Go tell it on the mountain over the hills and everywhere Go tell it on the mountain that #'s predicted it all
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
Go tell it on the mountain over the hills and everywhere Go tell it on the mountain that #'s predicted it all
Gov. Murphy reopened daycares as of 6/15.
Was this a mistake?
They are trying to limit capacity in classes and SD but not requiring toddlers to wear masks.
Adults must wear masks inside.
I see an "appears" and a "suggested".
Reading the article I also see:
"The data on kids has been contradictory so far, with some reports corroborating the Pasteur findings and at least one pointing the other way."
As well as
"Epidemiologist Arnaud Fontanet and colleagues said more studies on schools were needed because of the small number of cases they were able to study."
So I don't think anyone should make any decisions based on that study.
+1
Very true. CA didn't control for social distancing during the protests and rioting. And all that was a few weeks ago.
Facts don't matter when you have an agenda. This thread is essentially an echo chamber for 7-8 posters, very limited public reach.
Let's all be open minded and post different POVs. There's a big push in NJ to help day care centers and encourage parents to use them. This will help many get back to work and start living life again. The data in NJ looks good. Time to focus on reopening schools in Sept.
Opening day care centers was a good idea. Little children are not common spreaders of corona as per my link last night.
I think Murphy has to open things even though it also opens up a possible transmission point.
He's opening bars and restaurants even though we know they are major transmission points.
But NJ has gotten it's #'s way down so it becomes much easier to manage. Then you add in all the mitigation measures, masks, sanitation, social distancing. Finally you add in contact tracing. The early reports out of NY were not glowing, but you hope that everyone gets better with it as they move fwd.
Look, some 64K of our 121K deaths have been people 75 and over. Let's say it is January 1st of a "normal" year. How many of those 75K and older on 1 Jan are going to die during the year? Lots of them. Hey, I'm in that demographic. Life in the fast lane, right?
On it's surface the protests would seem to be an obvious transmission point. But why are we seeing spikes in some states that had protests, but declines in other states that had protests?
I know some people suggest some level of herd immunity played a role, but looking at the New York #'s they have declined steadily right through the protests. Nary a blip.
Don't see anything in Illinois.
Minnesota? Maybe something there, but certainly nothing like what we are seeing in CA, TX, FL, or AZ.
It’s easy to scoff at the virus when its effects are 2-3 degrees of separation from you.
When someone you know dies, or someone who you are close to is affected by a death, your perspective changes instantly.
Give numbers a break, 95% of his posts have been extremely informative for someone who has no obligation to post this on an RU football board of all places. The other 5% of his posts that are political or whatever in nature are because he’s a normal human with his own leanings, like everyone.
Back to news, it looks like the south is going to adopt the Sweden approach to the virus. Going to get very dicey, hoping we don’t see a major spike in under 50 mortality. It’s also interesting to me that some of these places are at or approaching exponential growth when the case seeding took place with in an interventionist environment even if the general population wasn’t fully compliant.
When someone you know dies, or someone who you are close to is affected by a death, your perspective changes instantly.
Give numbers a break, 95% of his posts have been extremely informative for someone who has no obligation to post this on an RU football board of all places. The other 5% of his posts that are political or whatever in nature are because he’s a normal human with his own leanings, like everyone.
Back to news, it looks like the south is going to adopt the Sweden approach to the virus. Going to get very dicey, hoping we don’t see a major spike in under 50 mortality. It’s also interesting to me that some of these places are at or approaching exponential growth when the case seeding took place with in an interventionist environment even if the general population wasn’t fully compliant.
I dunno, maybe 1000K of those would? Complete guess.
So we get back to that moral question of how many deaths are acceptable? And I do think that Covid has shone light on the fact that such questions are something we do have to consider. We can't close the economy to save one life, or 100 lives, or 1000 lives. Then yeah, you factor in that most of these deaths are people over the age of 75. It sounds cold hearted but I think you are right it has to be a consideration and weighed against the ramifications of closing the economy.
There is also the point that the 120K is not the end point. More people are dying, and we don't know how many people would have died if we did not close it down. We can look fwd now knowing we have increased hospital capacity, having significantly improved treatments, having increased PPE for the general public. In the early stages we had little to known of that. People seem to forget or ignore how bad it was in NYC early on.
Life needs to move on, the data in NJ is fine. People can be responsible and decide what amount of risk they are comfortable with.
The data is fine now in NJ because of the strict rules that were put into place.
Unfortueately, as we are seeing in states with spikes, that this is not always the case.
Folks that would like to can still adhere to those strict rules. That's everyone's choice. Also, those rules didn't help the poor people living in nursing homes. Those numbers are down because the virus ripped through those centers and ran its course. The same is likely true for the gen pop.
Very true.
But we do need to open up. We did a smart thing getting our #s so low, but the next step is the contact tracing. If the state can do a good job of this, and put out fires where they pop up, then I think we can say it was handled pretty well. If as we open the cases rise, we don't contact trace with success, and we get to a spot where those hot spot states now are then you can ask what was it all for?
Two most important things for future success (besides a vaccine):
1. Good contact tracing
2. Obese people losing weight
California is showing a rise in positivity, they were as low as 4.4%, and are currently at 5.6%, but they are also testing alot more people.
They were testing about 60K people per day a couple weeks ago, they are now consistently testing 80k+.
Compare that to Florida, who isn't testing more now then they were a month ago and has seen their positivity rate jump from a low of 2.3% and are now at 14.4%? Two very different situations.
The increased testing is how you get a handle on this. So CA who is nowhere near as bad as FL in terms of positivity is doing the right thing, while FL is carrying on status quo.
They were testing about 60K people per day a couple weeks ago, they are now consistently testing 80k+.
Compare that to Florida, who isn't testing more now then they were a month ago and has seen their positivity rate jump from a low of 2.3% and are now at 14.4%? Two very different situations.
The increased testing is how you get a handle on this. So CA who is nowhere near as bad as FL in terms of positivity is doing the right thing, while FL is carrying on status quo.
increase of positive tests are outpacing increased testing by a good amount. So that’s part of the explanation, but only a small part. The real reason is because the virus is spreading rapidly in some states.
1)Right now I'm putting treatments above a cure, but we shall see.
2)I fought #'s on tracing for awhile, I just wasn't sure we could test at the levels necessary, but after a slow start you do see the power of the US machine(I assume they are made here?) just pumping out tests. Edit: And in a state like NJ which got it's #'s so low it becomes a much more tenable proposition. States which are reporting 5K+ new cases a day? Good luck tracing that.
3)I'm not expecting it, but it would be something if as a consequence of Covid the US was able to cut back the obesity rate. I think it would take some top down leadership, but like I said, I'm not expecting it.
Last edited:
Since April, I've been very positive about the potential of convalescent plasma, have said I think that engineered antibodies will be a gamechanging near cure to cure by the fall and have predicted we'd have a commercial vaccine by the end of this year. Those are pretty damn positive positions relative to what most experts have been saying.
And while I was concerned that the protests would lead to spikes in COVID cases, once I saw generally at least half (or more in many cases) of protesters were wearing masks (although I wished they all wore masks), I predicted minor, at most, spikes in cases, which has been shown to be correct.
https://www.nber.org/papers/w27408.pdf
I've also been very positive about the post-first-wave reopening plans for the regionally-connected NE US states (especially NY), which were hit hardest, and which generally had specific metrics-based triggers for reopening safely and so far, those efforts have borne fruit, with cases, hospitalizations and deaths continuing to decline. I'd prefer to see everyone wearing masks and practicing distancing, as we can still do better, but most are, especially in close quarters inside where the risks are greatest.
So, not all negative and the "negative" stuff, IMO, is simply accurate.
During the large protests, it was said, let's see the numbers two weeks later.
Well, it's two to three weeks later and the amount of cases have increased.
Some wore masks, some didn't, but when thousands of protesters are packed together a flimsy mask won't help anyways
When you look at the current big 4, three of those states are doing a good job in terms of increasing testing.
And then there is FL.
When you look at the big 4 in terms of positivity, all are rising, but 3 of those are spiking. California, despite it's huge new case #'s does look to be in a better situation then the other 3.
You were right on the conclusion on the protest but not on the reason. According to the paper you linked :
This study is the first to empirically examine the linkage between the 2020 Black Lives
Matter protests and the spread of COVID-19, which has been a point of concern among public
health officials and the media (Bacon 2020; Goldberg 2020; Harmon and Rojas 2020). While it
is almost certain that the protests caused a decrease in social distancing behavior among protest
attendees, we demonstrate that effect of the protests on the social distancing behavior of the
entire population residing in counties with large urban protests was positive. Likewise, while it
is possible that the protests caused an increase in the spread of COVID-19 among those who
attended the protests, we demonstrate that the protests had little effect on the spread of COVID19 for the entire population of the counties with protests during the more than three weeks
following protest onset. In most cases, the estimated longer-run effect (post-21 days) was
negative, though not statistically distinguishable from zero.20
While the exact mechanisms for these findings cannot be conclusively known with the
data available, the results are consistent with avoidance behavior on the part of the non-attending
population. This is consistent with the literature on crime, violence, and perceived safety
amongst the general population, who in the presence of crime or violence choose to remain home
more often (Bennet et al. 2007; Stafford et al. 2007; Chalfin 2008; Janke, Propper and Shields
2016; Yu and Lippert 2016; Stolzenberg, D’Alessio and Flexon 2019). While Black Lives
Matter protests are protected speech and not criminal activities, they may still be viewed as
dangerous by non-attendees due to the occasional presence of violence, including police
response to these protests, and elicit avoidance behavior.
There are other possible explanations for our findings as well, such as avoiding travel
outside the home due to additional traffic congestion or street closures, or due to lack of
available activities from businesses closures near protest sites. Additionally, non-attendees may
perceive a higher risk of COVID-19 infection due to the protests and choose to stay home.
0 Our results do not necessarily extrapolate to imply that large outdoor gatherings per se are safe. In the case of the protests that we study, compensatory behavioral responses among the non-participating subpopulation appear to be driving the net effects that we find in the overall population
Yes, the ones that had large protests.
Remember that aerial drone shot I posted here from CA?
Looked liked thousands of sardines packed in a can
Based on science the protests are the biggest reason why we are seeing upticks and spikes.
Sure other factors contribute but when people traveled from all over the place to protest in other large cities, then they go home and bring CV with them.
Well then, let's conduct our own study and see if we come up with similar results. If we do, then we can open up schools in September. But that's not going to happen. Murphy will continue to ignore science and keep the panic going.
I agree, don't see how those protests would not be major transmission points.
But why is Florida spiking while NY is declining and Minnesota is showing only a slight increase?
I just think there is much more at play then those protests.
As noted above, Murphy did open day care. So perhaps he is conducting that experiment.
We also know he opened parks, and then kept them open when people said he would reclose them.
We know he opened beaches and then kept them open when people said he would reclose them.
We know he has opened up other areas of the economy. Indoor restaurants and bars will be open next week.
Some of Murphy's critics have been very wrong as to what he will do.
Just to elaborate on the protest part...I was very concerned that the protests would lead to spikes in COVID cases, but once I saw generally at least half (or more in many cases) of protesters were wearing masks (although I wished everyone wore masks), I predicted minor, at most, spikes in cases. It looks like this has turned out to be correct, but the outcome is likely more due to the impact of the protests on non-protesters (although certainly mask-wearing played a role). The paper actually shows that net distancing increased (more protesters in urban areas, but less non-protesters than usual for a variety of reasons, including concerns over violence and/or COVID) and no apparent COVID spikes have been observed in these urban counties/cities over the 3+ weeks following the start of the protests (and one would expect case spikes within 7 days). It's not clear whether there were any spikes within the protester population itself, however, as that would likely be too fine of a population to profile accurately. Abstract is below and tons more in the paper.
https://www.nber.org/papers/w27408.pdf
ABSTRACT: Sparked by the killing of George Floyd in police custody, the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests have brought a new wave of attention to the issue of inequality within criminal justice. However, many public health officials have warned that mass protests could lead to a reduction in social distancing behavior, spurring a resurgence of COVID-19. This study uses newly collected data on protests in 315 of the largest U.S. cities to estimate the impacts of mass protests on social distancing and COVID-19 case growth. Event-study analyses provide strong evidence that net stay-at-home behavior increased following protest onset, consistent with the hypothesis that nonprotesters’ behavior was substantially affected by urban protests. This effect was not fully explained by the imposition of city curfews. Estimated effects were generally larger for persistent protests and those accompanied by media reports of violence. Furthermore, we find no evidence that urban protests reignited COVID-19 case growth during the more than three weeks following protest onset. We conclude that predictions of broad negative public health consequences of Black Lives Matter protests were far too narrowly conceived.
Every state tests differently and also interprets the numbers their own way
Ya, FL on their dashboard combines antigen and antibody tests which is frowned upon.
Though I'm pretty sure John Hopkins, where I am getting the data, is tracking tests of the virus itself.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states/arizona
Is there some new news on Moderna? Maybe I missed it. I've always been pretty skeptical of their platform, mostly because there is not yet an approved mRNA vaccine. Maybe this will be the first.
Not MRNA specific. Nor Covid specific. But related.
"1425 GMT - Downbeat results from tests of a cancer vaccine based on an unproven technology cast doubt over the chances of using that approach to develop coronavirus vaccines, says HSBC. The bank says data from trials of BNT-122, which uses mRNA technology and was developed by BioNTech and partner Roche Holding, showed what HSBC described as 'clearly disappointing' patient responses. HSBC says the results suggest mRNA-based vaccines may not be as immunogenic as hoped. BioNTech and partner Pfizer, as well as Moderna Inc., are developing Covid-19 vaccines based on mRNA approaches. "The failure of BNT-122 should provide pause for thought on the prospects for mRNA approaches in vaccination for COVID-19 and other diseases," HSBC analyst Steve McGarry says. (philip.waller@wsj.com)"
I've heard from nurses that "probables" are more like "very likely", but yeah the #'s are not dead on precise.
Clear though that NJ's cases are way down, while other states are way up.
Edit: For instance, FL with another 5000K new cases.
Their fatalities, are def looking like they will be up week over week as well.
Also related. TX freezes it's opening plans.
- Status
