Code to allow Argentine milongas to re-open

[TTanguero]

I don’t anything would have made a difference short of total lockdown (and economic collapse) until everyone was vaccinated. We throw around a lot of blame, but the truth is there’s no controlling the disease without herd immunity (and or vaccinations). Many deaths along the way.

A really good track-and-trace system, properly enforced, is massively successful. Look at Taiwan, Singapore, New Zealand, Iceland, Norway ... There are many examples of countries that have handled it well.

 

[Tangogal]

(Never mind milongas, whose stupid idea was it to allow extended family gatherings at Christmas and mix age groups / social groups / different parts of the country? How many people are dying because of this?)

I think this was done in an effort to minimize the effects of a free for all. People were going to do it anyway so they tried to allow Christmas gatherings in a controlled manner.

 

[Rabbit]

I think this was done in an effort to minimize the effects of a free for all. People were going to do it anyway so they tried to allow Christmas gatherings in a controlled manner.

Well, people aren't totally irresponsible so they do whatever's officially allowed + X%, and they generally care about their family even if they don't care whether random people that they don't know get sick or not. I think a clear message to protect older family members until they could be vaccinated would have been effective.

To get back to tango, I think we should be careful about milongas with mixed age groups for a while too, unfortunately the younger generation (not vaccinated for a while, with higher number of social contacts and higher risk tolerance) is a danger to the older generation.

 

[Brummbaer]

To get back to tango, I think we should be careful about milongas with mixed age groups for a while too, unfortunately the younger generation (not vaccinated for a while, with higher number of social contacts and higher risk tolerance) is a danger to the older generation.

It isn't going to suddenly switch back to the way it was. Some Milongas will adopt some code, which may be enforced strongly or weakly, and some participants will try to exceed the requested restrictions. It won't suit everyone, and some just won't go, or are not allowed to participate. Alternative milongas may spring up, and some will fade away. There will be local resurgences of Covid-19 simply because the vaccines aren't 100% effective, and, unfortunately, there are anti-vaxxers, or more sadly those who can't take the vaccine. People will mingle, but the risk will reduce to an acceptable level for some groups to participate.

It's likely that there will be groups of Milongas: those a group of participants consider 'safe', and those 'risky'. It's likely to take longer to get back to how it was depending on vaccine effectiveness, virus mutations, treatment, longevity of protection, etc.

I can't envisage an initial situation where we get back to changing dance partners. Take it or leave it. I hope it will come, but that's going to depend on many factors.

 

[JournalInTime]

It isn't going to suddenly switch back to the way it was.

You are 100% correct. I think that's the most important thing to bear in mind!

—

People keep talking about "after COVID-19" and "when things return to normal." That's nice but misguided. The pandemic will eventually go away, but COVID-19 is here to stay at some low-but-menacing level. And while pandemics end, they have irreversible long-term effects that permanently transform society, just like wars . . .

Tango people need to be thinking of what they'll change to keep on dancing, not how they can get back to the way things were. Those who don't will run their local tango scene onto the rocks and lose it, one way or another.

 

[itwillhappen]

I can't envisage an initial situation where we get back to changing dance partners. Take it or leave it. I hope it will come, but that's going to depend on many factors.

As I said, I was still at a milonga in October where we changed dance partners to a limited extent.
Right now we could meet another couple who have already gone through the infection. (That wouldn't be legal at the moment, though.) And we could bring in another couple that provide rapid tests. And two months later will probably also be vaccinated join. And I haven't asked my friends in a targeted manner yet.
So at least in the private sphere, I don't see any fundamental obstacles.
Vital public milongas might depend on a much lower virus pressure.

 

[WhiskeyPapa]

It will switch back to the "way it was" very quickly. I vividly remember looking at videos of milongas in March-April 2020 and thinking then "we didn't know how wonderful life was then; it will never return"--it was like reminiscing about trips to Paris while being worked to death in the GULAG. It looked bizarre to see carefree people dancing without masks,

In late June 2020 the old life was back and we were dancing as we pleased. By July many of us had come down with COVID. We have been dancing since we recovered.

It will come back and it will be like it was before. It seems impossible until that happens, but the renewal will make you grateful.

 

[Rabbit]

People keep talking about "after COVID-19" and "when things return to normal." That's nice but misguided. The pandemic will eventually go away, but COVID-19 is here to stay at some low-but-menacing level. And while pandemics end, they have irreversible long-term effects that permanently transform society, just like wars . . .

Tango people need to be thinking of what they'll change to keep on dancing, not how they can get back to the way things were. Those who don't will run their local tango scene onto the rocks and lose it, one way or another.

I disagree. This is not just a tango thing. The idea that people will accept a "new normal" being imposed permanently is what is misguided, because that is simply not going to happen.

 

[JournalInTime]

The idea that people will accept a "new normal" being imposed permanently is what is misguided, because that is simply not going to happen.

*shrug*

I cannot speak for where you live, but where I live, history has shown time and time again that people change their expectations (not lower, not raise, just change) and get on with life. They did so here after the Spanish Flu, the World Wars, the Great Depression, and the imposition of income tax – each changed society significantly, but people didn't dig in their heels and refuse to change. I don't see things going differently this time around.

 

[Brummbaer]

So at least in the private sphere, I don't see any fundamental obstacles.

In the 'private sphere' - provided it's not illegal, people can do what they want. That's basically those old, invite-only, milongas or encuentros - and I don't want to join that club.

You're right about 'vital public milongas'.

Lots of doubt expressed about the effectiveness of those rapid tests. For their purpose of identifying asymptotic infected, some minor value, but overhyped by governments and entrepreneurs. No single negative test shows that you can't be infectious just a short time later.

It will switch back to the "way it was" very quickly

Possibly attempted, or even 'wilder'. Whether dancers participate depends on the local culture and whether they have anything to lose. I think some incident like the encuentro in Italy in Feb 2020 may cause some rethink, but maybe not.

The pandemic has changed many things - simple economics will change participation, not forgetting those who have given up, or found something else, or had to diversify to get an income. The current world of lockdowns, social distancing, and restrictions isn't the future 'normal', but it won't be what it was. Other social and economic constraints may determine how it looks.

So far it's all just hopes and speculation. I'll go with whatever gets AT dancing safely again and see how it evolves. If the only way ahead is the hazmat suit, then maybe to be considered, but I hope vaccination will be good-enough.

 

[JournalInTime]

In the 'private sphere' - provided it's not illegal, people can do what they want.

Exactly. To be clear: All my previous statements were about public, advertised milongas where just anybody – known or not – can show up, pay money, and dance, no questions asked. Those will be forced to change by law where I live. But private events? They'll do what they do.

The pandemic has changed many things

From this thread, I can conclude that what has changed depends on where you are. Some have said, "No, it doesn't depend on where you are" . . . only to go on to say that people are doing things that aren't permitted and may never again be permitted here.

For me, "here" is Canada, a center-left country with moderate socialism, no revolutionary tradition, strong rule of law, and citizens habituated to things like "the government controls health care," "you can't just buy guns," and "you need a national ID number to work." More specifically, it's Québec, which sits slightly to the left of Canada in general, has its own "national" police despite being a province, and bases its laws on le Code civil of France (substantially, la Coutume de Paris) instead of the English common law used elsewhere in Canada. And most specifically, it's Montréal, which is a de facto city-state whose mayor routinely does what she wants, and whose citizens are more communitarian and progressive than most people in Québec or Canada.

I guess if you live in a place that's center or center-right, or anti-socialist, or born in revolution, or highly libertarian, you might have other views. Here, putting personal rights ahead of collective ones isn't looked on fondly . . . though the state also stays out of things like what you smoke and who you have in your bed.

 

[David_In_CA]

I guess if you live in a place that's center or center-right, or anti-socialist, or born in revolution, or highly libertarian, you might have other views. Here, putting personal rights ahead of collective ones isn't looked on fondly . . . though the state also stays out of things like what you smoke and who you have in your bed.

I think that there will be tremendous pressure to open up the economy once everyone who wants a vaccine can get one. At that point, the personal rights / collective rights argument flips. People's collective right to earn a living and take care of themselves mentally and physically outweighs someone's right to skip the vaccine, with the repercussion that those who skip the vaccine risk getting infected.

I'd be really surprised if we didn't see social dances get back to near normal shortly after that.

It sure would be nice to know whether a vaccinated individual is less likely to spread the disease, though, and how much less. If it's sufficiently reduced, I would think that even those who legitimately can't get the vaccine would wind up protected by herd immunity.

 

[itwillhappen]

Lots of doubt expressed about the effectiveness of those rapid tests. For their purpose of identifying asymptotic infected, some minor value, but overhyped by governments and entrepreneurs. No single negative test shows that you can't be infectious just a short time later.

But that is because many people cannot really calculate.
A good rapid test on the current day brings maybe 95% certainty, 1:20.
So, for example, the chance that an infectious person is at a milonga drops from 1:100 to 1:2000.
Multiplied by my chance of getting infected, for example 1:10, we're at 1:20000.
Multiplied by my chance of a severe illness, by example 1:5, we're at 1:100000!
For comparison, my average chance of dying within the next week (95(!) years, 52 weeks) is around 1:5000.

 

[TTanguero]

A good rapid test on the current day brings maybe 95% certainty, 1:20.

76.8% (https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-11-1...eral-flow-tests-show-high-specificity-and-are), but your point is solid. Once we are well past the risk of the health service being overwhelmed, we will have to view the risks in proportion to other, more mundane ones.

 

[Brummbaer]

A good rapid test on the current day brings maybe 95% certainty

And this is the problem. Whilst there are reports, by those promoting these tests, of 95% certainty on enhanced lab samples from patients who have been ill, actual usage in the UK has reported considerably less, and giving a false sense of security to those tested. There seems to be a lot of questions over the samples used for these rapid tests. The article here is just one example. The tests have also been reported as being almost useless in test areas (Salford, Liverpool), although there are other factors (can't afford to isolate if test positive). It looks like almost total waste of money on a snake-oil salesman. Haven't checked recently the situation with rapid tests elsewhere in the world. Should I really trust UK government sales pitch on this?

It's futile arguing about numbers over the internet - one group of experts says this; another that. I'd just say it's questionable and I await some success. If I was funding this testing I'd want better evidence.

The key point seems to be that you can be infectious before detectable. Until sufficient evidence otherwise I'll go with the old sampling theory. 3 days or so between tests and isolation in-between tests, and maybe a sequence of 3 tests. If you're still clear, then you're probably not infected (but maybe dead from isolation!). On the other hand, if you test positive...

Yes, it is about degree of risk. It's also about trusting the government and getting the information. I watched someone yesterday getting vaccinated who then wanted to go off immediately and greet his grandchildren - ignoring that it takes time for antibodies to develop. And that's even ignoring the 2nd dose where there's an argument about time between doses. We still don't seem to know whether one can pass on the virus when vaccinated.

For the moment I can wait until we have more info and this settles down rather than becoming a serious internet virologist, epidemiologist, statistician and vaccine developer.