diving cases in other parts of the country right now, but in NJ it's absolutely small gatherings and private hangouts.

But yes, messaging in general is fractured; there isn't a consistent application of what we know works - which we've known since April/May. Instead, there's all of these regional/local rules being created to try and keep businesses afloat. And when people start to think through the logical loopholes you need to justify why having indoor dining with 25 people and no masks is somehow more acceptable than having 15 students and a teacher in a classroom, everything crumbles.

Inconsistent messaging and a prioritization of the almighty dollar will likely be seen in retrospect as our ultimate undoing. Our collective inability to pay people to stay home spiraled into what we're all living with now and will be living with through the Spring. I saw commentary yesterday that the current "surge" we're in might not peak until February unless aggressive, national actions are taken *right now*. I'm not holding my breath and by the time Biden official takes over, things could really be dire.

[noxiousdog]

Interestingly, it's a good example of drawing different conclusions from the same data. While it's the largest contributor if you ignore medical facilities, nursing homes, and schools, it's still a small fraction of the spread.

"However on Monday Persichilli shared some of these details, announcing that an analysis of 118 outbreaks tracked between March and October linked 16% of the identified cases to private gatherings — the largest percentage of location-associated cases, other than diagnoses connected to health care facilities, group living settings like nursing homes, and schools. She said 13% of cases were tied to daycare facilities and another 13% occurred among farmworkers."

[Isgrimnur]

CBS News

A rushed cull of Denmark's mink over concerns about a coronavirus mutation has left the country facing a new horror, as cadavers of the animals re-emerge from the earth. The macabre phenomenon was observed in a military training field outside the western town of Holstebro, where thousands of mink had been put into an improvised mass grave.

The carcasses rose to the surface, lifted by pressure from gases released by the decomposition, according to local police.

The environment ministry said mink should be covered by at least five feet of soil, but according to public broadcaster DR they were only buried about three feet deep in the field outside Holstebro.

[Daehawk]

2 women both 100 beat COVID. First story is from July.

Woman celebrates two major milestones: Turning 100 years old and beating COVID-19

In addition to overcoming the novel coronavirus, she's also a cancer survivor.

"She's an incredible woman that's for sure," said granddaughter Celeste Angeles.

Violet lived in North Minneapolis.

Her first husband, a World War II hero, lost his life in a freak accident when he returned home, leaving Violet to raise two young children.

Later, she married a police officer who she has also now outlived.

"Everything that's come her way, she's fought her way through it. She's survived," Angeles said.

After the passing of two husbands and a son, Violet went on to beat cancer.

"We are trying to celebrate every single victory in her life," Angeles said.

On May 6, that meant marking her 100th birthday.

=================================================================================================

Gilbert woman who survived COVID-19 celebrates 100th birthday

A special birthday celebration in Gilbert took place on Nov. 10 for a woman turning 100 years old.

Cars and bikes rolled by with happy birthday signs, and Katherine Loughrey sat on the sidelines with her tiara taking it all in on her 100th birthday. To make this birthday even sweeter, Loughrey is celebrating after she beat COVID-19 just a few months ago.

“She had a difficult life, living through the [Great Depression] and the World Wars and raising six kids," said Loughrey's daughter Janet Hartle. "She’s strong."

[Daehawk]

Lots of shoppers stood outside in lines for stores today. One of them said they just wanted to keep the tradition alive. Ya keep it alive by killing yourself and others.

[YellowKing]

We went out shopping today - it wasn't much more crowded than it usually is. And since the stores are all mandating masks and limiting capacity, it didn't feel unsafe. We avoided crowded aisles and kept our distance. I'd have probably stayed home if our state didn't have the strong mask mandate, but at least locally everyone's really good about following it. I honestly can't recall a single person in our entire shopping day today that did not have a mask on while inside the store or outside in line.

Also, someone ahead of us in the drive through at Starbucks paid for our entire $20 order. So still some good people out there.

[Daehawk]

I removed the 'dumbasses' remark from my post as you're not a dumbass and i suspect others here aren't...but cant be sure

Just seems unsafe to go out if you're not forced to even with masks.

[LawBeefaroni]

COVID-19 is so bad in North Carolina prisons, they're shutting them down and transferring inmates to other locations:

Three state prisons have been closed, with hundreds of inmates being transferred to other facilities across the state, as COVID-19 continues to spike within the prison system.

Inmates at Randolph Correctional Center in Randolph County, the minimum custody unit at Southern Correctional Institution in Montgomery County and the minimum custody unit at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Rowan County have been moved.

State prison leaders outline the moves in a briefing to staff on Wednesday.

In the briefing, leaders said the move was due to both an increase in COVID-19 cases among inmates and the number of staff that have been out of work at some facilities.

The state has also maxed out on hospital bed capacity for inmates, the briefing said.

If I wanted to ensure the spread to prisons throughout the state, that's exactly what I'd do too!

[YellowKing]

Just seems unsafe to go out if you're not forced to even with masks.

Nothing's going to be as safe as just sitting at home, to be sure. But at some point you've got to live according to your risk tolerance, provided you're not endangering anyone else.

Locking everyone in their house made sense early in the pandemic when we didn't know much about the virus or mask effectiveness, and businesses were trying to adapt to a new way of thinking. I don't think it makes much sense now, provided you live in a state where the people and government are in sync.(Note: A LOT of them aren't).

[hitbyambulance]

I don't think it makes much sense now, provided you live in a state where the people and government are in sync.(Note: A LOT of them aren't).

Seattle is one of those places - virus spread is relatively low (compared to most of the US) and people are quite good about using their cloth face coverings in public but i still feel incredibly uneasy shopping indoors.

[Unagi]

Just seems unsafe to go out if you're not forced to even with masks.

Nothing's going to be as safe as just sitting at home, to be sure. But at some point you've got to live according to your risk tolerance, provided you're not endangering anyone else.

And how is it you conclude you are not endangering anyone else.

Isn’t this the key? Cause, people get this part wrong consistently.

[Blackhawk]

Just wait until the vaccine is out, the crisis is over, and it's time for the first shopping trip without masks. That'll be terrifying!

[Daehawk]

Vaccine is not 100%. It will give people a false sense of security.

[Kraken]

Today's business section reports that air travel this weekend was down 70% at New England airports, from 500k to just under 150k. Also, traffic was very light in malls and shopping districts yesterday. Two very good signs that New England, at least, is taking warnings seriously.

'Course, the 150k people returning from places that just don't care kind of ruin it for the rest of us.

[Alefroth]

Vaccine is not 100%. It will give people a false sense of security.

It's not false. It doesn't have to be 100% to be very effective. It seems like you'd understand that.

[Blackhawk]

It's like making 97% of the trees in California fireproof. It's not 100% effective, but it will still stop the uncontrollable forest fires. And it's much easier to put out the fires that do crop up.

[Daehawk]

Still wouldn't want to be that small percent that get COVID and has lifelong problems or dies. Guess that like the flu and chicken pox its here forever.

[Defiant]

Vaccine is not 100%. It will give people a false sense of security.

It's not false. It doesn't have to be 100% to be very effective. It seems like you'd understand that.

Both of these are true, though. Even assuming it proves to be highly effective, you may still be part of the percentage for which the vaccine is ineffective (would people know whether it's effective for them or not?), and really, until enough of the population gets (both doses of) the vaccine such that herd immunity will kick in, we'll still be social distancing.

[The Meal]

Not to mention whether or not having the vaccine prevents you from spreading the virus. My understanding is 2 of the 3 front-runner vaccines do not prevent its spread, only helps ones body deal with the side effects.

Going shopping without masks on is quite a ways into our future, methinks.

[Smoove_B]

Not to mention whether or not having the vaccine prevents you from spreading the virus. My understanding is 2 of the 3 front-runner vaccines do not prevent its spread, only helps ones body deal with the side effects.

Exactly correct. There's a huge difference between a vaccine that mitigates the effects of the virus on a person vs a vaccine that does that as well as prevents a disease from spreading. Between the specific type of vaccine and the unknown reduction of transmission risk, I'm pretty confident in saying we're going to be wearing masks (or told we should be wearing masks) through at least this time next year, possibly into 2022.

[Daehawk]

Ya just keep thinking that. As soon as there in a vaccine most Americans will drop masks totally even if they dont get a vaccine because they'll figure others getting it will protect them too. Americans are not smart on the whole. One might be. A herd is not.

[noxiousdog]

Not to mention whether or not having the vaccine prevents you from spreading the virus. My understanding is 2 of the 3 front-runner vaccines do not prevent its spread, only helps ones body deal with the side effects.

Exactly correct. There's a huge difference between a vaccine that mitigates the effects of the virus on a person vs a vaccine that does that as well as prevents a disease from spreading. Between the specific type of vaccine and the unknown reduction of transmission risk, I'm pretty confident in saying we're going to be wearing masks (or told we should be wearing masks) through at least this time next year, possibly into 2022.

Wait a second. I thought I was supposed to get the flu shot so I didn't spread the flu to other folks? Yes, I know the mRNA vaccine is different, but fundamentally it should drastically prevent replication of the virus, no?

While it's good to be cautious, the reality is we're just being cautious because we don't know yet.

[Kraken]

Furthermore, we don't know how long that protection will last. One can imagine a scenario wherein by the time the last cohort is getting their second shot, the first cohort needs a booster. If we're lucky, it will last 6-ish months (like a flu vaccine), or possibly even years. If we're unlucky, it will wear off in just a few months. We just don't know.

One can further imagine a scenario in which the GOP does its best to hobble distribution to weaken the Biden administration, but perhaps that's just paranoia.

[Skinypupy]

Enjoy what football you can this weekend, 'cause I think we're about to see things shut down (which they probably should have been in the first place).

[Smoove_B]

Furthermore, we don't know how long that protection will last. One can imagine a scenario wherein by the time the last cohort is getting their second shot, the first cohort needs a booster. If we're lucky, it will last 6-ish months (like a flu vaccine), or possibly even years. If we're unlucky, it will wear off in just a few months. We just don't know.

I think this is part of the reason my state wants to have 70% of adults vaccinated in 6 months. If they can hit that target and immunity does indeed last 6-8 months (which seems reasonable), then there's a chance of squashing it down. However, if we can only get ~40% of adults fully vaccinated (between those lost to follow up and those resisting any attempt at vaccination, we're in trouble.

[msteelers]

Enjoy what football you can this weekend, 'cause I think we're about to see things shut down (which they probably should have been in the first place).

I don’t think they will go straight to shutdown. I think they would move teams into hotels and try a “mini bubble” approach.

[Kurth]

Enjoy what football you can this weekend, 'cause I think we're about to see things shut down (which they probably should have been in the first place).

I don’t think they will go straight to shutdown. I think they would move teams into hotels and try a “mini bubble” approach.

As an Eagles fan, I wouldn’t be completely sad to see this season end prematurely!