
New restrictions in Hong Kong show that a single lockdown won’t be enough - othello
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/lockdowns-hong-kong-china-coronavirus/608932/
======
tomatocracy
The political acceptability of releasing then locking down again is likely to
be very low in my view.

Friends and colleagues I speak to who haven’t followed the modelling papers
etc think the point of a lockdown is to eliminate the virus entirely - not
contain, not delay but eliminate entirely. There is also a very strong fear of
getting the virus (many of the same people are convinced that it’s a death
sentence almost akin to Ebola). I suspect that these views are very widespread
and this is why the lockdowns currently enjoy strong popular support.

A release followed by a second lockdown would, I think, be viewed as an
admission that the policy was a failure therefore and would also lead to a
reassessment of how dangerous it really is amongst those people. Those still
suffering from the economic damage from the first (which will be almost
everyone) will have a lot of reasons to resist very hard and I think most
governments in democratic countries would struggle to implement such a policy.

~~~
alexandercrohde
Right, if there's a resurgence I'm not participating. The cure would be worse
than the disease.

I encourage susceptible populations to quarantine themselves, rather than
everybody quarantining. We must work, date, and life must go on.

~~~
GavinMcG
The cure would likely be worse than the disease _for you_.

Are millions of people dying an acceptable trade-off for us to be able to
date?

~~~
izend
There is a legitimate debate of: Cause an Economic Depression vs X times the
number of yearly deaths.

Note, the Economic Depression would indirectly cause deaths.

For example everyone agreed that not shutting down the global economic was the
correct decision in regards to the Swine Flu pandemic which did cause 100,000
or more deaths.

What if it was 1 million projected deaths, 10 million or 50 million?

I honestly do not know the answer but there are individuals who specializes in
these decisions.

~~~
amylene
Deaths would also worsen an economic depression. Why does everybody forget
about this?

Also, an economic depression reduces air pollution which would reduce deaths.

There are lots of factors that would need to be considered. Most people I’ve
seen advocating this pov are stopping at the first order analysis.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
Because most people who don't advocate the POV are stopping at the zeroth
order analysis, saying that you're a heartless killer if you want to consider
any factors instead of just saving lives.

~~~
amylene
I can’t correct other peoples flawed thinking. But I can avoid reacting to it
when that reaction makes my thinking worse.

Just because someone does something I don’t like doesn’t mean I should base my
viewpoint around rejecting theirs.

------
empath75
Successive lockdowns and easings are probably going to continue for up to two
years. Anybody arguing that the stock market or the economy is going to bounce
back quickly in the next two months are either bullshitting you or deluding
themselves.

No “stimulus” package is going to be effective, because you can’t use spending
to stimulate an economy which has been forced to stop producing goods and
services. All you will accomplish is inflation as more money chases fewer
goods and services.

~~~
IgorPartola
/r/Wallstreetbets just had someone put $775k, the person’s entire net worth,
into options on the idea that the market will crash by 6/19\. I am sure
comments like yours give them hope that they are right.

Personally, I think that the economy will change significantly, but crash vs
recover for markets is different. If suddenly workers got a fair wage and
everyone got universal healthcare we could easily see the country doing a lot
better while the markets would tank as this would undoubtedly be paid for by
loss of corporate profits.

~~~
bob33212
From a first principal perspective there is no reason why anyone should think
that it is impossible for China or another country to create 2 billion vaccine
doses in the next 6 months. There are plenty of reasons to say this will not
happen but it isn't impossible. If it does happen everything flips very
quickly.

~~~
empath75
It’s also possible no vaccine will be discovered as there are no coronavirus
vaccines.

~~~
fedorareis
There are no human approved coronavirus vaccines. There were a number of SARS
vaccines that never finished clinical trials because SARS became pretty much a
non-issue before they finished. There are also coronavirus vaccines approved
for animals. Both of these things could potentially help with faster
developing a vaccine for COVID-19.

------
jimmySixDOF
There is another study from Harvard released this week saying the same thing
about multiple surges of containment:

[1]
[https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/927586](https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/927586)

------
chiefalchemist
But of course. If you intentionally prevent ppl from being infected then they
remain susceptible. Short of a vaccine, you can't put it off forever. Those
ppl can't hide forever.

This is an expected - or should be - result of "flatten the curve." FTC is not
about the virus per se, it's about the healthcare system. That is, to not
exceed the volume the healthcare system can handle.

Put another way, an increase in the number of positives isn't necessarily a
bad thing. If if stays towards the 80% who are asymptomatic or low risk then
the more the better. They'll get it. Recovery and will be past it. The key
number - the number the media should be emphasizing - is the positives in high
risk individuals. That's the curve we don't want to see spike.

Furthermore, it's where those happen. One-thousand as 50 in 20 cities is not
the same as 500 in one city (e.g., NYC) and the other 500 distributed evenly
elsewhere.

The aggregate numbers make great - but crap - headlines. The understanding is
in the details.

~~~
alexandercrohde
It's amazing how many people copy-paste knowledge without doing the most basic
logical checks on it.

For example, nobody yet explained to me how flattening the curve is gonna make
much difference when say NYC has 3,000 ventilators, and the average time on a
ventilator is 20 days. If 1/100 of NYC's 8 million population need a
ventilator that'd still be 80,000 ventilators needed.

So flattening would reduce the deaths to 74,000 instead of 77,000?

[To be clear I'm not saying this math is exact. But I am saying I am owed the
actual math by people who want me to change my life over it]

~~~
patall
8.000.000 by 100 is 80.000.

And if the governor is able to somehow organize another 30000 ventilators in 3
weeks, your death count goes down from 77k to 44k. Or 11 times 9/11.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
The improvement isn't quite that high, because people sick enough to need a
ventilator are often going to die even if they get one, but I agree with your
point that increasing medical capacity is the high-leverage play here.

------
lazylizard
Why wont the world stay at home together for 3 months? Lets start apr1! Then
by july there will be no more covid19. And lots of other infectious diseases
too, i imagine..

~~~
sebazzz
If only there was a way to suspend the entire economy.

------
soared
Technically this is clickbait - the title's implication is that we'll have
more lockdowns in the future, while the article only talks about how the
current lockdown will ebb and flow. If something is lifted and reinstated its
really the same lockdown, not a new one.

I was hoping to read an article about the potential of other coronaviruses or
threats that may cause global lockdowns in the future.

~~~
makomk
Ir's arguably less clickbaity than saying that the lockdown is going to last
for the next two years, which is the alternative framing.

------
chippy
Baity title - the actual article was more interesting than the sensationalist
baity title suggested

~~~
xwdv
Quite an inflammatory title too. Don’t tell me what to do.

------
not_exactly__
“ Hong Kong and Singapore were early examples of places that were able to
contain the spread of the virus”

 _cough_ TAIWAN _cough_

Again for the people in the back:

T•A•I•W•A•N

~~~
CydeWeys
Being an island nation is definitely an advantage in this regard.

~~~
dominotw
not for UK evidently

~~~
patall
Which evidence? Do we have a continental control UK where results are the
same?

In my parents county, there is one village with 9 cases out of 800 inhabitants
that has been put on full lock-down, nobody is allowed to leave the village.
Unfortunately, there are hundreds of hiking trails in the area and somehow,
some of the locals have gotten 'lost' in their backyard, only to reappear in
the next towns supermarket.

------
ngcc_hk
China woo this again. Not sure n ext round will be 20 years long if they
continue their eating and Gov social control.

------
jariel
This is terrible thinking: South Korea and other places have not locked down
and they have effectively contained the virus.

We are doing Trillions of damage they are avoiding. Given the costs we should
be spending billions studying what they are doing.

We need to understand more effectively how the virus is spreading and focus on
those spots, not this lockdown stuff which is too costly.

Some basic policies like mask-wearing for everyone in public, gloves, and
masks in restaurants, and on subways busses, N95 maybe for anyone in crowded
area jobs, anyone with any sickness immediately self-isolates etc..

These total shut-downs seem like a 'home vacay' for now but it will start
causing serious pain very soon.

Edit: I should add by 'trillions in damage' I'm not worried about
shareholders; this will have serious consequences for people. Many millions
are losing their jobs, millions will be evicted, foreclosed, homeless,
jobless, and otherwise, have their lives severely disrupted. FYI in America no
job = no healthcare. At some point, the shelves stop being stocked. We need to
be smart.

~~~
chinathrow
From the article: HK did in fact not effectively contain the virus.

"In recent days, this semblance of normalcy has vanished. The number of
confirmed cases here has ticked upward at a much quicker pace than before,
worrying health experts. The government reversed course on its easing of
restrictions, sending workers back home, closing parks and city facilities,
and reiterating calls for social distancing."

~~~
bilbo0s
It's actually even worse than that on the ground in HK right now.

Ban on non-residents. Groups of more than 4 people are broken up. A growing
skittish-ness about "foreigners", (thought to be the people who brought the
second wave of infections to HK). Etc etc.

HK and Tokyo are not examples to be emulated, they are examples of what we
should be trying to avoid.

~~~
jariel
"HK and Tokyo are not examples to be emulated, they are examples of what we
should be trying to avoid."

???

Japan has one of the lowest rates of infection/million and data shows that
spread is considerably slower.

Assuming the data is not fiction, obviously, we should be emulating them, not
ignoring them.

FYI they also have not 'locked down'.

They're literally stopping the virus while not destroying their economies,
while we are putting millions out of work while the virus expands.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
It's likely, unfortunately, that the Tokyo data is fiction. There's been a
significant spike in new cases starting immediately after the Olympics were
officially delayed.

~~~
jariel
I share your skepticism, that said, it'd be nary impossible to hide hospitals
overflowing with patients etc. there'd be too many whistleblowers in the
medical community. So we'll have to keep an eye on Japan.

