Even though we have no symptoms and no reason to believe we have been infected, my wife and I are going to try to do everything reasonable to reduce outside contact for a while. Call it “social distancing” or self-quarantining.
This means giving up discretionary trips to the grocery store or other shopping. It means giving up going to dance sessions (that is a big sacrifice, as far as I am concerned). It means not having social meals with others. It means not going to visit our children and grandchildren (an even bigger sacrifice).
My thought process is this:
1. I would rather be in front of an exponential curve than behind it.
When I started my Internet business in April of 1994, most people had not heard of the World Wide Web, and many of those who had heard of it took a “wait and see” attitude about whether it would work out as a business environment. It only became clear that the Web was a business platform more than a year later. But by that time, it was harder to ride the curve.
A lot of people, including government leaders in most countries, are going with a “wait and see” approach before reacting to the virus. They are certainly not getting ahead of the curve. In a few weeks, the self-quarantine decision we are taking may be imposed on everyone. Meanwhile, we hope to reduce our chance of contracting the virus and becoming spreaders.
2. In an uncertain situation, I like to compare the upside and the downside. When the upside of doing something is high and the downside is low, go for it. When it’s the opposite, avoid it.
So think about the upside and the downside of going about our normal business instead of self-quarantining. The upside would be that for the next few weeks I get to dance more and spend more time with friends and family. The downside is that I contract the virus and spread it. I think that the downside, even though it is unlikely, is worse, especially becoming a spreader.
3. How long will we self-quarantine? Either we’ll get something like an “all-clear” signal in a few weeks, or, if my worst fears are correct, there will be government-imposed measures that are as strong or stronger than what we are taking.
4. If I were in government, I would, in addition to making an all-out effort to test people with pneumonia symptoms, be making a large effort to test a sample of asymptomatic people. And re-test people in that sample every few days. From a statistical perspective, random testing strikes me as necessary in order to get a reliable picture of the epidemic. I would not trust an “all-clear” signal that was not backed by evidence from random testing.
Note that this post is not about the current Administration, so please self-quarantine your political comments and take them elsewhere.
UPDATE: John Cochrane recommends an essay by Tomas Pueyo. The message is to respect the exponential curve.
Cautious but rational. With the initial lag of testing in the U.S. it is a good assumption that community spread is well underway. Having said that, I think it’s the people who are ignoring their own mild symptoms that we have to convince that self-quarantine is our best tool. Now is the time to use your social communication tools to contact family, friends, neighbors, co-workers and emphasize common sense.
Don’t think self quarantine means spend time with friends and family. Who will also spend time with their friends and family. Etc etc. etc.
Virus hate heat unlike bacteria. Willing to bet big on 0 community transfers post April 1.
This is a smart plan. I lobbied to get my company to start WFH this week. I’m stocked up pretty well. Will probably just do weekly grocery store trips just to keep the stockpile topped off until I feel it’s really unsafe to go anywhere.
Jim: the virus spread in Singapore, where it was balmy. And SARS and MERS were not stopped by warm weather. I’m betting that it may slow it but not stop it.
A different but still rational? conclusion https://hal2020.com/2020/03/11/f-u-cdc/
Covid-19 is disproportionately lethal to the elderly, which seems to undermine that conclusion.
In the analysis I used the fatality percentage for those in their 60s, so I’ve taken care of the disproportionate lethality in making my point.
Note I wasn’t objecting to short term measures like a few weeks to a couple of months. It was the suggestion that this could run into 2021, and the tone deafness to the consequences, that I was commenting on.
From the closing sentence of the linked article:
The CDC’s “years” claim is pure speculation but 3-8 weeks is prudent anywhere there is community transfer. American citizens should be exercising full diligence. Don’t confuse absence of evidence with evidence of absence. As I watch the daily case reports from Ontario and British Columbia, it is clear that the virus is spreading undetected in many parts of the U.S., Puerto Rico, and Hawaii (travel hubs). South Korean “Case 31” demonstrates that one individual’s decisions can impact thousands and possibly an entire nation-state.
Self-monitor, self-isolate, self-track. Maybe its time to focus on decentralized self-tracking using mundane tools like Facebook. Incubation is about 5 days; can you track your contacts/routes in the last 5 days? Can you trust that all of those contacts in the last 5 days are being as diligent as you are or are they coughing in church like Case 31?
“A lot of people, including government leaders in most countries, are going with a ‘wait and see’ approach before reacting to the virus.”
I know Arnold has a policy of posting with a delay so, maybe, this was true at the time he wrote his post. Over the last few days, however, that has certainly not been the case. We have had a cascade of precautionary closings/cancellations/postponements: college classrooms, NBA, NCAA March Madness, MLB, PGA, company-wide work-from-home policies, parades, Disney World, etc. Every official is biased towards preemptive cancellation because officials tend to be judged in hindsight, rightly or wrongly. If they cancel and the virus does not spread rapidly, then the cancellations will be credited for slowing the spread. If the virus does end up spreading rapidly, then any official that didn’t cancel will be blamed and subjected to intense scorn. There is no upside for an official to not cancel.
Private individuals bear the risks and benefits of attending or not attending non-cancelled events. When events are not cancelled, they will perform the type of cost-benefit, upside-downside analysis that Arnold does in his post to decide whether to attend or preemptively self-quarantine.
I have seen no signs of preemption in the U.S. which is in the early stages of community transmission. The only question, in my mind, is whether the U.S. can avoid exceeding its health system capacity or will it look like parts of Italy.
Earlier this week I was trying to talk my Dad out of singing and my wife out of sending our kids to daycare. We are lucky enough to have grandparents that can watch them so we don’t need to quit our jobs if they stay home (I take it as given that we will all get it if one of us gets it, but want to self quarantine the entire family from the outside world).
On Monday I got fierce resistance. My father came around after the Trump speech. My wife who objected yesterday morning came around yesterday afternoon.
It’s amazing how quickly things have moved. There is a kind of zeitgeist to all this. Once big institutions started closing it convinces normies that something serious is happening.
I would rather be in front of an exponential curve than behind it.
I think in this case “in front of the curve” should mean “exposed early when the healthcare system isn’t overwhelmed”. If you self-quarantine moderately successfully and get sick in a month, there will be far fewer medical resources available.
Jay, that is a fair point, except that the earlier I get it, the earlier I spread it, and that is not good for the health care system.
In the “Infect First Responders First” scenario, select personnel go get infected in a controlled situation and then do a hard self-quarantine until they are no longer contagious.
If you did this to as much of the population as possible, the cost would be enormous, but you could knock the thing out quick.
Incubation is about 5 days. The relevant question every symptom-free day is whether any available health system capacity exists in 5 days. It is a respiratory disease. If you are a smoker or have medical issues or have immune system concerns (e.g. with age) then taking it 5 days at a time makes sense.
Unlike early childhood exposure to chickenpox, it seems foolish to “try and get it”. Either early or late.
If you get sick in a month your “quarantine” is a total failure.
It’s a big failure if you even get infected.
It’s a small failure, that you might not even notice, if you get “exposed” to any who are infected.
The most likely case is to successfully avoid exposure to any infected people. This is even more likely if few have it, and if more are self-quarantined.
We’re doing a lot of staying at home in Slovakia, including my Professor wife teaching from home her courses live on-line.
There will be a bit of a free rider issue of a few folk enjoying the lack of crowds at places which are often crowded that remain open. But I think such folk are both a bit rude, to others for taking a risk, as well as a bit foolish, altho that’s possibly more a cost-benefit calc.