• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

COVID concerns in the Northeast

da-bum

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
89
Points
8
The likelihood of spreading post-vaccine is probably going to be similar to the people who get Covid twice....it's a 1-in-100,000-1,000,000 people scenario. Doesn't mean the media won't scare you with it.
That number is just made up based on people who actually reported it. An actual study in UK indicated after 5 months, with slightly less than 1% of people who had been previously infected has caught it again after 5 months. This doesn't mean chance of catching is less than 1%, just that less than 1% of people in the study caught it again. The actual rate of being protected within 5 months is 83%

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/14/cov...round-as-much-immunity-as-vaccines-study.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: abc

ScottySkis

Active member
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
11,998
Points
38
Location
Middletown NY
Great news for Killington ppl:

""KILLINGTON TO DROP PARKING RESERVATIONS EXCEPT FOR BUSY DAYS!!!
"Starting Tuesday, January 19, we will only require parking reservations on Saturdays, Sundays and Peak Days, February 15-19."

This is great news as it removes a step that at least they now seem to see as unnecessary when they were unlikely to hit capacity. Opening up more bases, lifts, and terrain gives Killington more wiggle room now for sure.
"
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,773
Points
48
Location
PRNJ
I have a feeling you're going to be hearing about this study soon. And that there's going to be a lot of revisionist history among politicians in the coming years.

For those who dont like reading scientific studies, across 10 different nations they found no statistically significant benefit of mandatory lockdown orders on having a beneficial COVID19 effect over that of simple voluntary measures like social distancing or reducing your travel.

Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19

 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
490
Points
28
I have a feeling you're going to be hearing about this study soon. And that there's going to be a lot of revisionist history among politicians in the coming years.

For those who dont like reading scientific studies, across 10 different nations they found no statistically significant benefit of mandatory lockdown orders on having a beneficial COVID19 effect over that of simple voluntary measures like social distancing or reducing your travel.

Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19

shhhhhhhhhhh, you aren't supposed to say the quiet part out loud
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
17,341
Points
63
Location
Brooklyn, CT
I have a feeling you're going to be hearing about this study soon. And that there's going to be a lot of revisionist history among politicians in the coming years.

For those who dont like reading scientific studies, across 10 different nations they found no statistically significant benefit of mandatory lockdown orders on having a beneficial COVID19 effect over that of simple voluntary measures like social distancing or reducing your travel.

Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19



And I wouldn't be shocked at all, in say 5 or 10 years, if studies show that the harm done from a psychological standpoint, from the lockdowns, has a far greater toll on many in society than the disease process itself, for all but those who had multiple co-morbidities before hand.

It really is getting to the point, where if one removes the panic and hysteria that has been drummed up around most things COVID, and takes a scientific backed, critical look at things, it will show for most that social distancing, proper face/hand hygiene and mask use, and a relatively normal society for the vast majority of the population, is, and should of been the way to go.

What that brings into play, is that yes, you do need to single out certain members of society, because their risk is far greater, and trying to single out specific groups, (especially if it's not of a political ideological nature it seems ;):rolleyes: ) just isn't an acceptable thing, even if the science shows that it's the more prudent, realistic thing to do with the greatest benefit for most
 

gittist

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2019
Messages
56
Points
8
And I wouldn't be shocked at all, in say 5 or 10 years, if studies show that the harm done from a psychological standpoint, from the lockdowns, has a far greater toll on many in society than the disease process itself, for all but those who had multiple co-morbidities before hand.

It really is getting to the point, where if one removes the panic and hysteria that has been drummed up around most things COVID, and takes a scientific backed, critical look at things, it will show for most that social distancing, proper face/hand hygiene and mask use, and a relatively normal society for the vast majority of the population, is, and should of been the way to go.

What that brings into play, is that yes, you do need to single out certain members of society, because their risk is far greater, and trying to single out specific groups, (especially if it's not of a political ideological nature it seems ;):rolleyes: ) just isn't an acceptable thing, even if the science shows that it's the more prudent, realistic thing to do with the greatest benefit for most

Dr Jeff should keep an eye for a black SUV. If he's not careful they'll sneak up behind him pull a bag over his head and take him to a re-education center where they'll drain his brain and turn him into another COVID zombie for speaking his mind.
 

Edd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
5,508
Points
48
Location
Newmarket, NH
Dr Jeff should keep an eye for a black SUV. If he's not careful they'll sneak up behind him pull a bag over his head and take him to a re-education center where they'll drain his brain and turn him into another COVID zombie for speaking his mind.
Is that a thing that happens?
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,384
Points
63
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
What the study didn't look into, is the different social structure of the two comparison country.

Of all the country studied, South Korea is the ONLY Asia country. Even in the study, it mentioned Korea "
relied on intensive investments in testing, contact tracing, and isolation of infected cases and close contacts", a combination none of the comparison country bother to even try. Most of the countries in comparison have limited testing, even less contact tracing, and NO enforceable isolation of infected cases.

Sweden is the only country worthy as a comparison country. But there, also to some degree Germany, the population tend to conform to the "recommended" guideline of social distancing and even in Sweden, large gathering are banned. Whilst in the "other" country, those same guideline were put out, IGNORED by majority of the population. Even in Sweden, it slowly adds more restrictive measures as case number climbs. The biggest difference being, most other countries in the study the case number climb fast due largely to the fact people totally ignore the social distancing "suggestions"!

What the study didn't bother to add to the comparison, are countries like Singapore, Taiwan etc. Where they're VERY AGGRESSIVE at the beginning in ENFORCING social distancing and isolation of infected. Basically, just like South Korea. None of those countries gone to full lockdown either! Majority of Asian countries didn't go to the extensive lockdown Europe and north America did. But the biggest difference is, their government were extremely intrusive in their enforcement of the limited social distancing measure, which most western countries either unable or unwilling to do.

Lockdown should have never been the first option. And it wasn't. The same "Korean approach" was tried in New York City, for less than a week! But due to lack of testing, no enforcement of social distancing, and non-existing contact tracing, it DIDN'T WORK!

(the same can be said about Italy too. local politicians came out suggest people go on with their social life as usual even after social distancing recommendations)

When you have population that ignores the more sensible behavior, and refuse to take personal responsibility, you end up with sky rocketing case loads. By which point, a full lockdown became the only options left!

What the study REALLY end up proving*, is lockdown isn't nearly as good as a combination of social distancing, contact tracing and isolation of infected. The latter was always the "preferred" approach. But it didn't work in most western countries used as comparison because the population wouldn't comply! So they got lockdown. They deserve it! We deserve what we got!

(*) The study didn't exactly "prove" it because it didn't bother including other Asian countries that didn't use full lockdown but enforced social distancing measures. Had they done that, the commonality and contrast between the two approaches would have been much clearer.
 

skiur

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
852
Points
18
Dr Jeff should keep an eye for a black SUV. If he's not careful they'll sneak up behind him pull a bag over his head and take him to a re-education center where they'll drain his brain and turn him into another COVID zombie for speaking his mind.
Is that a thing that happens?

Happened to my neighbor last week.
 

da-bum

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
89
Points
8
I have a feeling you're going to be hearing about this study soon. And that there's going to be a lot of revisionist history among politicians in the coming years.

For those who dont like reading scientific studies, across 10 different nations they found no statistically significant benefit of mandatory lockdown orders on having a beneficial COVID19 effect over that of simple voluntary measures like social distancing or reducing your travel.

Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19

Doesn't look like they are comparing apples to apples.......Sweden vs France? How about Sweden vs its Nordic neighbors. Maybe its not lockdown or not, but how hard it is enforced. Apparently, they did not include China in the study because their lockdown was absolute and rigidly enforced, thus bringing their runaway case level down to practically zero and now life goes on there.

There are a thousand ways to play with statistics, and this is one of it.
 

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
490
Points
28
Apparently, they did not include China in the study because their lockdown was absolute and rigidly enforced, thus bringing their runaway case level down to practically zero and now life goes on there.
It helps to have a more successful approach when you have inside knowledge of the virus as you're willingly allowing it to spread around the globe while taking extreme precautions in your own country and lying about it to the rest of the world
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
17,341
Points
63
Location
Brooklyn, CT
Dr Jeff should keep an eye for a black SUV. If he's not careful they'll sneak up behind him pull a bag over his head and take him to a re-education center where they'll drain his brain and turn him into another COVID zombie for speaking his mind.

The Black SUV people are probably disappointed that dose #1 of the vaccine that I got a bit over 2 weeks ago didn't have the full effect they wanted on me! :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: o_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_O

I'm guessing that they'll have to bring me into the "special" vaccination room in about 2 weeks when I get dose #2!! :eek::eek::eek::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

da-bum

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2017
Messages
89
Points
8
It helps to have a more successful approach when you have inside knowledge of the virus as you're willingly allowing it to spread around the globe while taking extreme precautions in your own country and lying about it to the rest of the world
The rest of the world was watching the extreme approach that was taken place in China and took no action, except for Southeast and East Asian countries. The US then saw what was happening in Italy and thought it woudn't happen here. The rest of US saw what was happening in NYC and thought it wouldn't happen in their area......until it did.
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,384
Points
63
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
The rest of the world was watching the extreme approach that was taken place in China and took no action, except for Southeast and East Asian countries. The US then saw what was happening in Italy and thought it woudn't happen here. The rest of US saw what was happening in NYC and thought it wouldn't happen in their area......until it did.
Yes and no.

Most of the Asian countries didn't have a full lockdown like in China. In fact, most countries in Asia kept their schools open.

I wonder if that's where Sweden got the same idea. Sweden's population are more conforming than the rest of Europe. It's quite possible the "other Nordic countries" could have work too.

But Italy? France? Never mind in the US, when you have the highest office holder calling to "pack the churches by Easter". Did Sweden pack their churches on Easter???

From the article: "These observations are consistent with a model where the severity of the risk perceived by individuals was a stronger driver of anti-contagion behaviors than the specific nature of the NPIs"

Translation, those country whose population takes the virus seriously behave better. And the case number shows that.

p.s.
Now I'm beginning to think maybe the Vermonters got it right. The people there took it seriously. So they kept a low case number even when their neighbors' numbers are going up. Maybe I should move up my trip there now. Low case number, snow, skiing, what's not to like?
 
Last edited:

icecoast1

Active member
Joined
Mar 27, 2018
Messages
490
Points
28
The rest of the world was watching the extreme approach that was taken place in China and took no action,
Largely due to being misled by China early on in the pandemic. Perhaps if outside medical officials were allowed in early on, we might have actually seen what was going on and taken a different approach. I'd be willing to bet, you wouldn't see people like Fauci saying it's nothing to worry about and won't be a problem for us. And it could have lead to a much more reasonable and more effective approach than the one we took.
The US then saw what was happening in Italy and thought it woudn't happen here.
We were already in a lockdown or stay at home order when Italy was going through the peak of their infection curve, and Italy was widely cited as a reason for the measures we took, and what happened in italy never really happened here (perhaps maybe in NYC early on, but not to the extent it happened in Italy)
 

abc

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,384
Points
63
Location
Lower Hudson Valley
what happened in italy never really happened here
The article suggests: "severity of the risk perceived by individuals was a stronger driver of anti-contagion behaviors".

If you don't mind what happened, which is a smaller scale of what happened in Italy ("never really happened"), there's no need to do ANYTHING.
 

1dog

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
293
Points
28
I have a feeling you're going to be hearing about this study soon. And that there's going to be a lot of revisionist history among politicians in the coming years.

For those who dont like reading scientific studies, across 10 different nations they found no statistically significant benefit of mandatory lockdown orders on having a beneficial COVID19 effect over that of simple voluntary measures like social distancing or reducing your travel.

Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19

Alex Berenson, formerly of WSJ has written extensively on this very topic.
 

1dog

Active member
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
293
Points
28
It helps to have a more successful approach when you have inside knowledge of the virus as you're willingly allowing it to spread around the globe while taking extreme precautions in your own country and lying about it to the rest of the world
Correct - let us ban all inter-country travel from and to Wuhan, but not to other countries . . Jan 1st or possibly Dec 2019
 
Top