Coronavirus (Sports-Related and General)

zambonir 2020-04-19 06:01:13 UTC #683

Gammons tackles some of the baseball issues. Firstly, that there probably won't be baseball with fans as we know it until there is a vaccine. Secondly, as such, this will be a three-year process to completely reshape the game at all levels.

But, more immediately, assuming there is some kind of season he suggests you could also have 3-4 levels of minor leaguers at the complexes to keep player development going. Such a season could be as soon as (late) June or as late as August through Thanksgiving.

He also throws out some bigger picture what-ifs, such as contraction, or certain franchises having to move if they can't weather the storm. (Not just Tampa and Oakland, also Baltimore and Cleveland).

zambonir 2020-04-19 22:17:07 UTC #684

Lawman 2020-04-20 03:15:09 UTC #685

First time jobless claims in recent weeks:

215,000

285,000

3.3 million (released 3/26)

6.6 million

5.4 million (released 4/16)

22 million people filed in a month (and many couldn’t due to system overload)!

2008-2009 crisis lost 8 million jobs in two years.

blackrock
expects the economy to drop 15% from 2019 levels.

2019 GDP: $19.073 trillion

-15% = $16.212 trillion

2012 GDP: $16.197 trillion

In Feb 2020, the US had 152.48 million people employed. If 35 million jobs will be lost it drops to 117.4 million. July 1995 level!

Lawman 2020-04-20 20:45:49 UTC #686

New from @USC and @lapublichealth:

An antibody study showing 4% of LA has been infected. With a clear explanation:

"Infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread - and the fatality rate much lower - in L.A. County than previously thought." They estimate the true infection rate in LA was 28-55x than the reported rate (similar to the @stanford study); anybody who claims the @stanford study got it wrong somehow has basically zero case. They don't quite come out and say it's time for the lockdown to end, but they do say this:
"The estimates also suggest that we might have to recalibrate disease prediction models and rethink public health strategies."
http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328

andyb 2020-04-20 22:38:44 UTC #687

This makes sense to me though we need to remember that it is just 4% of LA county. Without social distancing we could easily get 50% infection rates on large counties. So that would mean something like 500,000 deaths nationally.

I am not sure this changes the strategy at all. Those 4% of infections are probably skewed to the young and healthy so a broad infection rate might be even worse. Yes mortality might be below 1%. That is still 10 times deadlier than the flu.

rpmcmurphy 2020-04-20 22:50:28 UTC #688

Are you implying that this study is evidence that the lockdown should end shortly? The co-lead on the study says this:

“Though the results indicate a lower risk of death among those with infection than was previously thought, the number of COVID-related deaths each day continues to mount, highlighting the need for continued vigorous prevention and control efforts," said Dr. Paul Simon, chief science officer at L.A. County Department of Public Health and co-lead on the study.

This study has yet to be peer reviewed. It is also just the first round of an ongoing study. We should be very cautious about reading too much into this. I’m afraid it would be unwise to change the overall strategy based on a preliminary report.

Lawman 2020-04-21 03:07:26 UTC #689

Well, I had seen this on twitter in passing and wanted to post it here, as it's both informative and interesting (and to ensure I can find it again). But, I suppose my broader point is that the social and economic toll that the lockdown is taking is tremendous.

L.A. suicide hotline sees rise in coronavirus-related calls.” LA Times

“major cities have seen spikes in calls to suicide hotlines.” - Politico 4/16/20

Cuomo aide Melissa DeRosa says state police report up to 15-20% rise in domestic violence cases.

“WellSpace Health, which runs the Sacramento region’s largest crisis center and answers calls made to the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, told FOX40 that there was a 40% increase in calls between February and March.”

“Anti-anxiety medication prescriptions have spiked 34% during the coronavirus pandemic.” - 4/16/20

Ferguson estimates that opening schools will up Corona deaths by 2%. That’s 2K more deaths if Corona were to kill 100K in the US.

Every % (100 basis points) rise in Unemployment ups suicides by 0.99%. If Unemployment averages “only” 20% this year, it will add 8K suicides.

In 2017, Drug ODs killed 70K. In 2018, 48K died from suicide.

Every 1% increase in Unemployment (that holds for a year), increases ODs by 3.3% and suicides by 0.99%. If unemployment averages 20% for 2020 instead of 3.5% it will add 38K ODs and 8K suicides.

We - on a state by state and region by region basis - are going to have to begin slowly and smartly opening up the economy and schools again. Small businesses, gyms, restaurants, hotels, houses of worship. NY is randomly testing 3,000 people statewide this week to get a snapshot of antibody counts. If the choice is to do it this week, next week, or the June 1, as long as the local hospitals have capacity to handle a spike in CV cases which may accompany even a slow opening, I'd argue to begin opening up sooner rather then later.

zambonir 2020-04-21 04:08:05 UTC #690

It seems to me there is a bit of a false comparison here, which is to say, lockdown vs. normal, virus-free life. There's no option to return to the latter, and no data on what "normal" would have been if we didn't lockdown. And from where we are now, ending the lockdown isn't going to automatically lower anxiety, depression or unemployment, plus there will be more of the same if the virus spikes again (and/or if we have to lock down again). The virus itself is a huge source of anxiety and depression and fear, not just the fact that it also causes job loss and stress at home.

Fixing things at a more structural level (be it testing or just all the problems people are having getting CARES benefits) would be just as good, if not better, as ending the lockdown. People aren't going to be coming back to restaurants, hotels and gyms to the point where it will help. There is a reason those benefits are supposed to last until July 29, but first people have to be able to get them.

Also, most states have already cancelled school - what happens to those kids if everyone goes back to work?

To me, every bad thing that people cite as a reason to "open up" will just become an even worse thing if we open up and it turns out to be a mistake. Then you get more death from the both the virus and the other stuff.

Opening up in and of itself does nothing. We need an economy where people feel safe and confident.

An equally random "saw this on the Internet," but this doesn't suggest we're out of the woods:

schillingfan 2020-04-21 04:30:49 UTC #691

The flu comparisons drive me crazy as we’ve had over 40,000 deaths in basically six weeks, most of them in the last three weeks. That’s a whole lot different than 60,000 in a year. Covod19 is clearly more dangerous.

mdougherty12 2020-04-21 05:18:21 UTC #692

The USC/LA county study (really just a press release so far) apparently used the same antibody test kit and has at least a few authors in common with the Stanford/Santa Clara county study, so they're not really independent investigations.

Lawman 2020-04-21 13:06:30 UTC #693

That, I think we definitely agree on. There's got to be a re-definition of what "normal life" will be, and I don't think anyone - doctor, politician, or citizen - can come close to defining it yet. I don't know how and where we start with beginning to open up, although I think we can allow small businesses - barbers, dry cleaners, libraries, gyms, etc.. - to begin re-opening and at reduced capacity where appropriate.

Schools, where they haven't already been cancelled, probably aren't going to open up, but perhaps we allow summer camps to open up.

Let me be clear. I'm NOT saying we should just attempt to flip a switch and open up everything all at once, with no restrictions. And there needs to be a plan on not just opening, but how to snap restrictions back in place if opening up results in a spike of CV cases. But, I am saying we need to open up as soon as safely possible to do so.

andyb 2020-04-21 13:28:55 UTC #694

This one will be interesting. It can't be done without personal contact. At the same time we all can go a month or two without a haircut and get away with it. Some time around mid-May people will be clamoring for this.

I think they end up opening and it will be dangerous.

rpmcmurphy 2020-04-21 13:33:41 UTC #695

A cautionary tale:

And this is in a place that initially is credited with having done everything right. They did far more testing and contact tracing and isolation of those who tested positive than what we are doing.

andyb 2020-04-21 13:38:44 UTC #696

A look at other country death counts shows the COVID counts are probably 30%-50% lower than reality. Even NYC is about a third low and they have been pretty careful about including probable COVID deaths in their count. This obviously counts people dying at home, sometimes from something else like a heart condition where they were too scared to go the emergency room, but it is still excess deaths caused by the virus. It is hard to believe the real count in the US will be less than 150K for the year when all is said and done. Probably more unfortunately.

Lawman 2020-04-21 13:42:18 UTC #697

Look, I think we know that any type of easing up on restrictions will lead to a spike in CV cases. There's going to be a risk inherent in that. It's going to become a judgement call as to when to begin taking that risk.

LoneStarPhan 2020-04-21 15:46:18 UTC #698

It is clear that things just cannot get back to where we started the year anytime soon. In fact, things will probably never return to what they were to start 2020. Hopefully, we learn, adapt, and move on even better things some time in the future.

There will be set backs and some things will be done too fast and maybe some too slowly. I do think it will take many months if not years for restaurants to once again be packed with long waiting lines waiting to be seated. Airlines will not return to the passenger levels of the past year for years to come. The hotel industry will suffer greatly. All of these mean loss of jobs that probably remain down for at least a couple years. We also cannot forget that each of these industries also have hundreds of companies that provide supplies and services, and these companies (many small businesses) will also cut thousands of jobs. It will not be a quick and easy recovery.

Philsmania 2020-04-21 15:56:47 UTC #699

Not surprised that suicides are spiking. There's a lot if economic hopelessness and for those already suffering anxiety issues, this all may simply be too much to bear.

Austinfan 2020-04-21 16:00:22 UTC #700

The antibody tests should be taken with a large grain of salt, as one commenter on the Santa Clara test noted, projecting those results to NYC would imply an infection rate > 100%. And many of the antibody tests have been shown to be faulty, how well has this one been vetted?

These results are an order of magnitude greater than other studies that found a 20-80% rate of non-confirmed infections as a % of all infections.

Some serious caveats:
1) coronaviruses are ubiquitous, so are the tests specific to COVID-19 or are they picking up other coronoavirus antibodies?
2) does the presence of antibodies imply immunity, or have many people experienced mild infections that weren't serious enough to provide a strong immune response
3) how does the mutations in COVID-19 impact these findings, if there are harmless variants that are being tested, do they provide immunity for more deadly strains?

There are too many unknowns to relax our diligence - a second wave of infections is inevitable, we want to ensure it's a few feet high, and not a tsunami.

Philsmania 2020-04-21 16:04:08 UTC #701

Lawman:

zambonir:

It seems to me there is a bit of a false comparison here, which is to say, lockdown vs. normal, virus-free life.
That, I think we definitely agree on. There's got to be a re-definition of what "normal life" will be, and I don't think anyone - doctor, politician, or citizen - can come close to defining it yet. I don't know how and where we start with beginning to open up, although I think we can allow small businesses - barbers, dry cleaners, libraries, gyms, etc.. - to begin re-opening and at reduced capacity where appropriate.

Schools, where they haven't already been cancelled, probably aren't going to open up, but perhaps we allow summer camps to open up.

Let me be clear. I'm NOT saying we should just attempt to flip a switch and open up everything all at once, with no restrictions. And there needs to be a plan on not just opening, but how to snap restrictions back in place if opening up results in a spike of CV cases. But, I am saying we need to open up as soon as safely possible to do so.

There was a lot wrong with the old normal--runaway income inequality, degradation of the planet, just to name a couple. The human race has the opportunity to build a better new normal from what is sure to be wreckage if an old order which is coming to pass.

zambonir 2020-04-21 17:16:32 UTC #702

The thing is there is an assumption that small business owners are desperate to re-open and employees are desperate to go back to work, but that is not entirely true. If you own a nail salon and re-open but half your employees and 75% of your customers don't come back, you are going to be in even worse trouble than you are now. If you are Gold's Gym or Supercuts maybe that's not the case but I sure wouldn't want to be one of their employees. And if we open up and then go back into shelter-in-place in six weeks things would be even worse (economically and emotionally).

In Texas they want to let all retail business reopen for pick-up. I don't think that helps anyone. The business won't be great and it just puts more people on the streets. I can't even think of a retail business right now that isn't already open that I would need to visit. Craft stores, sporting goods, record stores, chocolate shop, hardware - all open for pickup where I live. Not sure we need to tell the world, "it's cool, start going shopping every day instead of once a week" just yet.

The May 1 timing is surely not a coincidence. The real money and power in this country lies with banks and commercial real estate as well as corporations. The political pressure to "reopen" is not so your neighborhood dry-cleaner or barber can get back to work (or so we can get get clean clothes and haircuts), it's so landlords and banks and credit cards can start getting paid again as soon as possible. This is especially true in states where the party in power does not believe in social safety nets.

There isn't a state in the union that isn't currently putting a ton of energy into a plan for getting the economy back open. Different states just have very different plans, and perspectives on what's safe. But the virus won't respect that.

Obviously people are going to need to start going to their doctors. I don't see how you do hair salons or barbershops with anything other than one staffer and one customer at a time. That staffer is then taking on nearly all the risk, exposing him or herself to 10 or 12 people a day, but that's still better than if there are 2 or 3 people working and seeing customers.

There's no chance of summer camps. Most are already going to have to make the decision not to do it either for safety/liability reasons or because they know nobody is going to come, even if the whole country proclaims itself open for business tomorrow.