COVID-19 is 10x as deadly as flu.

Let's be explicitly clear: "learning to live with it" means needlessly accepting hundreds of thousands more preventable deaths and letting our hospitals get nuked yet again.

Why would the President call for that?
"Close the country" vs "learn to live with it" is a false choice, and one that exists only because of Trump's mishandling of the pandemic.

Peer countries have had shorter closures than we have precisely because they chose not to live with it but to control it.
There is an option besides indefinite closure vs let-it-rip: evidence-driven reopening + aggressive public health interventions centered around mass testing and tracing.

Trump's whole game since back in April/May is to make you forget that option exists.
Instead he wants to make you choose between a disastrously mismanaged indefinite closure or a disastrously reckless reopening.

The fact that those are the only choices he can imagine does not mean those are the only choices we should accept.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jeremy Konyndyk

Jeremy Konyndyk Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JeremyKonyndyk

7 Oct
To expand on this:

What the administration is doing here is politics, not science.

And what these academics are doing is likewise politics, not science.
The three academics lay out their case here. It's pretty brief and easy to read.

Interestingly, it does not cite or reference a single piece of research to support their arguments, nor does the linked website containing their sign-on "declaration." unherd.com/2020/10/covid-…
The basic argument:
- COVID poses little risk of death beyond specific vulnerable groups
- Non-vulnerables face little risk so should just go ahead and get the disease
- Vulnerables should be sheltered while non-vulnerables get naturally infected
- Ta-da, natural herd immunity ImageImage
Read 19 tweets
6 Oct
Douthat's column and the powerful @AlecMacGillis piece it references both argue without much evidence that the resistance to school reopening is largely a reaction to Trump pushing schools to open.

I don't think that's quite right.
Trump's push to open schools regardless of local conditions and in-school adaptation, and his failure to provide any meaningful support, didn't help.

But I think the more significant factor was what was happening with the country's outbreak at the same time. Image
To reopen in-person in August/early September, schools needed to decide which way to go in July.

And July was a catastrophe. The highest recorded peaks of the outbreak and the highest deaths since the worst days of spring.
Read 11 tweets
5 Oct
It's a crowded field but this may prove to be the single most damaging thing he's ever said about COVID.
It's not a choice between living recklessly vs living in fear. It's a choice to live responsibly, to balance sensible precautions with continuing to live our lives.

He is still, even now, trying to frame a false choice.
He wants you to believe we must choose between taking no risks or accepting all risks.

That's not the choice, that was never the choice.

The choice was and is incompetent outbreak response vs competent outbreak response.
Read 9 tweets
5 Oct
Difficult policy/public health dilemma: what to do when the White House itself has become a transmission hotspot?

Unlike a normal business or school, you can't just shut it down and quarantine everyone for two weeks.
The West Wing and EEOB facilities are conducive to transmission - small, enclosed spaces with limited airflow (many/most suites in EEOB have secure doors and windows that are always closed).

So there's real risk of rolling spread throughout the staff.
But must balance keeping government running with stopping spread.

White House should immediately take several steps:

- First, quarantine anyone who was in direct contact with POTUS or other confirmed. Fact that McEnany was still working y'day suggests this hasn't happened.
Read 9 tweets
5 Oct
Lot of people RT'ing this today.

A few things about this:

First, that doctor is @Craig_A_Spencer, he's awesome, you should follow him.

Second, Craig's behavior was neither selfish nor careless.

Unlike Trump, he followed protocols and didn't put anyone at risk.
Ebola and COVID are VERY different diseases that transmit and behave VERY differently.

Unlike, COVID, Ebola:

- Does not spread asymptomatically
- Is not very contagious at symptom onset, becomes more contagious as symptoms worsen
- Spreads thru direct contact with bodily fluids
This means the precautions for both diseases are very different.

Under Obama we developed a careful system for screening returning travelers from West Africa, based on the science (remember science?) of how the virus spreads. I wrote about it here: cgdev.org/publication/st…
Read 6 tweets
3 Oct
The amazing thing is that it took this long.

There had been a lot of near misses:
Bolsonaro's entourage back in the spring:
cnn.com/2020/05/13/ame…
His valet in May: cnn.com/2020/05/07/pol…
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!