CC 2020-08-11_08c Supplemental No 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: WHITNEY MCDONALD, ACTING DEPUTY CITY MANAGER
JESSICA MATSON, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
AGENDA ITEM 8.c. – AUGUST 11, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL
EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)
PANDEMIC
DATE: AUGUST 11, 2020
Attached is correspondence received for the above referenced item.
cc: Acting City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website (or public review binder)
From:VONIE GRIMM
To:public comment
Subject:board item comment 8c
Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2020 3:40:04 PM
By J.B. Handley
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/3166e
cae/LTobqnzEwE2dICG0wuyX6
w?
u=https://jbhandleyblog.com/hom
e/2020/7/27/lockdownlunacythree
If you’re hoping the COVID-19
pandemic will go on forever, this
post may disappoint you. And, I get
it. We have gone frothing-at-the-
mouth nuts over a slightly above-
normal virulence virus, with a
unique and obvious age-distribution
pattern that should have made
containment easy and panic
completely unnecessary. And, if
you’re living in the United States,
like I am, you probably think my
declaration that this pandemic is
“over” to be somewhere between
wishful thinking and incredibly
premature, and I hear you, too,
although forgive me if I’m not sure
you’re the one thinking clearly,
given some of the things I’ve
recently read. I promise to support
my assertion with data, and the
wisdom of people far more expert
than me who are having a harder
time being heard in the present
climate of…bats#@t crazy.
Have we lost our collective
minds? Yes.
You may not be one of them. In
fact, I’m guessing the people who
actually take the time to read my
blog posts are the few remaining
who haven’t been subsumed by the
panic, but can we agree that most
have? Jeffrey A. Tucker of the
American Institute for Economic
Research put it best in his excellent
essay on July 10 titled, When will
the Madness End?:
“I’m a practicing
psychiatrist who specializes
in anxiety disorders,
paranoid delusions, and
irrational fear. I’ve been
treating this in individuals as
a specialist. It’s hard enough
to contain these problems in
normal times. What’s
happening now is a spread of
this serious medical
condition to the whole
population. It can happen
with anything but here we see
a primal fear of disease
turning into mass panic. It
seems almost deliberate. It is
tragic. Once this starts, it
could take years to repair the
psychological damage.”
I’m 50 years old, and I’ve noticed
that younger people seem
particularly scared of COVID-19,
they are the ones I typically see
biking and hiking with masks on,
and this survey really corroborated
that point:
The age gradient is striking.
The young attach higher
probabilities to people like
themselves contracting
Covid-19, of being
hospitalized conditional on
infection, and of dying
conditional on infection.
Arguably, young respondents
have a lifestyle that exposes
them to wider networks, and
this may explain why they
feel more likely to be
infected. But their assessment
of health risks conditional on
infection are puzzling in light
of the evidence that Covid-19
is significantly less severe for
younger people…Third, and
crucially, young people, as
compared to older people,
report substantially higher
mortality rates for every age
group. Young people are
more pessimistic than older
people not only about their
own mortality risk but also
about everyone else’s
mortality risk.
Daniel Horowitz wrote a great
article about this survey titled, New
study: Millennials think their risk
from COVID-19 is exponentially
more than the true threat. He writes:
Perhaps the most destructive
element of lockdown is the
panic and fear that such
severe measures help
confirm, in this case, wrongly
so, in the minds of the young
and impressionable. As the
paper concludes,
“Experience has shown that
communities faced with
epidemics or other adverse
events respond best and with
the least anxiety when the
normal social functioning of
the community is least
disrupted.” In other words,
we need to flatten the fear.
I thought that survey was bad
enough, but a different survey by
Kekst CNC asking different
questions revealed a simply
astonishing figure: Americans over-
estimated the TOTAL number of
compatriots who have died from
COVID-19 by 200-fold! When
asked the question (in mid-July),
“How many people in your country
have died from the Coronavirus?”,
Americans responded “9%,”
which would be roughly 30,000,000
people, versus the actual number of
151,000. No wonder people are
panicked (and wildly, wildly
misinformed.)
click to read survey
click to read survey
Great, so we can at least agree on
three points: 1) Society has lost its
collective mind over a virus, and 2)
younger people overestimate the
risk of dying from COVID-19,
which creates a vicious cycle with
Point #1, and 3) Americans have
wildly over-estimated how many
people have died from COVID-19.
This is the third time I have written
about the pandemic. My first and
second blogs provide plenty of data
and perspective. I think there are
five bits of data that I’ve explored
in the past that merit an update:
1. Infection Fatality Rate: The
“IFR”, unlike the “Case Fatality
Rate” that is more often quoted in
the news, is the ACTUAL fatality
rate of COVID-19. In order to
accurately forecast the IFR, you
need two bits of data: total deaths,
and total people who have had the
virus. The second data point is
harder to find, because so many
people are asymptomatic, but the
most reliable data I have found is in
this meta-analysis by Stanford’s Dr.
John Ioannidis titled, The infection
fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred
from seroprevalence data. What
does the paper conclude? A median
IFR of 0.25%. It’s hard to make
this point strongly enough: a virus
with an IFR this low would never,
ever merit the response we’ve seen
from health authorities and elected
officials. COVID-19 is hardly a
“once in a century pandemic” as
some try to say, it’s a strong flu
bug, nothing more.
2. Death rates by age
stratification. The best science I
have seen showing IFR by age is
this study titled ASSESSING THE
AGE SPECIFICITY OF
INFECTION FATALITY RATES
FOR COVID-19: META-
ANALYSIS & PUBLIC POLICY
IMPLICATIONS. Check out this
chart:
I wish this chart broke the age down
even further, particularly in the 0-
10 or 0-20 age range, where the IFR
is effectively zero. These facts are
slowly making their way into the
mainstream, and the paper
concludes: “Age and fatality risk
for COVID-19 are exponentially
related. In non-technical terms,
COVID-19 poses a very low risk
for children and younger adults but
is hazardous for middle-aged adults
and extremely dangerous for elderly
people.”
3. Herd Immunity Threshold.
Since my previous blog post, when
I wrote about Herd Immunity
Threshold in detail, it’s becoming
even more clear that the “H.I.T.” of
COVID-19 is very likely in the 10-
20% range, rather than the 60-70%
range that was originally thought. It
would be impossible to overstate
the importance of this difference,
because it supports exactly WHY
COVID-19 has already reached
herd immunity in most of Europe,
and WHY we’re almost done here
in the U.S., too. Here’s one new
paper, Herd immunity thresholds
for SARS-CoV-2 estimated
from unfolding epidemics. Their
conclusion:
Our inferences result in herd
immunity thresholds around
10-20%…these findings have
profound consequences for
the governance of the current
pandemic given that some
populations may be close to
achieving herd immunity
despite being under more or
less strict social distancing
measures.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford
Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford
The conclusion that COVID-19’s
H.I.T. is between 10-20% is gaining
wide acceptance, and it’s being
borne out in the real world as
countries everywhere are watching
deaths from COVID-19 simply dry
up, as the virus runs out of new
people to infect. The obvious
explanation for WHY the H.I.T. for
COVID-19 is far lower than
thought is that many more of us are
naturally immune to COVID-19,
because our T-cells carry immunity
based on the fact that we’ve all
been exposed to many corona
viruses, which is commonly called
a cold. My favorite outspoken
scientist on this issue is Oxford’s
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, check out this
interview with her titled, “We may
already have herd immunity – an
interview with Professor Sunetra
Gupta.” A quote:
What I didn’t anticipate was
that some of our responses to
previous exposure to
seasonal coronaviruses might
actually protect us from
infection. It’s one thing to get
infected and not ill, but what
the new studies are showing
is that people are actually
fighting off infection. So at an
even more basic level, the
pre-existing antibodies or T-
cell responses against
coronaviruses seem to
protect against infection, not
just the outcome of infection.
If you read one link in this whole
blog post, I’d make it this interview
with Dr. Gupta, it’s wide-ranging
and she also explains how
lockdowns not only don’t work (see
next) but that countries and states
that sealed themselves off—like
New Zealand or Hawaii—are
simply postponing their day of
reckoning. Dr. Gupta and her
team’s new paper, The impact of
host resistance on cumulative
mortality and the threshold of herd
immunity for SARS-CoV-2,
explores the issue of H.I.T. further:
These results help to explain
the large degree of regional
variation observed in
seroprevalence and
cumulative deaths and
suggest that sufficient herd-
immunity may already be in
place to substantially
mitigate a potential second
wave.…Equally,
seropositivity measures of
10-20% are entirely
compatible with local levels
of immunity having
approached or even exceeded
the HIT, in which case the
risk and scale of resurgence
is lower than currently
perceived.
4. Lockdowns don’t work. Getting
politicians involved in trying to
fight the normal course of a viral
illness will hopefully be seen by
historians as one of the silliest
things we ever chose to do. In
simple terms, a virus is gonna be a
virus. As Dr. Gupta explains, “The
epidemic is an ecological
relationship that we have to manage
between ourselves and the virus.
But instead, people are looking at it
as a completely external thing.”
Said differently, like every other
virus, COVID-19 is here to stay.
Lockdowns provide politicians with
an “illusion of control” but the data
is rolling in that they have been
useless, and even The Lancet, one
of the world’s most prestigious
medical journals, has weighed in.
Titled, A country level analysis
measuring the impact of
government actions, country
preparedness and socioeconomic
factors on COVID-19 mortality and
related health outcomes, their
conclusions are pretty stark, and
depressing for those of us who have
undergone lockdowns:
“Government actions such as
border closures, full
lockdowns, and a high rate of
COVID-19 testing were not
associated with statistically
significant reductions in the
number of critical cases or
overall mortality.”
German scientists looked at the
same topic just within the country
of Germany and reached the same
conclusion in this paper titled,
Change points in the spread of
COVID-19 question the
effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical
interventions in Germany. An
excerpt:
A trend change of infections
from exponential growth to
decay was not induced by the
“lockdown” measures but
occurred earlier. Additional
impacts of later NPIs cannot
be clearly detected: Firstly,
there is no significant effect
with respect to infections that
could be attributed to school
and day-care closures.
Secondly, effects which could
be related to the contact ban
a) do not appear with respect
to all three indicators, b)
differ in strength and tend
towards lower impacts, and
c) do not match the time the
measure came into force.
Thus, the necessity of the
second (March 16-18) and
the third bundle of
interventions (March 23) is
questionable…
All these American Governors
threatening to resume lockdowns?
Yes, there’s no science that
supports anything they are
threatening. A virus is going to be a
virus, which leads me to the final
piece of data before we look at the
evidence that inspired the title of
this piece, the evidence that the
pandemic is OVER.
Farr’s law on a chart, from Oxford
5. Viruses go up, and then down,
and the death rate is the only
reliable way to track them. A
team at Oxford explains this way
better than I ever can. In this post
titled COVID-19: William Farr’s
way out of the Pandemic, they
explain how Farr, a UK
epidemiologist from the mid-19th
century, understood that all viruses
follow a similar pattern, and that the
slope of the death curve on the way
up will roughly equal the slope on
the way down, which means if you
know when you have reached peak
deaths, you have a very good idea
of when the virus will be
extinguished. As Farr wrote, “The
death rate is a fact; anything beyond
this is an inference.” The Oxford
scientists write:
Once peak deaths have been
reached we should be
working on the assumption
that the infection has already
started falling in the same
progressive steps. Using
deaths as the proxy for
falling infections facilitates
the planning of the next steps
for reopening those societies
that are in lockdown.
I think there are two points about
Farr’s Law that deserve further
clarification:
Hope-Simpson’s viral seasonality
Hope-Simpson’s viral seasonality
In order to prove the virus is
basically done, I’m going to be
showing you death curves from
all over the world. My death
curves are based on country-
specific reported COVID-19
deaths. This runs the risk that
COVID-19 deaths are over-
stated because of the pressure
in many places to classify any
questionable death as a
COVID-19 death. The proper
way to measure the impact of a
virus is to compare current year
“all cause mortality” versus
previous year “all cause
mortality.” This is a far more
accurate way to see IF COVID-
19 impacted mortality, and the
way Farr recommended doing
it.
I missed something when I
wrote my previous blog post.
While Farr has been proven
right, that viruses typically
have the same death slope on
the way up and down, I missed
the wisdom of another British
scientist, Dr. Edgar Hope
Simpson, who explained that
the course of a virus is
DIFFERENT in terms of both
timing and its slope, based on
WHERE in the world you live,
by latitude. Whether driven by
solar radiation or Vitamin D
levels, Hope-Simpson long ago
predicted exactly what
happened in California,
Arizona, Texas, and Florida in
the last month: COVID-19
came later, on a lower death
curve, to U.S. states that sit at
or below the 35th parallel (see
chart from his book that shows
this visually). Hope-Simpson’s
seminal work is a book titled
The Transmission of Epidemic
Influenza, and why our public
health authorities never discuss
the fact that seasonal viruses
hit our lower latitudes later in
the year is beyond me. The
U.S. is unique, relative to
Western Europe, because our
geography is so vast. In simple
terms, our northern states are
done with their death curves,
and our southern states are
almost there. Read on.
It’s over when the death
curve says it’s over
Now we get to the fun part:
celebrating that the COVID-19
pandemic is over in most Northern
countries and passed the peak in
most Southern countries. In the
United States, we actually have two
distinct death curves, roughly
divided along the 35th parallel. The
Northern states are done, and the
Southern states are almost done. I’ll
start with the rest of the world, and
finish with the U.S. Please note that
ALL the death curve charts I’m
using come from Worldometers, so
you can go see the exact same ones
for yourself. Are they imperfect?
Yes. But, they are the best we have.
Will I give you an actual date for
the U.S.? Yes, I will.
Europe
Here are the death curves, from
Worldometers, for six European
countries. It’s self-explanatory, so I
won’t belabor the point. To state the
obvious: Sweden had no lockdown.
Amongst the other five countries,
the choice for HOW to lockdown
varied widely. Knowing those
simple facts and seeing these charts,
if you still think lockdowns are
important in the management of a
seasonal virus, I can’t help you. In
Western Europe, IT’S OVER, and
it had nothing to do with how
governments, or the populace,
behaved. A virus does what a virus
does.
U.S. Northern States
Using the same data from
Worldometers, it’s also over in the
northern states. Note that in certain
states, the impact from COVID-19
is so tiny, the death curves aren’t
even curves, so I’m focusing on
larger population states that actually
have a curve. I looked at New York,
New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois,
Indiana, and Michigan.
In the Northern U.S states, IT’S
OVER, and it had nothing to do
with how governments, or the
populace, behaved. A virus does
what a virus does.
U.S. Southern States
This quote from Dr. Gupta of
Oxford explains the mistake the
press keeps making by treating the
U.S. so homogeneously:
When you
think of the
US as a whole,
you’re missing
the fact that
the epidemic
appears to be
over in the
north east and
growing in the
south west.
Why would
you put them
together?
There’s no
reason to lump
a rise in cases
in Arizona
with
everything
else.
This is the most confusing part of
predicting when the COVID-19
pandemic will be over in the United
States. Take a look at the TOTAL
U.S. death curve when I wrote my
last blog post, and where it is today:
What happened? Seasonal viral
patterns of southern latitude states.
Well, luckily for me, some smart
and enterprising analysts graphed
the U.S. death curve, but did
something different, they separated
the states by using the division of
the 35th parallel, basically turning
us into two separate countries. They
had to make some judgments, so
ALL of California is in the
Southern number, and here’s how
the death curves looks:
U.S. death curve, by latitude
U.S. death curve, by latitude
This is an excellent quick video that
explains this seasonal dynamic:
And, look at this chart that shows,
since June, where deaths have been
weighted in California. Notice
anything? It’s worth mentioning
that California also destroys the
narrative that governmental
behavior has anything to do with
the spread of the virus since
California not only locked down
early and hard, but also had an early
mask mandate. And, they look no
different from Texas, Arizona, or
Florida, which had much more
liberal lockdown policies.
IMG_4001.JPG
There’s plenty of data showing that
the southern states are all past their
peak. Here’s deaths in Florida,
sorted by date of death, the curve is
clear:
Ed8Rxm4WAAM4-N0.png
Here’s deaths in Arizona:
And here’s the hospitalization curve
in Texas, showing well past peak,
death curves always match
hospitalization curves with a minor
lag.
Ed8S3mpXYAIccSU.jpeg
So when will it be over in the
United States?
That’s the question you’ve patiently
been waiting for me to answer.
When will we be done in the United
States? August 25th, just under
one month from now. How do I
know that? Well, I don’t know it
with certainty, but it’s the date that
Stanford Nobel laureate Dr.
Michael Levitt picked and he’s
been right on China and Sweden, so
I’m going with him. Let’s explore
his answer to this question and how
he looks at it.
Dr. Levitt does exactly what
William Farr said to do: he looks at
historical all-cause mortality, and
when we hit that same threshold
here in the U.S., the pandemic is
over. His analysis shows we get
there by August 25th. He explains
why Europe is already done, the
excess deaths from COVID-19 have
stopped now for several weeks,
which is what all the death curves I
showed you above also corroborate.
Interestingly looking at CDC data,
the 2020 death curve and the
Average Death Curve in the U.S.are
extremely close to converging, we
may be done even sooner than we
think:
EeAdXWLXYAE_MvY.png
Conclusion
It’s over in most of the world. It
will likely be over in the United
States within the next four weeks.
You can spend your time watching
the news and hearing about “new
cases” and being worried, or you
can get on with your life, I’m
opting for the latter. I’ll finish with
a great quote from Oxford’s Dr.
Gupta that summarizes how I feel
about this whole mess:
The truth is that herd
immunity is a way of
preventing vulnerable people
from dying. It is achieved at
the expense of some people
dying, and we can stop that
by preventing the vulnerable
class in the process. In an
ideal situation, you would
protect the vulnerable as best
you can, let people go about
their business, allow herd
immunity to build up, make
sure the economy doesn’t
crash, make sure the arts are
preserved, and make sure
qualities of kindness and
tolerance remain in place.
Appendix
Since I last wrote, there have been a
few articles that really jumped out
to me. Here’s a few great ones:
Wired Magazine, It’s Ridiculous to
Treat Schools Like Covid Hot
Zones
Excerpt:
Let’s review some facts: Children
are, by and large, spared the effects
of the virus. According to the
latest data from the CDC, infants,
little kids, and teenagers together
have accounted for roughly 5
percent of all confirmed cases, and
0.06 percent of all reported deaths.
The Covid-linked child
inflammatory syndrome that
received fervent media
attention last month, while scary,
has even more infinitesimal
numbers. “Many serious childhood
diseases are worse, both in possible
outcomes and prevalence,” said
Charles Schleien, chair of pediatrics
at Northwell Health in New York.
Russell Viner, president of the
UK’s Royal College of Pediatrics
and Child Health, noted that the
syndrome was not “relevant” to any
discussion related to schools.
There is also a wealth of evidence
that children do not transmit the
virus at the same rate as adults.
While experts note that the precise
transmission dynamics between
children, or between children and
adults, are “not well understood”—
and indeed, some argue that the best
evidence on this question is that
“we do not have enough
evidence”—many tend to think that
the risk of contagion is diminished.
Jonas F. Ludvigsson, a pediatrician
and a professor of clinical
epidemiology at Sweden’s
Karolinska Institute, reviewed the
relevant research literature as of
May 11 and concluded that, while
it’s “highly likely” children can
transmit the virus causing Covid-
19, they “seldom cause
outbreaks.” The World Health
Organization’s chief scientist,
Soumya
Swaminathan, suggested last month
that “it does seem from what we
know now that children are less
capable of spreading” the disease,
and Kristine Macartney, director of
Australia's National Centre for
Immunisation Research and
Surveillance, noted a lack of
evidence that school-aged children
are superspreaders in her country.
A study in Ireland found “no
evidence of secondary transmission
of Covid-19 from children
attending school.” And Kári
Stefánsson, a leading researcher in
Iceland, told The New Yorker that
out of some 56,000 residents who
have been tested, “there are only
two examples where a child
infected a parent. But there are lots
of examples where parents infected
children.” Similar conclusions were
drawn in a study of families in the
Netherlands.
The Atlantic, Hygiene Theater Is a
Huge Waste of Time
Excerpt:
COVID-19 is apparently a war that
will be won through antimicrobial
blasting, to ensure that pathogens
are banished from every square inch
of America’s surface area.
But what if this is all just a huge
waste of time?
In May, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention updated its
guidelines to clarify that while
COVID-19 spreads easily among
speakers and sneezers in close
encounters, touching a surface
“isn’t thought to be the main way
the virus spreads.” Other scientists
have reached a more forceful
conclusion. “Surface transmission
of COVID-19 is not justified at all
by the science,” Emanuel Goldman,
a microbiology professor at Rutgers
New Jersey Medical School, told
me. He also emphasized the
primacy of airborne person-to-
person transmission.
Paul Graham, The Four Quadrants
of Conformism
Excerpt:
One of the most revealing ways to
classify people is by the degree and
aggressiveness of their conformism.
Imagine a Cartesian coordinate
system whose horizontal axis runs
from conventional-minded on the
left to independent-minded on the
right, and whose vertical axis runs
from passive at the bottom to
aggressive at the top. The resulting
four quadrants define four types of
people. Starting in the upper left
and going counter-clockwise:
aggressively conventional-minded,
passively conventional-minded,
passively independent-minded, and
aggressively independent-minded.
I think that you'll find all four types
in most societies, and that which
quadrant people fall into depends
more on their own personality than
the beliefs prevalent in their
society. [1]
Spiegel International,
Reconstruction of a Mass Hysteria
Excerpt:
The new virus would probably have
attracted far less attention if it
hadn't been for modern molecular
medicine, with its genetic analyses,
antibody tests and reference
laboratories. The swine flu would
have conquered the world, and no
doctor would have noticed.
But the world did notice, largely
because of high-tech medicine and
the vaccine industry. From Ebola to
SARS to the avian flu,
epidemiologists, the media, doctors
and the pharmaceutical lobby have
systematically attuned the world to
grim catastrophic scenarios and the
dangers of new, menacing
infectious diseases.
None of these diseases receives
more attention than influenza.
Researchers in more than 130
laboratories in 102 countries are
constantly on the lookout for new
flu pathogens. Entire careers and
institutions, and a lot of money,
depend on the outcomes of their
work. "Sometimes you get the
feeling that there is a whole
industry almost waiting for a
pandemic to occur," says flu
expert Tom Jefferson, from an
international health nonprofit called
the Cochrane Collaboration. "And
all it took was one of these
influenza viruses to mutate to start
the machine grinding."
T.R. Allen, An outbreak of
common colds at an Antarctic base
after seventeen weeks of complete
isolation
click to read
click to read
Comment:
This is a published study from
1973, and the title kind of gives it
away, but basically six of seventeen
men wintering at a base in Antartica
got sick with a cold (coronavirus)
“after 17 weeks of complete
isolation.” If you weren’t sure if a
virus is going to do what it’s going
to do, I hope this gives you pause.
(Are you listening, New Zealand?)
Part of their conclusion is quite the
omen for today’s craziness: “The
occurrence of a common cold
during isolation, when the chances
of introduction of new infection
from the outside are virtually nil,
implies that in some way virus
persisted, either in the environment
or in the men.” Look out.
Other great information in links
below
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/a1a77b
5e/0hGXFiTOlE2P8YHf2_p6hw?
u=https://mobile.twitter.com/alexbe
renson
Page 8 is the Orange County
Schools White Paper in support of
return to normal
school https://link.edgepilot.com/s/
7f9734bc/IzDcsOm3d0Wo_tmF-
_vXtQ?
u=https://ocde.us/Board/Documents
/2020%2520Agendas/Special%252
0Meeting%2520Agenda%252007.1
3.2020.pdf
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/1e5d4c
99/RmtkmKFo40i9Y0cOad-oSQ?
u=https://mobile.twitter.com/aginnt
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/e5ebeab
f/idbpwV6FtUOnfqrGznYG7g?
u=https://www.citizens-
rights.org/harm-from-social-
distancing-maskwearing-and-
lockdown
Thankyou for your service
Vonie Grimm
Get Outlook for Android
Links contained in this email have been replaced. If you click on a link in the email above, the
link will be analyzed for known threats. If a known threat is found, you will not be able to
proceed to the destination. If suspicious content is detected, you will see a warning.