COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
- Status
More LOL you and your silly SoKo comps, to wit:
And as I'm sure you know, SoKo's conditioning to masks from past chicomvirus outbreaks led the population to demand so many that there were shortages after the WHO issued the regional pandemic in Asia. Try as you might the SoKo to US comps are still ridiculous. It's not like Seoul had to deal with outbreaks 3,000 miles away on another coast.
What is your point about symptoms being delayed "a day or two" not making a difference on testing? On average it takes 5–6 days from when someone is infected with the virus for symptoms to show, however it can take up to 14 days. The article in the @wisr01 post was about the chicomvirus being highly contagious 48 hours before symptoms appear. But since asymptomatic spread was not
known at that time---I'll get back to your Fauci note--why do you believe so many New Yorkers or busy NJ commuters would actually deal with testing hassles if they did not have symptoms? I asked you months ago if NY/NJ had hospital records of patients presenting with chicomvirus symptoms in Jan & Feb (pre-test availability)---do you have anything yet?
Sorry, but you also continue to be wrong about "..nobody was going to shut down anything without any data..". San Fran shutdown using chicomvirus infection models six days before NYC did. Why did Cuomo/Wilhelm not follow their models and shut down earlier or at least at the same time?
It has been estimated that deaths might have been reduced by 50 percent to 80 percent in NYC if social distancing had been widely adopted a week or two earlier. Of course we don't know if that estimate considered Cuomo's order sending infected elderly patients into nursing homes.
So now last, but certainly not least, what's this about Fauci's call with an unnamed Chicom colleague? Do you have any more details on whether it was confirmed by other US or international health experts at the time about asymptomatic infection and that some asymptomatic people were transmitting infections? If there was such a consensus among US scientists and career government health officials, why weren't they and Fauci screaming from the rooftops about it in early Feb? I look forward to more information on this from you. Thanks.
Last edited:
Someone in Massachusetts claims that masks violate OSHA regulations by limiting oxygen levels to 17 per cent,below the OSHA indoor minimum of 19 per cent.
This may be the legal weapon to fight The Mask Of The Beast.
This may be the legal weapon to fight The Mask Of The Beast.
I prefer to call it the tRUMP virus. Is that OK with you?
Well if someone in Massachusetts claims it ... It's gotta be real.
It wasn't anything in particular but more echoing what Bac said that the narrative is always changing and we should be vigilant (on both sides) of 'settled science.
He also called into question the number of deaths in the 18-42 age and said that maybe it is not a good idea to lockdown whole populations. And yes, I get the whole other side of the equation which is being asymptomatic and bringing it home.
The other point that resonated with me a bit was not allowing small shop owners or coffee shops, eateries etc., to open up. If people wear masks and social distance, then why not a bookstore or a cafe if a Wegman's is allowed to remain opened.
I think we could be a bit more surgical in what we allow to be open and not open. But for the most part I would say he is just the flip side of the opposite argument. He has his agenda just like the shut-down at all cost folks do.
The first link is one of the sources I use. Can't say it's always 100% in agreement with NJ DOH numbers, but it's certainly good enough for trending (been posting these weekly in my posts on COVID national/key state stats, which includes NJ as a comparator). And speaking of DOH numbers, I think they used to be there for tests at the 2nd link, but I'm not seeing them. The 3rd link has a great summary, but I can't find an updated version. Probably moved these somewhere - the test info and other info really ought to be easier to find and I'm not willing to spend more than 10 minutes searching when the first link data is probably ok.
https://covidtracking.com/data/state/new-jersey#chart-annotations
https://covid19.nj.gov/
https://www.nj.gov/health/cd/documents/topics/NCOV/COVID_Confirmed_Case_Summary.pdf
Thanks, numbers. Total tests by day hasn't been on the dashboard ever, I don't think (2nd link). If it was it hasn't been there in quite some time. I guess I'll have to wait for the update at link #1 to see if the 699 positives was on a data dump or is evidence of increasing positivity/spread.
Any retail shop in which you can wear a mask should be allowed to open. I assumed they all were at this point.
retail is allowed to open.
and wegmans, while open, isn't allowed to open the indoor dine in area, which would be the equivalent of the cafe or small restaurant.
Usually when all or most counties show large increases all at once its a data lag.
Problem is the state Rt formula doesn’t take into account data lags so we’ll likely see a jump well above 1.0 which doesn’t necessarily mean transmission is increasing.
For all you guys who want your local gym open, just petition them to drop a slot machine or two in it
Up this way, it has been piecemeal. Yes, now everything is open but the damage has already been done in terms of small businesses that closed and in all likelihood will never re-open.
Saw on Fox Business, Little Havana stores in Miami getting destroyed by these unnecessary Draconian edicts.
A damn shame
A damn shame
DC to Boston is about the same as South Korea - no excuse for not being able to do what SK did with developing/deploying tests, despite all your silly posts to the contrary. We utterly failed having testing available anywhere, which is independent of the size of the US.
With regard to having "data" on symptomatic people presenting at doctor's offices and hospitals, I've already posted about that via the ILI (influenza like illnesses) reports, which were way up in our area starting in the beginning of March (first link), plus there have been numerous studies estimating the NYC had >10,000 cases by the end of February (and NENJ probably had a similar amount and some estimates are much greater), and finally, as per the 2nd link, a paper was just published showing that COVID was growing unknown to anyone in Jan/Feb in Seattle (based on COVID testing of retained "flu" samples that were negative for flu), so it's also quite likely the same was going on in this area.
So certainly by late February, there were many symptomatic cases walking around, but no tests for any of them before early March and still <1000 tests/day by mid-March. It seems nearly certain that if we had tests available by late February, we'd have been finding cases by then and probably would've easily had a few hundred cases by early March, if only we had had testing capability in place.
https://www.healio.com/news/infecti...new-york-were-preceded-by-uptick-in-flu-cases
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2589-5370(20)30223-6
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/us/coronavirus-early-outbreaks-cities.html
With regard to shutting things down, the biggest reason California likely started with earlier shutdowns is they had more cases and deaths through early March and into mid-March vs. New York. As of 3/4, CA had 53 cases and 1 death, while NY had 3 cases and zero deaths and it wasn't until 3/12 that NY had more cases than CA (328 to 237), but at that point CA had 4 deaths, while NY had none. NY finally passed CA in deaths on 3/15. So, it's not a surprise that CA closed schools on 3/13, while NY did that a few days later on 3/16, when bars/restaurants were also shut down.
Yes, CA's "formal" shutdown order came on 3/17 vs. 3/22 for NY (due to bickering between BDB and Cuomo, which was unfortunate and the formal shutdown shouldn't have taken that long), but both states were effectively closed up by around 3/16, by which time NY's cases had ballooned very quickly to ~3X those in CA (1374 to 392), as NY (and NJ) was unknowingly in the midst of an incredible exponential growth phase unlike any seen during this pandemic - just a week later, on 3/23, NY had over 25K cases, while CA had just 1700 (15X). I believe that if NY (and NJ) had SK's 10,000 test/day capability by late February, we would've seen the 3/16-style case numbers by early March and potentially might have shut down 2 weeks earlier or at least 1 week earlier, saving perhaps ~50% (1 week earlier) to ~80% (2 weeks earlier) of the lives lost.
https://abc7news.com/feature/health...-to-becoming-a-new-york-level-crisis/6108354/
Not sure what your point is about Fauci - it's all in the article. Everyone in the field knew there was the potential for asymptomatic transmission going on by early February, based on the study cited, but it took a few more weeks to get a robust set of data showing that was likely going on (including data from the Diamond Princess and elsewhere). Also, while I think Fauci and our political leaders (federal and state) should've sounded stronger alarms, it's also unrealistic to think Fauci should've been screaming to shut down the country with <75 cases and zero deaths on 3/1? Hmmmm, maybe if we had had robust testing in place and seen hundreds of cases by 3/1, perhaps things would've played out differently.
On the flip side I recall many comparisons to the flu and 60k deaths.
Another poster in this thread has posted him a few times, and he has said around 2 months ago that Florida and Arizona were doing fine and it was all hysteria and that those states didn't have many sick people in them and that deaths wouldn't rise there.
I forecast about 300,000 by the end of the year since we are getting 10,000 more by at least every two weeks.
China reporting (which always needs to be taken with a grain of salt) that they are conducting 4.3M tests/day, and reporting a case rate 1/5000th that of the US. Near universal mask wearing. Schools open.
Why the F would they be testing so many healthy people showing no sign of CV?
Hawaii is certainly seeing a signficant rise in cases, but it's much better to put their performance in broader context. Right now, Hawaii has the lowest per capita death rate (by a wide amount at 28/1MM vs. the country avg of over 500/1MM) and the 2nd lowest per capita case rate (at 3000 cases/1MM, just behind VT, and way below the US avg of 16.4K/1MM).
Also, let's actually look at the slanted, misleading article. First thing they do is show a graphic that appears to show an out of control case increase heading towards infinity - it's almost off the charts! Until one realizes they're using the old trick of setting the y-axis max right at the greatest data point. The other gem in the article is the ridiculous statement that there is zero correlation between human input and the trend of the virus. There are countless examples of state/country differences based on interventions.
Don't get me wrong - they're having a serious spike relative to the fantastic results they've had to date, but if they're able to control the peak close to where they are now (~200 cases/1MM, even with today's big spike), it'll be below California's peak (~250 cases/1MM), per capita, which is less than half of Florida's/Arizona's/NY's peaks per capita. If they've actually lost all control and the peak is much higher, which I do not expect to see, then we'll have to have a different post-mortem. The fact that their Rt has dropped from 1.6 to 1.3 is a good sign that they're starting to take this more seriously.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.198855/page-120#post-4664682
With regard to what "went wrong" I'd hazard a guess that living in paradise has not meant strong adherence to their mask policy in some quarters and especially by young people, which has been pretty common almost everywhere, plus, they probably were at <3% infected, meaning rapid spread was much more likely than here or now in some of the other states that had large wave 2 peaks.
They've also been more aggressive in what's open than some states, including opening up gyms (many jokes I could make here). I also don't think their mask policy is anything unusual (35 states have mask requirements) and that this indicates that masks don't work - it likely indicates that lax adherence to mask wearing, while opening most things back up and while having a very low case rate to begin with (far more to infect) are ingredients for a spike, especially on the much more densely populated Oahu (more densely populated than NJ, overall), where most of the recent cases are.
That's what you do if you want to prevent minor flare-ups from becoming major outbreaks, especially if combined with effective testing/tracing/isolating of all contacts. Are you really that naive? The US is testing way too little to do that in most locations.
I posted earlier today about how Hawaii in particular Oahu eventually fell into the same situation as Florida , California, Arizona ... large groups not wearing masks, no social separation, bar overcrowding and the influx of visitors, returning residents and military stationed there. It became Florida West...at this time control is a big question.Hawaii is certainly seeing a signficant rise in cases, but it's much better to put their performance in broader context. Right now, Hawaii has the lowest per capita death rate (by a wide amount at 28/1MM vs. the country avg of over 500/1MM) and the 2nd lowest per capita case rate (at 3000 cases/1MM, just behind VT, and way below the US avg of 16.4K/1MM).
Also, let's actually look at the slanted, misleading article. First thing they do is show a graphic that appears to show an out of control case increase heading towards infinity - it's almost off the charts! Until one realizes they're using the old trick of setting the y-axis max right at the greatest data point. The other gem in the article is the ridiculous statement that there is zero correlation between human input and the trend of the virus. There are countless examples of state/country differences based on interventions.
Don't get me wrong - they're having a serious spike relative to the fantastic results they've had to date, but if they're able to control the peak close to where they are now (~200 cases/1MM, even with today's big spike), it'll be below California's peak (~250 cases/1MM), per capita, which is less than half of Florida's/Arizona's/NY's peaks per capita. If they've actually lost all control and the peak is much higher, which I do not expect to see, then we'll have to have a different post-mortem. The fact that their Rt has dropped from 1.6 to 1.3 is a good sign that they're starting to take this more seriously.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...entions-and-more.198855/page-120#post-4664682
With regard to what "went wrong" I'd hazard a guess that living in paradise has not meant strong adherence to their mask policy in some quarters and especially by young people, which has been pretty common almost everywhere, plus, they probably were at <3% infected, meaning rapid spread was much more likely than here or now in some of the other states that had large wave 2 peaks.
They've also been more aggressive in what's open than some states, including opening up gyms (many jokes I could make here). I also don't think their mask policy is anything unusual (35 states have mask requirements) and that this indicates that masks don't work - it likely indicates that lax adherence to mask wearing, while opening most things back up and while having a very low case rate to begin with (far more to infect) are ingredients for a spike, especially on the much more densely populated Oahu (more densely populated than NJ, overall), where most of the recent cases are.
If we were able to test everyone in the country at least once a week, we'd have this thing contained enough to get back to a more normal life. This is where the saliva test would have been fantastic. Also would need to improve turnaround time on test results to make it work.
- Status
Similar threads
