Maybe all those empty seats will save us
I was all set to write a pretty
pessimistic post this morning. I was going to point out that:
- While it’s
hopefully not likely, it’s very possible that there will be a new
resurgence of infections in the fall. This, combined with the fact that
there always is a resurgence in flu infections then, might lead to a more
widespread crisis in the healthcare system than has been the case so far
in our current “wave”.
- Late last
March, as Covid-19 deaths were growing at weekly rates of 542% and 690%
(in the last two weeks of March – vs. 4% currently), the governors of most
of the biggest states did the only thing they could do: lock down their
states. The federal government then issued voluntary guidelines for all
states, which were observed to some degree almost everywhere. However,
there is no appetite anywhere in the country to repeat this experience.
- So what’s
going to save us from the fall wave if we can’t lock down? There’s no
mystery: it has to be a combination of a) massive testing, b) massive
contact tracing, c) isolation of cases (not just sheltering at home, where
the virus will spread to family members) d) mask wearing, and e) finally
having the PPE that’s needed to protect health care and front line workers.
Moreover, the only way to prevent a fall wave in the first place is to
have all of these provisions in place now, since we need all of them now.
- Of course, we’ve
been way behind in all of these areas for a while. However, I became
especially pessimistic about this when I read a great story
in the latest Wired magazine that described probably the biggest
obstacle the US has in implementing this strategy to fight the virus: a
lack of trust, both in the government and in our neighbors, to do the
right thing for all.
- I will
still do a post about this article because I think it’s so important, but
for now I’ll just say this made me more pessimistic, because I couldn’t
see any way we would ever be able to turn this problem around with Donald
Trump still in office – and keep in mind that he’ll still be president
until January, even if he loses the November election. So it seemed to me
that we were very likely to be devastated by the fall wave.
- This fear was
certainly strengthened when I read that during Trump’s rally in Tulsa on
Saturday, he had restated something he’d said before: that his solution to
the problem of rising test numbers is to slow down testing. And since he
wasn’t wearing a mask when he said that, he obviously doesn’t think too much
of that either.
However, I noticed in the New York Times
and Washington Post this morning a quotation from Peter Navarro, a White
House adviser whose main contribution so far has been to actively encourage
Trump in his trade wars with China, Canada, Germany, Japan, South Korea – you name
it. I didn’t think he had anything officially to do with the coronavirus response
that I know of, but given that Trump has pretty much disbanded his task force
and stopped even talking to Dr. Fauci, I guess he was the only person who would
talk to reporters.
I can hardly think of anything Peter
Navarro has said that I didn’t completely disagree with, but he was quick to
point out that Trump was “only joking” about testing. That isn’t true of course,
but it was good to see him willing to contradict Trump. Moreover, he went on to
say that the government was actively preparing for a fall wave (which Trump has
repeatedly said won’t happen), including stocking up PPE. I took this as a good
sign.
In any other situation, an
announcement that the government was taking steps to prepare for an anticipated
emergency wouldn’t be a cause for celebration, but given the administration’s deliberate
efforts at many times to signal that there’s no cause for alarm by not bothering
to do what might be necessary (including the fact that the coronavirus task force
hasn’t given a press briefing since April 27, and seems to be meeting only
sporadically), it was refreshing to see this.
The point is that preparations are
going on in the states, at the CDC, etc. So Navarro’s announcement won’t
directly change anything. But it’s encouraging to see someone in the White
House willing to contradict Trump, admit we might be in a lot of trouble in the
fall, and lend encouragement to these lower-level people doing the actual work,
rather than undercutting them at every point.
Of course, Trump’s statements at the
rally didn’t indicate any change at all in his position that we’re over with
the coronavirus and we just have to get back to work now. And Peter Navarro hardly
has the stature of say Mike Pompeo – so he’s far from being an official spokesman.
But I do think things may have changed a lot over the weekend, and we’ll see a
lot more people contradicting Trump and saying what they know needs to be said.
What has changed? Just one thing: the
fact that, according to a Tulsa official, there were only 6,200 attendees at
the rally, vs. 19,000 seats in the arena (plus a lot more outside, in a
temporary arena that was hastily dismantled when it became clear almost nobody would
be there). Trump and his supporters have been talking for weeks about this
rally as the “reset point” for his campaign. It was obviously a reset point –
just not the kind they were looking for.
Trump’s power has always been the huge
loyalty shown by his devoted fans, which was a warning to all officials –
elected and appointed – not to cross him. Now that loyalty is certainly fading.
Officials will hopefully now feel free to do what needs to be done, and just as
importantly to say it. It’s highly unlikely Trump will change his official
tune, but as long as hardly anyone listens to him, maybe we can actually make
progress against the novel coronavirus.
The
numbers
Since
my projections of deaths have barely changed from yesterday’s post, I’m
omitting that table today. The actual numbers below are up to date.
I. Total
deaths
Total US deaths as of yesterday: 122,249
Increase in deaths since previous day: 264
Yesterday’s 7-day rate of increase in total deaths: 4% (This number
is used to project deaths in the table above; it was 4% yesterday. There is a
7-day cycle in the reported deaths numbers, caused by lack of reporting over
the weekends from closed state offices. So this is the only reliable indicator
of a trend in deaths, not the three-day percent increase I used to focus on,
and certainly not the one-day percent increase, which mainly reflects where we
are in the 7-day cycle).
II. Total
reported cases
Total US reported cases: 2,356,715
Increase in reported cases since previous day: 25,946
Percent increase in reported cases since yesterday: 1%
Percent increase in reported cases since 7 days previous: 9%
III. Deaths as a percentage of closed cases so far
in the US:
Total Recoveries in US as of yesterday: 980,367
Total Deaths as of yesterday: 122,249
Deaths so far as percentage of closed cases (=deaths + recoveries): 11%
(vs. 11% yesterday)
I would love to hear any comments or
questions you have on this post. Drop me an email at tom@tomalrich.com
Comments
Post a Comment