
A Lesson from the Spanish Flu: Don’t End Restrictions Too Soon - doener
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-08/a-lesson-from-the-spanish-flu-don-t-end-restrictions-too-soon
======
cm2187
I find it extraordinary that the goalpost has completely moved without even a
debate about it.

We were told to enter this lockdown to flatten the curve to under the capacity
of the healthcare system so it is not overwhelmed.

Now we are being told we can’t leave the lockdown as someone more could die,
ie the objective is not to remain under the capacity of the healthcare system
but to go to zero deaths at all costs.

If the healthcare system has spare capacity, which seems to be the case pretty
much everywhere, this lockdown is no longer justified.

~~~
rosywoozlechan
I also find it extraordinary that unelected health officials have been allowed
to dictate the freedoms of millions of people. These bureaucrats are experts
in health and not economics, politics, and law and we're all beholden to them.
They're qualified in a specific and narrow field but their decisions are
impacting so much more. There's more to our lives and well being than an r0
number.

What we are experiencing right now is a considerable loss of freedom, this is
what government intervention looks like, but into the most cherished aspects
of our personal lives. How much of this control are governments going to try
and hang on to after this is all over?

~~~
didibus
As far as I know, they are not allowed to dictate the freedoms of millions.
They simply report and provide guidance from their angle of expertise, and it
is up to elected officials to aggregate the advice of all their consulted
experts and their own judgement and hopefully with a bit of listening to their
populace as well, to make the decisions.

~~~
lbeltrame
You are correct. However, some elected officials have (for incompetence, or
just wanting to deflect responsibility) completely abdicated from their
functions, and they act (or say they act) like whatever the experts tell them.

"We'll reopen when the scientists say so" was a common mantra the past two
months in my country. That's an admission of giving up responsibility, IMO.

On top of that, experts not always agree, which makes things even more
confusing. Some say (again, my country) that masks and social distancing are
"worthless" (in favor of indefinitely long lockdowns), others say that they
_might_ work, others say that they _definitely_ work.

~~~
rbg246
What would be a better course of action to take in this crisis? Would you have
preferred for your elected leaders to not have taken the consensus expert
view?

Or do you think the consensus view of experts is not agreed upon currently?

~~~
lbeltrame
The latter. I believe there's no real consensus at this point, save for a few
points, of which the minutiae require more investigation. A lot on this virus
is being learned "on the go" as the situation develops.

Also, some choices made at the time were made in haste, now, like the Science
blog warned about "pandemic research exceptionalism", we need to make sure
that public policy is subject to the same rigorous line of thinking (an
extreme example of _not_ doing so is the bleaching of a beach in Spain), IOW
no decisions simply "because it's a crisis".

Public policy and elected officials need to be aware of these unknowns when
taking decisions, especially since many of these, in one way or the other,
carry negative externalities.

~~~
rbg246
Interesting.

My take has been that they have taken a conservative action with regards to
the virus, I've seen locking down as a way for the government to slow down
time to try and work out what is going on before then taking a more considered
point of view.

There was so much confusion in mid March about what would happen and lockdowns
seem to have slowed things down a bit to get a clear head about what the path
through is going to be like and I hope they don't rush their next decisions as
there are so many things that are still not known.

In the future these current decisions could be wrong and will be wrong, I'm
hoping that they aren't badly wrong but who knows... It seems to be considered
on what mainstream scientific consensus but that's been wrong before but I
feel it's the best we have given the situation.

------
OatsAndHoney
The title is just doublespeak. The article ends with the line: "At 12 weeks,
he says, the benefits from a shutdown exceed the costs."

The economy is a human invention, there is nothing natural about it. You can't
go on the safari and find a wild S&P500. These consistent demands in the media
for a blood sacrifice is outrageous and dehumanizing to the people that have
to suffer the consequences.

~~~
bad_user
While I'm a proponent of restrictions, your argument doesn't make much sense.

It's irrelevant if the economy is human-made or a natural phenomenon, because
it is nevertheless what keeps us fed and with a roof over our heads.

There are indications that this depression is as bad as the Great Depression
and might be even worse. It is true that there is no food shortage right now,
but we might have one, at least from where I'm from, esp due to drought, which
affected crops all over Europe. And guess what, during the Great Depression
people starved to death.

So if the restrictions continue, I sure hope there's a better plan in place
other than taxing the living shit out of the middle class that still have jobs
and pay their taxes. Because we all know that the money required to keep the
unemployed from starving will not come from the rich.

~~~
Barrin92
Food shortages would be the results of lack of agricultural output and
disruption of supply chains, which by and large is not happening. (At least to
no degree that would put you at risk of serious shortages in Europe)

Non-essential workers don't influence a food shortage. If those workers stay
home their income may be hurt for a while, but in contrast to 1918 we have a
social security system. Nobody's going to starve.

edit: For reference, Greece suffered from 18-25% unemployment _for the last
ten years_. The economic effects of the pandemic will have bad consequences,
but it's not an existential issue, it just sucks and will destroy some wealth.

~~~
Izkata
> and disruption of supply chains, which by and large is not happening. (At
> least to no degree that would put you at risk of serious shortages in
> Europe)

It's starting in the US.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/16/meat-
proc...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/16/meat-processing-
plants-are-closing-due-covid-19-outbreaks-beef-shortfalls-may-follow/)

[https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/26/business/tyson-foods-nyt-
ad/i...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/26/business/tyson-foods-nyt-
ad/index.html)

------
supernova87a
Using value of statistical life figures of the federal government, and lives
potentially saved by the shutdown, we are still saving much more in life $
value than the cost of the shutdown on economic output.

[https://www.npr.org/transcripts/835571843](https://www.npr.org/transcripts/835571843)

And, I might add, the situation isn't fully yet understood, so it's not like
anyone making these calculations is doing so with the real known risk factored
in.

~~~
logicchains
Often public policy will use "quality-adjusted life years" saved as a more
precise metric in decision-making, which allows for valuing e.g. an
intervention that saves people 10 years of life on average more than one that
saves 2 years of life on average. Using this metric, it's not clear that we're
saving more in life $ value than the cost of the shutdown:
[https://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/economic-
cost-o...](https://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/economic-cost-of-
flattening-the-curve/) .

------
tinus_hn
The first problem with this article is that they calculate peoples worth based
on expected earnings but as if they’ve still got their whole carrier ahead of
them. But in reality Covid-19 just is not very dangerous for people under 50.

And of course that whole reality thing where there is an end to giving people
free money while nothing is being produced and the stores are not going to
remain stocked if the factories are closed.

~~~
foogazi
But there are things being produced and factories are open

------
EGreg
* Barro's calculation doesn't take into account the economic losses from an extended shutdown. But in an email, he says any decline in gross domestic product has to be weighed against the economic value of saving lives*

Not so simple. Consider that the shutdowns themselves can lead to even worse
consequences:

[https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN21Y2X7](https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN21Y2X7)

And I just posted an article about millions becoming infected by tuberculosis,
an even more serious issue.

Here is the thing...

The politicians and media in the west have utterly failed us, telling us not
to wear masks. The WHO still continues to do this and YouTube censors anyone
who disagrees. It’s not just bad for free speech — it’s irresponsible! In
Austria, masks led to a 90% drop in cases, as they did across Asia.

The lockdowns are a last resort, after public policy has failed to contain the
outbreaks

Masks are supposed to protect others from you. They keep the germs in, doesn’t
let them escape when you cough or talk. An N95 mask with the valve is actually
worse than doubling up surgical masks, because the germs can go through the
valve under pressure.

What good is social distancing and quarantines when residents use elevators?
Masks on the other hand greatly reduce R0 and aerosols.

Cuomo just found out the “shocking” statistic that most hospitalizations are
from people who stayed home. Elevators play a huge role.

Masks and gloves are a way to return back to work, restore social life in
common areas too. Please watch this video:

[https://youtu.be/oScxm_xy1i4](https://youtu.be/oScxm_xy1i4)

~~~
js8
> Consider that the shutdowns themselves can lead to even worse consequences

Are you saying that when people cannot travel by airplanes, go to a theater or
a restaurant, then this is inevitably causing children to die?

What kind of sick society is that, which cannot make a different economic
arrangement?

I understand (obviously) there are jobs that are required for functioning of
the modern society, but to claim that it cannot be organized (especially given
we have Internet) so that people could avoid mass gatherings is insane.

~~~
neilwilson
What we are discovering under the lockdown arrangements is precisely which
jobs are actually required in the economy, and which are there just to cause
some financial figure to increase.

Other than the stupefying boredom and colossal holes in the safety net due to
the ideological blinkers of politicians and their cronies, exactly what isn't
being done that needs to be done in the real world?

The farmers around here are still as busy as ever with their lambs. The wheat
is growing in the fields. The rapespeed is below and as fragrant as normal.
Supermarkets are stocked, and food is on the shelf. The power is on. The
Internet is working. The drains function and refuse is being cleared.

Are some people scared that we might realise just how much activity is really
fluff?

~~~
Izkata
> The farmers around here are still as busy as ever with their lambs. The
> wheat is growing in the fields. The rapespeed is below and as fragrant as
> normal. Supermarkets are stocked, and food is on the shelf.

Raw milk is being dumped because processing facilities to make it safe to
drink are shut down. Meat processing centers are shut down or running at below
capacity - beef is already disappearing from shelves. Vegetables likewise,
farmers are losing ways to get to market.

The lockdowns have interrupted the path from source to store, and we're
approaching a food shortage because of it. People will go hungry if we can't
get the economy moving again.

~~~
alwillis
Two Walmart supermarkets near me are shutdown because employees tested
positive for COVID-19 and at least one has died. Which explains why they
cancelled my delivery order a few days ago. The app didn’t mention why my
order was canceled…

Instacart is more expensive but about 20% of what I order is out of stock.

So basic groceries aren’t as available as they were a month ago.

~~~
js8
I think this is what is gonna happen (in the U.S.). Because of lack of
coordinated shutdown of non-essential economic activity, much more people will
become infected, causing eventual shut downs of more essential activity.

So reopening the economy in order to save it is completely backwards. It's
like drinking alcohol when you're suffering from cold, which will cause more
heat loss. It might feel better, but in fact, it is making things worse, by
not conserving heat on the parts of your body that are less essential for your
survival.

------
xyzzyz
We’re already locked for twice as long as we were for Spanish Flu.

~~~
coopsmgoops
Counterpoint: The world is way more than twice as connected as it was then at
a macro level.

~~~
js8
Not only that, COVID19 also spreads slower. The incubation period is longer.

------
neonate
[https://archive.md/wggSS](https://archive.md/wggSS)

------
paypalcust83
And don't call it the "Spanish Flu," it's the "Kansas Flu."

~~~
alvatar
I find it interesting that it’s ok to call it Spanish Flu (while it wasn’t
even originated there), but is politically incorrect to call this one the
Wuhan virus or the Chinese flu. Political correctness has always a political
intention I guess.

~~~
arboc
It's kind of a complicated issue. I do think that we should refer to the 1918
flu as just that. However, since that's so far back in the past, you won't
find a lot of people pointing their fingers at Spain and accusing Spaniards of
being inhuman scum. On the other hand, you have a LOT of people saying
"Chinese flu" who then jump to the conclusion that the Chinese people
themselves are to blame and inherently 'bad', aggravating racism against the
Chinese. The Chinese government deserve a lot of criticism for so many things,
including their persecution (and most likely execution in some cases) of
Chinese citizens who reported on the pandemic. But hate crimes happening right
now against Chinese, and people who happen to look remotely Chinese, are very
real. I see little benefit in referring to the 2019 Coronavirus/COVID-19 as a
"Chinese flu", while I see huge downsides.

In sum, while I think "Spanish" flu is more factually incorrect, I see talk
about a "Chinese" flu as more acutely harmful. So - 1918 flu, COVID-19, IMO.

~~~
Gigablah
It's ironic that you talk about stigmatization, yet indulge in baseless
speculation about execution of pandemic reporters.

~~~
arboc
I think "stigmatization" isn't quite the word for spreading
disinformation/speculations about the actions of a government, but you're
right.

[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-
china-...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-
journalist/chinese-citizen-journalist-resurfaces-after-going-missing-in-wuhan-
idUSKCN22515X)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chen_Qiushi#February_2020_disa...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chen_Qiushi#February_2020_disappearance)

"Citizens reporting on the epidemic have been made to disappear" would be a
more factual description. And as can be seen from the first article linked
above, "disappearance" doesn't necessarily lead to a fatal end.

There is some not-direct-but-still-relevant support for being inclined to
think that death is not entirely out of the question for those reporters, e.
g.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China)

But again, I think you were right to call me out on speculating. We just don't
know, and if there's one thing we don't need more of right now, it's
speculation from non-experts like me. Thank you.

