“Politicians appear to implement lockdowns as a response to social-distancing behaviors in their areas, rather than as drivers of those behaviors.”
“Is it possible that while lockdowns do not influence the timing of social distancing, they do influence its scale? There is actually some evidence of this. While issuing a lockdown probably doesn’t initiate social distancing, it might make social distancing a bit more aggressive. The figure below shows how social distancing has proceeded since March 11 in states with and without shelter-in-place orders (SIPs).” - The Public Discourse
It’s rare these days to see articles that push back a bit on the majority narrative but aren’t transparently political or otherwise agenda-driven. I don’t know if he’s right, but this is a very thoughtful look at some interesting questions.
I’m encouraged to see it. Debate is good. All the reacting and posturing we call debate these days isn’t worth much… and when it influences decision-makers, it’s worse than useless.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
One thing we don’t know is what people will voluntarily continue to do after restrictions are lifted. Though we’re all tired of it, low level fear (i.e. caution) is a strong motivator. I suspect it has become pretty habitual at this point for most, and if numbers start going up again after relaxing rules, most people will intensify their distancing etc with or without rules.
But there will always be some…
Glad you got to have your wedding! Congrats!
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I won’t try to address all the issues raised in the previous post by joeb. I assume it was written in sincerity. Maybe.
However, I would point out that multiple news outlets have reported on Mr. Trump’s “calling out” Sweden for not doing more to lockdown their population more aggressively. He compared their higher death rates to similar countries in their neighborhood of the world. So I’m not sure how the situation as joeb describes it is accurate.
Maybe you might want to walk this back a bit joeb?
There are more factors involved than just a lockdown, to be sure, but it is true that Sweden’s COVID rates are indeed higher than those of neighboring Norway and Denmark, where the cultures and lifestyles are similar. My thought is that you have a certain number of people who will consider the data, understand the reality of uncertainty, and take action to reduce their exposure. For example, my company decided that most employees would work from home a couple of weeks before governors started issuing lockdown orders—really when it became clear that the virus was very infectuous and fairly lethal as well.
On the flip side, there are others who will either misrepresent the data (“death rate so far is about the same as ordinary flu”, “fewer people have died so far than in an ordinary flu season”), or ignore it altogether, and they will, if not stopped, expose the rest of us, including the most vulnerable, to that disease. It is for them that lockdowns are devised.
Some would argue “well, if we can keep the disease out of nursing homes and away from the vulnerable, we’ll be just fine”. Well, true as far as it goes, but as the father of three daughters who work in one (2 CNAs and one in food service), I don’t know how you do that. The people who work there are young, some of them dedicated, some of them “going somewhere” (usually RN or other college), and a third portion are “dead enders” who work there because that’s really their best option.
They’re the ones who smoke, come in hung over, and are probably your most likely source for infectious disease. Open up the bars and restaurants, allow large gatherings, and a good portion of them will be there. So what do you do? Keep in mind that not only are most nursing homes working HARD to keep the CNAs they have (it can be depressing working at a place where people basically go to die), and if you fire people for coming to work tired or smoking, you’re likely to “get to know lawyers on a non-personal basis”. Even “hung over” is somewhat subjective and….if they’re doing their job, your lawyers will tell you not to discipline or fire them.
I’m open to less intrusive solutions than overall lockdowns, but we need to figure out how it’s going to work. I don’t see an easy path.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I’m seeing a lot of science vs emotion over the Sweden thing. Although the science is not settled on the proper approach, the theory based on previous scientific research on disease spread is suggesting that Sweden will initially have a higher death rate, but then the death rate will quickly decline once herd immunity slows the spread. (herd immunity is not 100% being infected, but rather enough people infected that the spread slows and eventually stops). The hope is that even though Sweden has a higher death rate early on, that they will not have a severe second wave and will thus have a lower death rate overall.
The verdict is still out on whether or not this theory is correct, but it is not a theory that is based on any political party. Experts in the field over a variety of political leanings have differences of opinion on these matters. Only time will tell if Sweden is correct or not. To turn the Sweden approach into a Trump thing makes people sound uniformed and makes me question the credibility of other things they have to say on these matters.
Congratulations on your recent marriage Josh!
Dr. Paul Henebury
I am Founder of Telos Ministries, and Senior Pastor at Agape Bible Church in N. Ca.
[Paul Henebury]Congratulations on your recent marriage Josh!
Thanks Paul!
Discussion