Playing the numbers

I am not adamantly opposed to conversations that debate risk and reward, that weigh the consequences of action or non-action in the face of a crisis, or even in one's everyday life for that matter.  We all accept risk of one form or another many days of of our lives.

We might decide to smoke because it calms us, knowing full well that it will invariably reduce our life span.  We may turn to alcohol or marijuana or Valium to help us wind down from the stresses of our lives, knowing that for certain people with an addiction predisposition, just a little is not a possibility, and that without facing our reasons for why we need to drink or take drugs, we will never conquer those fears or worries, but could develop a dependence that is worse than the problem.

When I was younger, I hitchhiked across America, despite the warnings from my family and some friends.  Warnings which I countered by saying that driving is dangerous, getting in a car can be dangerous, how much has the percentage increased by getting in a car with a stranger who has decided to be a good Samaritan?  So, when I see the spring breakers on the beach and in the bars, I react just as those who were against my hitchhiking, consider them fools at best, selfish at worst, but all in all, young people having fun in a way that is not a wise choice.  I imagine that just as I might discourage my children from hitchhiking, those same spring breakers will be surprised in 20 years when they advise their own children to avoid unnecessary risks.

At this point in time, we have a virus of unknown infectious rate and mortality rate spreading across our country.  We are fortunate in that we have a few examples, and some data to draw from since some other countries were effected by the disease before us, but those examples range from China and South Korea where extensive testing and forced quarantine was used to identify and isolate those with the disease, to Italy and Spain where the freedom to go to restaurants and public entertainment events and beaches was not relinquished quite so easy as it was in the first two countries I mentioned.

Deaths per 1 million people in China and S Korea is around 2 while those for Italy and Spain are 100 and 60 respectively.  Our rate is at 2 as well but since we are just in the beginning of our battle, the question isn't will that number rise, but how can we avoid the death toll in Italy and Spain.  Yesterday we lost over 100 people for the first time, and we will most likely continue to break a record for deaths per day for 2 weeks, if you believe the medical experts who warn us that today's numbers reflect those who first encountered the disease 10-14 days ago.

So, not being a infectious disease expert or an economist, it is imperative that the president is weighing information from both as he makes his decisions, both today and in the weeks to come.

If we assume that President Trump is getting numbers from both camps, I would be curious as to what those numbers are, and how the President defines "the problem" when he says that the cure cannot be worse than the problem.  As I sit hear hacking away on my computer, there are 400,000 cases of the virus on the planet with about 17,500 fatalities so far.  When compared to the numbers from a normal flu season, there haven't even been as many deaths in the world as there will be in America this year.  However, the number of cases is expanding at 20% or more per day, so until we hit the top of the curve, it is not unlikely that there will be millions of cases worldwide by April, and 100,000 in America by next weekend.  Again, way less than the normal flu but the graph line is very close to vertical with no plateau in sight.

I believe that President Trump believes that the health experts are overstating the top end of the curve when some predict tens of millions of cases in America with tens of thousands of deaths, even though that is the typical extent of a normal flu season.  I also suspect that he does not hold with the theory that COVID-19 will be more fatal that the .1% mortality rate of the normal flu even though the current death rate in America is a bit over 1%, which is 10 times the flu and does not reflect the number of people in serious or critical condition which is twice more than the actual number of deaths.

This link below is a nice reference site.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

But again, there is a case to be made that another 10,000 COVID-19 deaths on top of the normal flu (which also may rise a bit since there could be resource shortages that effect the care and cure of those who become very sick from the normal flu), might not justify trillions of dollars of deficit spending and/or creating an economic recession.

For that reason, I think we need to ask the president along with all politicians and pundits who comment on the choices we have made and are about to make, what is the number of deaths they are willing to accept?  This is not meant to be a sarcastic question, or some type of philosophical trap, but is the foundation of the reasoning for how we handle this pandemic.

10,000 good, 50,000 less good but OK, 100,000 bad?

If closing everything for two more weeks results in only 25000 deaths where three weeks would have saved half of those lives, is that justification for more economic suffering?

Playing the numbers is a great way to gamble at Atlantic City or Las Vegas, especially when you are willing to lose everything you brought in order to have some fun.  However, if today's gambling losses also meant you might lose the same amount next week, without playing, you might think twice about what you are willing to risk.

Make no mistake, President Trump and all the Governors and the mayors and all their advisers and everyone who comments and opines on what we should do next, are making and effecting decisions that are not easy.  That is why we elected them, so that they can make those decisions for us, when we might spare no expense rather than to sacrifice our parent, older sibling, or immune deficient friend to save the economy for everyone else. Still, I am hopeful that despite the dire warnings from his economic advisers, the president will listen to those advising caution before reverting to "open for business" again, at least until the curve for the United States shows some type of flattening.

Finally, is it possible that this is a false choice to begin with?  Is it possible that the willingness for the rich and powerful to justify their decisions which lead to the suffering and death of the masses, is just another way for them to maintain the status quo which has rewarded them to date?  Why can't America, the greatest country now, or ever, be able to continue to reduce the spread of a novel virus through practices which reduce social contact, hence revenue, while still paying those who need to stay home while providing a source of money for those businesses most effected by the slowdown?  There are many people still working, many businesses only partially effected and some even doing well.  Why aren't they able to help bridge the gap by sacrificing a bit of pay and temporarily hiring some who are being displaced?  Are we even asking them?

In the end, the main problem with all this mental masturbation is that we can't go back in time if we think our actions are only going to cost 15,000 lives but end up costing 25,000.  We won't know if we made the right choices, ever, since how many lives we saved by washing our hands more and maintaining social distances will never be known,  We will only know, how many lives were lost despite our efforts.  Or, perhaps how many lives were sacrificed to avoid the cure being worse than the problem.

By the way, since I started this post about an hour ago, 750 more people died from the virus