Let's just agree to check back. When the test results of recent patients who came in with Covid like illness come back we will see who was correct.
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
Maybe since NY/NE had more antibody spread, it's possible that there was a partial herd immunity effect? Just positing a theory.
I thought the question was: Are AZ new covid hospitalizations rising?
But maybe I just have no idea what you are talking about.
Good call, have to figure that is a factor as well.
Outdoors, higher antibody levels, masks.
All these factors combined could have a significant effect.
Though as you noted, only previously hard hit areas would have the antibody factor.
Story on Iceland and how they contained the virus after one time having one of the highest infection rates in Europe.
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/iceland-reopens-coronavirus/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/iceland-reopens-coronavirus/index.html
Why are we always talking Florida, Texas, Arizona? How about the great progress in NY, NJ, Conn., Pa. etc. The fact that NYC is going to phase 2 Monday just 60 days from it’s peak is incredible. Connecticut all green now, Pa. days away from all green and NJ right behind. Great news and hardly ever mentioned on this board. Why?
You are right, this is good news, these states learned how bad the virus was and took the measures to get it under control.
People do talk about. I have. I mentioned NJ above and how it has brought it's #'s way down in my post about masks above. Others have recently posted the declines in current hospitalizations.
I do think the story right now though is the states that are seeing their #'s rise need to get this under control.
Not really...Horowitz wasn't arguing that either--he was providing an explanation for part of the increase. Then you went crazy over an update to the June 3 case count--even though AZ is still well below the June 2 peak.
Yet 59 x's the number that Horowitz used in his article which he thought was signifying a down ward trend.
June 2nd in his article was around 5.
Based on some of the recent rhetoric, that must mean they are doing well and it's on the decline....NOT! Some states are dancing with the devil.
Last edited:
Again, in his article June 2nd was not the peak. Horowitz was noting how new covid hospitalizations for that week were near zero.
Now it's the peak, at least in terms of reporting. In a couple weeks it won't be. The reality is the #'s have been increasing the whole time. The reporting will eventually show that.
So how does that change the point of his article about why there were increases? Haven't the pre--Jun 2 numbers been revised upward also?
Nope---59 out of 7.3mil is less than 75...like 50 on Jun 8 is less than both 75 and 59 out of 7.3mil. Look you can spend the rest of the day looking at AZ charts--I can't, so I'll check in periodically with your alerts ok. Thanks.
All green in PA doesn't mean alot. Bars and restaurants severely restricted among other business.
DeSantis on now - big issue are migrant farm workers, live together in dorms. One farm tested 90 out of 100 workers were positive.
This is why liquor stores are essential
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-going-rampage.html?__twitter_impression=true
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-going-rampage.html?__twitter_impression=true
So you seem to have two arguments going here.
1)As evidenced by the dashboard the new Covid hospitalized cases are dropping.
My counter, which I've said a couple dozen times is that graph shows a lag. The June 8th number is going to rise as the test results come in and the data is allocated to the specific days. Just like the June 2nd # has risen since the time of the article.
2)59 cases amongst a population of 7 million is very small and thus not a concern.
I have a few counters to this.
A)That is a one day total, multiply that times 30 and that is 1800 new hospitalizations in a month.
B)1800 out of 7 million doesn't sound like a big # either, but the 7 million is not the number we should focus on, it's the number of hospital beds. Back in March AZ had a total ICU bed capacity of around 800. They have raised that in light of the Covid threat to 1666 ICU beds. Currently 1407 of those beds are in use. 84%.
C)If 59 (June 3rd is now updated to 64)was the peak then maybe AZ would be OK. Unfortunately it's not the peak, the #'s will continue to rise.
Well you have morphed the debate to that, which started with you misinterpreting the Horowitz article. Whatever.
1) We will see.
2) Yes of course we need to watch for a hospital system overload. However as we saw in NYC and even Cali the Fed gov't has enormous capacity to support states in this need.
^^^ THIS!
Though I'm not totally onboard with fewer restaurants and bars, but fast food joints are driving our country's health into the ground and people do need an awakening about healthier diets.
Very misleading article from CNBC (they've been doing a lot of that lately; not your intention, I'm sure). Signify is referring to UVC radiation used in industrial UV disinfection systems. It's well known that UVC quickly deactivates viruses (there is no "killing" of a virus as, they're not "alive" per se), which is great, but it would be easy for the public to think the article is referring to sunlight/UV and viruses outdoors. It's not.
https://www.signify.com/global/our-...ces-on-inactivating-virus-that-causes-covid19
UVC is a much shorter wavelength than the UVA/UVB rays that do reach the earth's surface (all of UVA does and 5% of UVB does, as most of it is absorbed by the ozone layer) - all of the UVC radiation from the sun is absorbed by the ozone layer (thankfully or it would kill everything). As per the post I made last month, a great study using simulated sunlight at 40N showed that the sunlight deactivated 90% of virus particles in about 7 minutes.
What this means is that sunlight will greatly reduce surface virus viability (which is probably only a source of 1% or less of infections), but will do nothing to reduce the vast majority of transmissions, which occur from respiratory droplets for people within a few feet (from sneezing, coughing and even talking), as those droplets will only take a second or two to get to someone close by.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/infdis/jiaa274/5841129
This is the title of the artricle:
Horowitz: The new panic lie: Increased coronavirus hospitalizations and cases in the southwest
Is he not saying increased hospitalizations is a lie?
Then he says this:
"The truth is that new hospitalizations of people coming in for serious coronavirus infections are actually extremely low"
Then he points to the graph "which says it all".
After which he says this:
"As you can see, if you break down the new admissions by date of admission, as this chart does, the numbers are actually near zero over the past week."
Then he says this:
"Now you might wonder how cumulative numbers could be so high if the new daily intake is so low? It’s quite obvious that the first chart is only counting those who actually come in with new serious cases of COVID-19, for example those who have trouble breathing because the virus attacked their lungs. Those cases are extremely low relative to April."
I'm not misinterpreting anything here. He basis his whole argument on that graph. Which he didn't realize showed a decrease in cases, not because cases were decreasing, but because there is a lag in reporting. He then throws out other theories also based on the graph, which again, he misread.
If you want to keep going round and round on this, I'm obviously up to it(though I'm sure the rest of the board is tired of it), but the conclusion continues to be the same thing. Horowitz was wrong, AZ covid hospitalizations were, and are rising, as is the positivity rate, the ICU bed use, the vent use.
You're arguing with a zealot who is blindly following an absolute moron, who has zero understanding of science or math, apparently.
Doesn't surprise me. I was in Immokalee, FL for a mission trip in January. The farm workers would wait on the side of the road for the old dilapidated school bus to pick them up in them morning, then return (with a full bus) to drop them off at the end of the day. Many appeared to be heading to the same housing.
Can you point me to your evidence that the virus could not have escaped the Wuhan lab? Genuinely curious, as I found Martensen’s evidence extremely compelling.
Ease up old man. The Horowitz article cites a medical doctor, a public health official, an attorney in the healthcare field and others, and even news from a couple of your favs NYT and WaPo. Horowitz explains in part why cases are going up in SW. That's his argument--stop being so blinded by partisanship.
Good lord guy---your cherry picking is beyond tedious at this point. 1) His data was the same the media had at the time. We'll see if the trends change. Relax. 2) See my previous posts about his sources for reasons the case counts were increasing.
Hate retyping if I don't need to, so here you go. It'll never be possible to "prove" the virus couldn't have come from a lab (nearly impossible to prove a "negative"), but the papers/arguments I've read have convinced me that it's extraordinarily unlikely. Here are a couple of posts on this from last month - haven't seen any new relevant evidence on this.
Citing the title of the article is cherry picking?
The title may be misleading but article is clearly describing the use of a specific UV light made a company that can "deactivate" the virus in 3 seconds. The light application could be used in a number of applications as the article mentions. One application that I read about was boxing air conditioning return vents with UV Lights that could "deactivate" the virus. This may limit the spread indoors.
That was his word.
Also note, and this is also significant, that he is contradicting himself in the article. He is at once saying new cases are down. He then says the increase could be due to Mexico, though he never actually provides evidence it is happening in AZ, or patients coming in for some other condition testing positive, again with no actual data to support it. Cases are down, but the increase is due to these other things. That's the article.
You are right I was consumed by his main point, which was embarrassingly flawed, so I didn't delve into the rest of the article, but now that I have, I have a greater appreciation for how bad it is.
- Status
Similar threads
