Will say it seems to be hanging around regardless of the summer weather.
I’m with GH on this....I just can’t care anymore. Too much life to live.
I had to explain that the only way it will ever drop is if some people who died from Covid come back to life. I showed her the daily number for our state which has dropped to almost none.
This has been the biggest disaster in my lifetime. And, I’m not talking about the deaths either.
I’m just going to get a BLM t-shirt and go wherever I want. They must come in camo too, right?
Was this in Kansas?
Our good friend's mother and father got the virus in Michigan. Both were very healthy beforehand. Both were hospitalized. The father recovered. The mother died on Mother's Day.
Scoff and downplay it all you want, but Just because you or your circle of family and friends hasn't been affected by Covid 19, yet, doesn't meant they won't be in the future. And it shouldn't diminish the precautions we all take.
Thanks Matt. Condolences to you as well.
There is asymptomatic and there is pre-symptomatic. They are not the same thing.
Turn back the dial
All in this together
These uncertain times
SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm suffering from corona cliche' overload!!
Sent a similar PM to Jack. I look forward to burgers and brews with you tomorrow. We disagree on politics, but do it in an agreeable fashion. I know we both end up contemplating competing ideas when we finish our discussions. That's the way it should be IMHO!
I feel sorry for those that go to Fox News/MSNBC/CNN between 7-10pm (CST) for their science knowledge. There is absolutely no news on TV in America from 7-10pm.
COVID is not an issue for you and your family until it is.
Kinda think you get bumped for being a dick..... or a Karen.... not censored for posting an articulate opposing view. (see: twitter,facebook, youtube, etc) If you have some evidence of this happening in the forum referenced please show your work. I wouldn't want to be a part of such a thing.
But knowing the folks involved, I don't think it happened. Just more hyperbole (pre or asy? hard to tell...) from Capt Hyperbole and his sidekick Drama Boy...... but please do carry on. Really interested in your date night..... at least it's likely factual..... likely....
Neither are a lot of things until they are...
The disclaimer that went poof said nothing of the such.
Do you even know what hyperbole is TD? The lack of self reflection is stunning.
Michigan protestors were literally called domestic terrorists by their wonderful governor. Saying they wanted to kill people to go to the beach and get a haircut. No. It was so people could go back to work. So people wouldn't lose their homes, livelihood and family. Her husband then gets caught trying to take his boat out (kinda like that Cuomo nutball in NYC) breaking their own lockdown rules. "Do you know WHO I AM?" That is what has happened and literally said about truly peaceful protests, actions by the hypocrites in power. No "hyperbole". Facts.
They then turn around and say nothing about the protests and riots. Participating in them actually. So was it all BS back when they wanted to fine and arrest barbers? Or is it BS now when they won't even arrest a rioter or looter, much less for breaking social distancing?
Do you honestly think "they" have been straight up with the real facts in all this mess? Facts don't matter when the narrative must be controlled..... for your own good of course.... trust us they say, we know what's best.... for you.....
They have done nothing to earn anyone's trust. Quite the opposite in fact.
“Michigan protestors were literally called domestic terrorists by their wonderful governor. Saying they wanted to kill people to go to the beach and get a haircut.” Please show me a link where this occurred because I can not find a video or article where the Michigan governor was quoted saying this...or maybe it was hyperbole?
“They then turn around and say nothing about the protests and riots. Participating in them actually. So was it all BS back when they wanted to fine and arrest barbers? Or is it BS now when they won't even arrest a rioter or looter, much less for breaking social distancing?” See link. You really want to stick to facts?
“They have done nothing to earn anyone's trust. Quite the opposite in fact.” Who is they? Who held a press conference daily? Because Trump is so trusting and moral? The guy lies daily? What is so scary is that I actually think he believes his own lies. You don’t need a media filter to see that. Just listen to the words coming from his own mouth On video and his fingers onto twitter. Direct communication unfiltered. He attacks science, the media, government, and gobbles up conspiracy theories daily for breakfast you and rinse and repeat here.
I hardly think it’s facts you want. Based on your post you likely really mean you seek right wing propaganda because it supports your alternate reality along with Trumps.
Unfortunately, the goal posts keep moving in terms of what we are trying to accomplish and yes, it has become political.
When all is said and done, I truly believe that the consequences from our response to the virus will be much worse than the virus itself.
I've personally knows three people who have tested positive for the virus. One client in her late 70's and she was literally the poster child for "comorbidities" (morbid obesity, diabetes, HPB, and two previous heart attacks). She ultimately died of renal failure but her death certificate lists her cause of death as covid-19.
The daughter and son-in-law of a close friend of mine both tested positive. They are in their early 40's (he is a commercial pilot and she works from home). They were over it in about a week. Both said symptoms were less than that of the flu. Their three young children all tested negative.
Habitat for Wildlife's Link
As usual, KS, flew right over your head.
The wild thing, is that we have seen the impact from CV19 that we have with measures taken to flatten the curve so to speak. Had we not done anything, the impact could have been many times what it was.
There in lay's the challenge of public health policy... Often when it works, it means less or nothing happens. So it's easy to look and say: "see, no biggie, scientists are dumb, we should have just carried on etc..."
"Flattening the curve" is about trying to control the spread so that the healthcare system isn't overwhelmed. The grim fact is that most people who CAN get it WILL eventually get it, unless they are in an extremely isolated area which never has it introduced.
Therein lies the rub.
I'm not sure we can say, with any amount of certainty, this would have been the case. Many within the medical community feel that there was/is only a certain segment of the population that will ultimately succumb to this virus (and I mean actually die from the virus, not die with the virus). Whether that happens within 60 days or 2 years, the overall number will likely be about the same. Some actually believe that some of our reactions have actually made it worse (e.g. nursing homes) than it might have been otherwise.
Unless or until there is an effective vaccine, or true herd immunity, we will continue to lose the most vulnerable to this virus...just like the flu and other viruses.
Until we, the American people, accept that fact, it will continue to be used a political football.
If there is one good thing to come from George Floyd situation, it will have been to take the white hot focus off covid-19 and on to something else. This gives the American people a little time to come to their senses about the real risk as opposed to the panic created by some.
Grey Ghost's Link
But, I'm sure our resident medical experts, here, know so much more. SMH.
Are some of you actually serious with your conspiracy theories?!?!
I'm not sure we can say, with any amount of certainty, this would have been the case.'
We can say that with certainty. Anyone who suggests otherwise either has an agenda or simply is not that clever.
Last week, Stockwell Day lost his place on CBC TV and two board positions because he said that he did not believe there was "systematic" racism in Canada. He said there are individual racists in Canada and on police forces and among plumbers, insurance salesmen, housewives and house husbands and politicians, etc.. The cancel culture's justice was swift and complete!
Wendy Mesley just lost her gig on TV because she said the "N" word while quoting someone else in the backroom of the studio. Not on the air, not to an audience, not to a group, not for the public, but no matter. The ult-left leaders fall to their knees, self flagellating themselves over the even slightest or even perceived slightest hint of un-correctness.
Yet, day after day, that same media can willfully and intentionally incite fear of and hatred towards police MEN and WOMEN!! Are they not an "identifiable group".
The news here is constantly showing pictures of a Indigenous man, the chief of a reserve with his face swollen and bloody. The headlines all scream " police brutality and racism!!!" They KNOW the backstory, but won't print it. And it's all on dash cam. The "innocent first nations man" was leaving a casino at 2:00 am in a truck that had no valid plates. To make it sound even more atrocious, they include that the wife was trying to adjust a child seat. Was there a child in the seat? If there was, where was the child the whole time the couple was in the casino? And the reason the truck plate had expired was because the Chief had just got it back from a sixty day impoundment for DUI, as a REPEAT offender! The wife first tried to drive of, then when stopped the chief had to "fight for his life" and it got ugly. Fine upstanding example to the young people under his leadership. But if you don't one hundred percent back the chief, you are a racist. One of the many daily examples of the media bias in Canada.
And in Canada the media is literally bought and paid for by the government. CBC was gifted additional six hundred million dollars (over and above) to facilitate better journalism and to hire "better' people. "Bad" journalists were not allowed to draw from the trough. And guess who gets to decide who is bad?
If anyone didnt read the article... it shows how flu deaths often noted this spring as a comparison to COVID19 are based on an algorithm, NOT individual deaths. Based on that, if we count flu deaths EXACTLY as COVID19 has been counted, the COVID19 numbers of deaths are far far higher than flu, accomplished in only about 3 months vs a full flu season.
This is a different beast.
That does NOT mean we shouldnt be working to re-open. Not at all. Just that reasonable precautions make sense as we do re-open.
KPC, and therein lay's the truth of what I just said. when things dont happen, you cant count them, thus it's tough to quantify if an intervention worked... especially when there is no previous thing to measure against. In this case, we can measure nations that cracked down fast and hard and have universally fared better for deaths and infections than those that have not. So, we dont have concrete numbers in this case, because they didnt exist to compare to. All we can do is recognize that shut down strategy has generally worked well where applied early and fast, for reducing infection rate. I'd say a challenge here is that it needs to be directed from above but regionally focused so the response is cohesive but targeted to that area. Small town Montana is going to have very different needs than Miami.
A few hundred who loot, burn and commit acts of violence or murder during the protests doesn't mean all the protestors are bad people. That is an obvious truth.
Unfortunately the left can't apply the same truth when an occasional bad or incompetent cop does something bad.
Abolishing the police because of a handful of bad apples would be like abolishing the right to free speech and protest due to the people who use it as an excuse to harm, loot and destroy.
I was trying to avoid the political aspect of this whole conversation. My biggest irritation is the constant comparisons of COVID to the regular flu. There really is no comparison, despite the fact that our POTUS implied so early on, and people are still trying to make that comparison, now. This thread is a perfect example of that.
COVID has proven to be many times more contagious than the regular flu. It can be transmitted thru droplets on surfaces and in aeresol form thru the air. Infected people can spread the virus before they have any symptoms. Everybody's immune system reacts to it differently, some have a mild reaction, while others react severely to it. Although the numbers are ever-changing, COVID has proven to be in the magnitude of 5-10 times more deadly than the flu. Finally, there is no truly effective treatment of COVID, nor is there a vaccine.
It's easy to argue that the lockdowns have caused more harm than the virus would have. But that's disingenuious and a bit ignorant, IMO. No one really knows how bad this could have been without the lockdowns, nor do they know how bad it may become if a second wave hits this fall.
Our economy will recovery just fine from this. Heck, the stock markets already have. Retirement plans are nearing their previous highs. Unemployment numbers are falling faster than anyone expected. Yes, there is still pain to endure for some, but it pales in comparison to the economic hardships this country has endured many times in the past. People will get back to work, perhaps with a new found appreciation for their jobs, and the US will be as productive as ever, IMO.
As for protests, riots, and looting, I think that's just a product of pent up frustration and people having way too much time on their hands. That too will pass when we get back to some semblence of normalcy.
Just my 2 cents, and a pocket full of lint.
Unfortunately, you conveniently left out what might be the most important part of my statement.
"I'm not sure we can say, with any amount of certainty, this would have been the case. "Many within the medical community feel that there was/is only a certain segment of the population that will ultimately succumb to this virus (and I mean actually die from the virus, not die with the virus). Whether that happens within 60 days or 2 years, the overall number will likely be about the same."
Flattening the curve was not really intended to stop infections and the resulting deaths, it was intended to spread them out over a longer period of time so as to no overwhelm the system all at once.
By the way, the one dentist that doesn't recommend brushing was probably a guest on the EIB network or Hannity recently talking about COVID being the same as the flu. Then some posters come here and regurgitate it constantly. I can pretty much tell you what was on Hannity/Limbaugh/Levin last night by watching posts on here. It's like those on the far left and right folks got their BS meters taken away from them early in life. Some seem to get their opinion handed to them nightly by cable news channels.
DO NOT GET YOUR SCIENCE INFORMATION FROM CABLE NEWS CHANNELS OR INTERNET FORUMS/SOCIAL MEDIA.
Science...because its better than making s@#t up.
Your most important part and broader point assumes no vaccine will be developed, which is not a foregone conclusion. That is another potential benefit of flattening the curve.
A highly touted negative study on hydroxychloroquine (New England Journal of Medicine..... sounds pretty sciencie to me yeah?) news media jumped all over it. Then quickly found to be total BS when held to the light and retracted (as opposed to censored... huh...) Poof, gone. What was the dire need to whip up such a study? And totally ignore others such as those ongoing for months in France, etc. Naw.... no politics there.... move along....
Some good covid news though...... Whitmer is NOW considering NOT stuffing covid patients into nursing homes...... ($5000 per patient state grant to the homes) where an estimated half the states fatalities have occurred. Or more, they are still counting nursing home deaths and won't release "official" stats on them yet. Huh, kinda the same policy (and outcome) of Cuomo and New York nursing homes. What could go wrong?
NY, NJ and Michigan are ranked the top 3 states. And by coincidence also had the strictest lockdown. Florida and others with comparatively little restrictions and much sooner reopening have had far fewer deaths. Apparently there are no old people in FL....
Thank God they kept the pot stores (and abortion clinics) open or it would have been a real crisis.... everybody knows weed is a disinfectant so nobody can spread the virus..... not like those evil tomato plants that WERE outlawed.... good grief....
yeah.... it's all science..... ya knuckledraggin' racists.... now sit down, (no! not on the sand!) STFU and do what you're told.... we know what's best for you.....
Behavior has a lot to do with it as well. LA county was subject to many of the same rules we are (and some more stringent) and while it has a much larger population than we do (~5.5x more populous), they had almost half that many deaths so far today as we've seen through the entire situation and are approaching 2,800 total deaths. Apparently they do not follow rules very well.
What is amazing to me in the disconnect between the science and the politics is LA county has pursued and received approval to relax more quickly than we have, all in the context of a much higher prevalence of COVID. Our county health officer is way too conservative, but even in instances where our governor claims to be all about science and data, ridiculous inconsistencies abound.
Apparently you chose to leave that part of my post out also.
”Unless or until there is an effective vaccine, or true herd immunity, we will continue to lose the most vulnerable to this virus...just like the flu and other viruses.“
"Based on the CDC numbers though, I should have seen many, many more. In 2018, over 46,000 Americans died from opioid overdoses. Over 36,500 died in traffic accidents. Nearly 40,000 died from gun violence. I see those deaths all the time. Was I alone in noticing this discrepancy?
I decided to call colleagues around the country who work in other emergency departments and in intensive care units to ask a simple question: how many patients could they remember dying from the flu?"
I found this rather peculiar.
First of all, it is my understanding that people don't very often "die from the flu." They die of complications from the flu, mainly secondary infections like pneumonia, or other complications like renal failure, sepsis, etc.. That is in part why it's hard for the CDC to get actual numbers because influenza is not often listed as the cause of death on a persons death certificate. Sepsis, yes. Renal failure, yes. Pneumonia, yes. Influenza, not very often. Unlike covid-19, where anyone that tests positive, or in many cases is even suspected of having covid-19 , hospitals are being encouraged to list those as covid-19 deaths.
Second, how many ER doctors are in a position to actually see those deaths? Sure, a person might show up in the ER due to severe flu symptoms but they are usually stabilized and transferred to departments that specialize in those issues. For the most part, that is where those deaths will occur, not in the ER. My guess is that there aren't a whole lot of people dying from cancer in the ER either, but that doesn't mean they aren't dying of cancer.
A more scholarly article on GGs earlier post.
Most flu folks would go through the ED. Thus those providers would see the flu folks more often than not.
It's really moot though. There is plenty of data to show COVID19 is far deadlier than the flu.
The end point is helping get folks back working while harnessing the flattening curve where possible to prep the medical system should there be a wave 2 and to stomp out an outbreak should it reoccur. Doing that maximize the economic progress and reduces odds of going backwards.
People can protest etc, and that is acceptable, but God forbid, you have too many fishermen, at the boat landings in MI....................
I could never support Democratic agenda, ever again. They are facist, who do not believe in free speech, the only speech they agree with, is what they want, and you are not allowed, to have any free thought.
This pandemic, has shed a lot of light...... Lockdowns did not work, they ruined a lot of buisness etc. Once I saw the light, I just shook my head. If you want to live under tyranny, and being told what to do, when you can do it, etc, vote Democratic......
I do not drink the Kool Aid anymore..... watching authorities, letting private property destroyed, and telling police to stand down, I could not believe it........
'Ike' (Phone)'s Link
One of the nation's top medical advisers on the U.S. response to the novel coronavirus pandemic said seeing troops test positive for COVID-19 after responding to protests is a likely sign more cases will emerge.
By and large, political affiliations and news sources dictate whether 115,000 dead Americans to date is a lot or a few, and whether partially closing the economy to limit the spread of the disease and wearing a mask as a component of reopening is a sensible response to a novel virus or capitulation to a political farce.
Getting it wrong for whatever reason or purpose is still getting it wrong. Fear, drama and panic, etc. are likely their best tools to encourage public compliance or conformity. I get it. But a couple points...... One, you can only go to that well and be wrong for so many times until all credibility is lost..... then, tell it to the hand..... And secondly, in this day and age, drama fear and panic coupled with the perpetually outraged have literally replaced baseball as the national pastime...... the most tightly wound among us often are the ones at the wheel....
A good number of folks were deemed "essential" in grocery stores, the trades, etc. working with and around the general public every day for months now. Seems a good sized "control" to study. Are there mass numbers of them dying? Or even seriously ill? Someone I'm sure is studying this..... what are their "death rates"? Guessing somebody has those numbers... but has anyone heard them publicized? Very very low I would guess or we would be hearing the screaming from here...
"tested positive" is not a terminal diagnosis. It likely will be the new norm in short enough time. I'm reading a great many, possibly a good majority will never know they had it. Vaccine? Don't they call the flu shot every year a vaccine? Coach gets her shot every year. She still gets the flu every year, along with millions of others every year as well. Maybe it's not as serious as it could have been, I don't know. I've never had a flu shot in my life (not an "anti-vaxer" just have never bothered to) and can't remember the last day I've even missed work from illness. Lucky I guess. Regardless, I'd venture offhand any covid vaccine will be more along the lines of flu vaccine than essentially eliminating it like a polio vaccine. Maybe not. With what I'm reading.... guessing this stuff will be with us a good long time. The Herd (or rather the Borg?) will have to adapt. It is what it is.
Was part of the logic in trying to contain the spread besides all the reasons already listed above also to provide less opportunity for the virus to mutate into something more virulent and deadly? I ask sincerely as not being medically trained but that is something I read early on in the shutdown. It was simply about buying time to learn and see what worked or not and predict how the virus would progress and adapt.
I am in the camp that this is much worse than the flu but we can't keep the economy shut down or the "cure" will cost us more. Very sad to say that knowing the human toll on lives involved.
For the third time, the comparison to the flu is not comparison of the virus itself, it's infection rate, or it's fatality rate.
The comparison is that like any other virus, a certain number of the most vulnerable people are going to die if infected. The American people (and the rest of the world) have come to accept that number for a whole host of viruses (as well as other risks) without shutting a society/economy down. By doing so, you introduce a whole other set of risks, both in terms of health and economics.
I believe the majority of the American are at that point right now. We have flattened the curve, now it is time to go back to life...with precautions.
I believe everyone understands this, but at what level of transmission, fatality etc. do we undertake additional/non-conventional means to reduce the numbers? Initially based on what the experts were communicating many including myself believed this virus warranted a different approach. Fortunately the worst predictions proved false, at least for now, and most are probably in the camp that we should move on but with slightly modified behavior.
I am glad I was not one of the decision makers. Imagine if we took no additional precautions and the worst predictions came to fruition. We would be making other comments, such as the liberals knew this was bad but believed they could use it for population control to save our planet and that is why they did nothing. It is a no-win situation really.
Thanks for stating the obvious....for the third time. The same can be said for a whole host of diseases and the other manners of death. He!!, isn't that whole premise behind natural selection...survival of the fittest?
I guess we should just accept the fact that the most "vulnerable" among us aren't worth trying to save, and get back to work.
Grey Ghost's Link
I'd say those numbers speak for themselves.
It will be at least two years before anybody, anywhere can say “our way was the best way.”
And for the love.... would people quit with the “... well I guess the old and most vulnerable don’t matter to you..”.
It's a matter of common sense precautions, and minimizing your exposure. Our first trip was in our RV to a remote river in Wyoming. The only exposure we had was at gas stations on that trip, and we took all necessary PPE precautions on those stops. I went solo on my second trip to Florida. Again, I took precautions seriously, I even slept in my pickup on the road both ways, to avoid hotels. The Inn I stayed at is on an Island that only had 3 confirmed cases of COVID, and my room hadn't been occupied for over a month, so I felt that was a safe bet. Upon my return, I didn't go anywhere for over 14 days.
So, while you were begrudgingly staying in lockdown, and complaining the whole time, I was busy getting on with my life, cautiously. Isn't that what most of us want now?
Exactly. So why aren't we shutting the economy down, and forcing people to stay home in an effort to protect us from all the others?
Thank you. In your effort to be cute, you actually made my point.
"I guess we should just accept the fact that the most "vulnerable" among us aren't worth trying to save, and get back to work."
I can't believe you went there, but OK, I'll bite.
Don't we already do that Matt? After all, we make that decision for about 750,000 of the most vulnerable every year in the US alone. And get this...we consider that "essential."
I took the time to watch that in it's entirety and I don't even know how to begin to respond...other than to say I pray she is wrong.
In British Columbia, as of yesterday we’ve had 167 deaths from Covid. In the last month alone, we’ve had 170 deaths from drug overdoses. The OD deaths are up twenty five percent, largely attributed to the influx of extra cash from Covid Emergency Relief Benefit (CERB) payments.
At least the most vulnerable on one side of the spectrum (the elderly in poor health with multiple comorbidities) had a chance to live a long life.
Either it’s the epitome of hypocrisy, or we’re just not “woke” enough to understand the difference.
Maybe someone will be along to “mansplain” it to us.
I agree, no way GG watched the video.
Having said that, secretly video-taping conversations with fellow colleagues, as well as medical records, then posting them on Youtube seems a little shaky to me. If she really wanted to expose wrong-doing, why would she not take this information to the authorities who could actually do something about it? It screamed of sensationalism, to me. But, perhaps she has actually done more than just produce a video for social media. I hope so.
As for her medical opinions on ventilators and treatment procedures, I'm not well-versed enough in the medical field to comment. I think it was well publicized that the vast majority of people who went on ventilators eventually died, so that wasn't earth-shattering news to me. As for the efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine and zinc treatment, I truly hope it proves to be the magic cure. But, again, I'll have to hear from a more credible source than a ER nurse.
Her assertions that the "higher ups" of the hospital were intentionally killing people for the financial benefit of the hospital was a little over the top for me. Again, if those accusations are true, I think there are more appropriate measures to take other than a Youtube video.
My biggest takeaway from this video was how little is actually known about this virus, even with the brightest medical minds in the world trying to figure it out. The reported successful treatments seem to be shots in the dark with no scientific basis to support them. Even the doctors who are using them don't know why they seem to work. That's a bit scary to me.
Anyway, sorry I didn't swallow this video hook, line, and sinker like some of you have, apparently. Like Kevin, I hope she's wrong. I also suspect there's another side to this story.
Apology accepted. Thank you.
My wife is an RN with several specialty designations. One of my daughters has her masters of occupational therapy. One of my nieces started out as an RN ( with her masters) and worked her way up through Emergency Into administration. She was/is the administrator in charge of the Covid Response for the very large Mayo Clinic she works for.
So I don’t have to rely solely on “what I’m fed”.
I'm glad you don't rely on information from social media videos. I too have several family members and friends in the medical field. All of them are still taking this virus very seriously.
Now, there may be administrators that use whatever they can to get the hospital more money and you occasionally have the private doctor who, for personal gain, knowingly commits fraud, but to say that doctors are making treatment decisions in ERs that are contrary to the best medical info they have in order to monetize patients... that's just hogwash and it's the same sort of hogwash that is demonizing all police because of a few bad actors.
That’s right. It’s not like hospitals and physicians aren’t convicted of billions of dollars in Medicare/Medicaid fraud every year.
I also have a niece whose husband is an infectious diseases doctor/researcher that is leading a five thousand person study on Covid right now. He’s of the opinion that Sweden did not handle it well. So real experts disagree on stuff too.
K Cummings's Link
"Hospital administrators might well want to see COVID-19 attached to a discharge summary or a death certificate. Why? Because if it's a straightforward, garden-variety pneumonia that a person is admitted to the hospital for – if they're Medicare – typically, the diagnosis-related group lump sum payment would be $5,000. But if it's COVID-19 pneumonia, then it's $13,000, and if that COVID-19 pneumonia patient ends up on a ventilator, it goes up to $39,000."
Jensen clarified in the video that he doesn't think physicians are "gaming the system" so much as other "players," such as hospital administrators, who he said may pressure physicians to cite all diagnoses, including "probable" COVID-19, on discharge papers or death certificates to get the higher Medicare allocation allowed under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act."
It's not like the claims in the video or totally implausible, especially if, as the the nurse said the orders are coming "from above" and many of the treatment decisions are being made by residents, who tend to be "order followers" and "want to please" those above them.
Early in March, I had all the common symptoms of covid19. Bad cough, high temp of 102, headache, fatigue etc. I got over it in about a week or so but always wondered if I might have had covid19, so I wanted to have an antibody test.
I saw an announcement that I could schedule a test online myself, show up at the local Quest diagnostics lab, have my blood drawn and wait a few days for the results.
I called my local physicians office to ask about it and was told that they don't recommend these "outside" tests as they don't know the accuracy of them. They would be doing antibody testing and recommended that I wait until their office opened again for routine visits and have the test done through them. I asked what what lab they would be using....you guessed it, Quest diagnostics.
Were they really concerned about outside test accuracy or were they concerned about people cutting their office out of the process.
I wanted the test done right away so I set it up myself, had the test performed, and tested negative...dangit.
At the end of the day, hospitals and physicians offices are businesses and operate under the same profit and loss pressures as any other business.
I work in the fire service. And despite what authorities kept telling us. It never got bad where we were. Hospitals were not over loaded like the news said. In fact many of the spouses of guys I work with are Nurses. And they were having their shifts cut because of lack of business at the hospital. Hospitals were empty. It almost seemed as if they were reaching for Covid numbers to try and justify the lock downs.
People at home were watching the news and just terrified. So much so that they would rather not go to the hospital for serious things and risk dying for fear of getting this “virus” at the hospital. We ran on lots of people who needed to go to hospital but refused. Sad to see knowing that hospitals were empty and these people didn’t want to overwhelm the hospitalA or get the virus at the hospital.
I will say above else we have run on more suicides and domestic disputes the last few months than anything.
This is just what I have seen so far where I live and work. Not an expert just an opinion.
Thanks for the work you do. What fire district are you in?
Do you think it's possible that the lockdowns and other government mandates actually served the intended purpose? And that could be why there wasn't a rush on your local hospitals?
My niece’s mother in law happens to be one of them. She suffered for almost a week with abdominal pain, but didn’t think she should go to the doctor because of the covid situation in her area.
When she finally passed out and was rushed to the hospital, it was too late. She died, alone, of a blood clot in her abdomen.
Unfortunately, she doesn’t happen to show up on a daily death total bar graph anywhere....not to mention her family wasn’t even allowed to memorialize her with a funeral service.
Over the next year or two, when those most affected have a chance to rethink and reflect, there’s going to be some hard questions and some big litigation actions.
K Cummings's Link
Number of people found dead at home increasing drastically during COVID-19
"That's what's scary for us at healthcare providers," says Dr. Charlie Keermaekers, an emergency room doctor with Beaumont Grosse Pointe. "We're seeing a dramatic increase in Priority 4 EMS calls, which are calls for people found dead in their homes."
He says the increase for some EMS companies is 400 percent.
He says he sees patients every day who have waited too long to seek care."
Habitat for Wildlife's Link
FWIW, TD and KPC for the win
We're all just stating our opinions WV M.
Unfortunately, we are all losers in this covid mess. Some have lost their jobs, some have lost their life's work and businesses, some have lost their sanity, some have lost their lives and we have all lost a little bit of our liberties.
FWIW, no one is calling this a hoax. Only pointing out the variables surrounding it.
It is amazing that some people still question whether COVID-19 is worse than the flu. The stat cherry picking must be a fulltime job.
Contextually, no. There is a link above that indicates people with treatable conditions have been dying at home for fear of going to the doctor. Do you think the flu would somehow be different? Add to that social distancing, a substantial drop in flu cases is more in line with what I would expect than magic.
But as you pointed out, these are partisan times so I am sure many folks smell a conspiracy.
Another confusion I've seen is that when some of us try to compare death rate vs infection rate between flu and COVID 19, some others start screaming "it's not the flu!" I never said it was. I said the death rates per infected individuals are comparable. No the same, not less. Comparable. for example 3% is comparable to 2% or 1% . It's less comparable to say 10% (Spanish Flu) 30% (Hantavirus) or 100% (rabies)
When I say that the modes, methods and rates of infection, environmental precautions and response to environmental conditions are similar to the common cold or norovirus, somer folks start screaming "it's not a cold!" I never said it was, I said it behaves similarly in the environment.
When I say the death rate per rate of individual infected some scream "you don't care if old people die!" Yes I do. A big part of my day-job is trying to make sure "old" and immune compromised people don't get sick and die before their time. I don't treat people, I don't protect people. I protect their environment.
In order to effectively protect their environment for a specific threat I have to understand that threat.
Hantavirus? Avoid inhaling small rodent waste. Clean rodent waste with disinfectant solution and wear mask and disposable gloves. Exercise effective handwashing after exposure to small rodents and rodent waste.
Norovirus? Make sure people who have symptoms don't prepare and handle food and food utensils or care for elderly and immune compromised until their symptoms are clear. Disinfect food utensils and hand contact environmental surfaces. Frequent and effective handwashing. Disposable glove use when handling food or caring for the vulnerable (even when not sick)
Cold, flu, COVID? Wear masks when sick, avoid contact with vulnerable when sick or after potential exposure, frequent effective hand washing, avoid close personal contact ("social distancing") indoors or outdoors, disinfect hand contact surfaces frequently. Avoid gathering indoors in large groups.
Rabies? Report bites to humans and domestic animals by any mammal to Health Department or Animal Control. Avoid contact with sick mammals. Discourage feeding or garbage collection methods which may attract large numbers of raccoons (a primary reservoir/vector). Reduce dense raccoon and striped skunk populations.
Ebola? I have no idea, I've never been faced with it.
Antifa and Republicans find common - unmasked - ground.
As is often the case, when some people are unable or unwilling to debate on the merits of a particular argument, they often resort to straw man arguments.
Of course covid 19 isn't the flu. Covid 19 isn't an accident either but the number of deaths in a year from each might be comparable.
Does stating that mean we don't care how many people die from accidents every year?
I have no earthly idea what the real death counts are. Neither do you or anyone else. So, it’ more correct to say what I did versus regurgitating false info. Especially since we have been told it’s not accurate.
K Cummings's Link
Apparently, even those in the best position to know aren't even sure what the actual mortality numbers are.
"There is nothing from the CDC that I can trust," she told CDC Director Robert Redfield, two people familiar with the meeting told the newspaper."
"The Post reported that Birx and others feared that the CDC's data-tracking system was inflating coronavirus statistics like mortality rates and case numbers by up to 25%."
Grey Ghost's Link
"Recent research has also indicated that COVID-19 deaths have been severely undercounted, both in the US and around the world, particularly in the early stages of the pandemic."
Who should we believe?
"As The Post reported, this does not mean all 15,000-plus deaths are directly attributable to the virus ...
One has to wonder how many of the "excess deaths" are attributable to people who died as a result of not seeking treatment for other conditions, due to the lockdown imposed because of covid19.
In one of my previous links, EMS companies here in MI reported up to a 400% increase in "dead at home" calls during the lockdown. People who died from what might otherwise have been treatable conditions like ruptured appendix, heart attacks, strokes, etc., had they sought treatment immediately.
Extrapolate that over all 50 states and you likely have a hell of a lot of people dying unnecessarily. Not because of covid, but because of what we did in response to covid.
Are those people expendable? Do we not care about them?
The point is that we don't really know what the numbers are. Not even the people who are in the best position to know what the numbers are know what the numbers are. So to insinuate that by stating that, you are engaging in some right wing conspiracy theory is just false.
Before it gets stated as such, due to the inability to defend the idea that Covid is the death sentence some political partisans are making it to be, I'm not saying it isn't real. That it doesn't make people sick. Or, lead to death in some people. But, you'd have to be a brain dead puppet to suggest that this country has not handled it with kids gloves. Yes, it is going to continue to kill some people. Heck, it may kill me. And, It It may end up being the plague. But, from he data we have, we had better meet this head on living life. Because it has been so politicized at this point, we truly have no choice but to carry on. We've used up our mulligans. It isn't going any where. Waiting it out isn't an option.
I'm not sure it'd have been possible, but in hindsight, it's amazing that we're still in the thick of it and we could have been mostly done by now.
If there actually is a “second wave” of any size, I suspect that is exactly what will happen. At least I sure hope and pray that is the case.
Hindsight is 20/20...let’s hope we’ve learned our lesson. It sure has been an expensive one.
Wouldn’t hold your breath it’s goverment after all .
And politics “never let a good crisis go to waste.”
After all, we know all know that all constitutional scholars agree on matters of the constitution, and all epidemiologists and virologists agree on how to deal with covid19.
Now THAT'S funny.
Phil, it’s great to hear from a you. Your clarity is unmatched. Kinda like all those professionals telling Americans this is the new normal.
Kevin, of course they do not all agree. But most of them have years, if not decades, of intense study and experience in their field so their opinions are informed ones.
I agree, there are lots of experts. There are two camps on this virus. So, one must chose who to believe. You believe who you want. I’ll do the same. And, I’ll try not to be a hypocrite.
Exactly. So what is wrong with a layperson basing their opinions on what those "experts" feel and have have stated publicly?
The notion that a person must to be an expert in a certain field in order to form an opinion based on their own research (as well as a little common sense) is rather absurd.
Furthermore, it's been my experience that almost without fail, when a poster chooses to attack a poster instead of attacking their argument, it is a good indication that their own argument has failed.
So glad we have gotten to see the effects of totalitarian lockdown and gotten a little taste of communism... Too bad it still seems appealing to so many.
Will certainly be a lot of differing opinions after years of study as to why our society and economy went off the rails.
Excessive exuberance? Pent up emotions? Lockdown to Looting in the blink of an eye.
Not to mention the systematic parallel destruction of our faith, history, rule of law, etc. Obviously just part of the Plan.
I do remember reading somewhere about these kind of times to come... So glad to know where I’m headed:-)
In the meantime, I am going to continue to enjoy the opportunities available here and be extremely thankful for every moment!
Hunting season can’t get here fast enough!!!
"Exactly. So what is wrong with a layperson basing their opinions on what those "experts" feel and have have stated publicly?"
"The notion that a person must to be an expert in a certain field in order to form an opinion based on their own research (as well as a little common sense) is rather absurd. "
As usual, you've twisted what I said. There is nothing wrong with a anyone having an opinion. We all have opinions. Many of them are based on facts and many are based on what people think are facts. But just having an opinion doesn't make someone an expert.
No I didn't Phil. Your sarcastic post was actually quite clear.
"I love that all the folks that were Constitutional experts a few months ago are now experts on epidemiology and virology.
I may have missed something but I don't recall seeing anyone claiming to be an expert on epidemiology or virology.
Ironically, I have seen where posters have actually referenced those professionals...only to be accused of being "Google experts."
A classic case of "damned if you do and damned if you don't."
K Cummings's Link
Again, hindsight is 20/20 but maybe a better approach would have been to lock down the most vulnerable as opposed to locking down the entire nation.
Here in PA, 70% of COVID deaths were in nursing homes. That's after following the EO by Governor Wolf and Dr Death that mandated that nursing homes had to accept "medically stable" COVID patients. Protect the most vulnerable indeed.
This is the type of hyperbole I object to. I don't know of a single person who found the lockdowns "appealing". The fact that most people chose to abide by the temporary government mandates and regulations, for the sake of public safety and health, doesn't mean they are communist loving sheeple.
The same goes for the governors, mayors, other public authorities who had to make those difficult decisions for their states and cities. I recently had dinner with the mayor of Sanibel Island in Florida. He said the last few months have been the most difficult in his life. He didn't derive any pleasure from shutting his city down. He's agonizing over the small businesses and workers who have suffered from the lockdowns. I suspect he's not the only politician who feels that way.
We can debate whether the consequences of the cure are worst than the virus until the cows come home. The fact is, we will never know exactly how effective the lockdowns were in checking the spread. Nor will we ever know how bad it could have been without the lockdowns. This is a case were there is no 20/20 hindsight, just a bunch of second-guessing and speculation.
The Constitution wasn’t written to provide power to the government. It was written to harness its over reach. All that got lost in this. And, while trampling citizens rights, many of these Dane well intending people set the most vulnerable up for certain death.
What we did as individuals was follow advice from people who were supposed to be doing this for the greater good. No one knew what we faced initially. Only that we needed to be cautious. Yet, government has done nothing here but hurt those that produce its revenue while aiding the death of those dependent on it. By design? Probably not. Asinine? Absolutely. They began losing supporters when people became aware of their lunatic approach.
So, to me it’s easy to say excuse those who choose to look at reality instead of follow along the guidelines these idiots have set forth. It’s for all our “own good”.
I’ll take my chances with common sense and, give my fellow Americans the sane responsibility.
It's hard and "cold" to look at it as numbers, not people, but when you are effecting the 300M for protection of less than 1% you have to look.
Were there some dumb decisions and mistakes made that led to unintended consequences? Sure. But as a whole, I think our government's and citizen's response to this crisis was successful. The fact that we are debating the true severity of the virus is evidence that many of the measures actually worked. I don't think anyone could have predicted the irrational civil unrest this crisis has caused. It's almost as if we've stepped back to the late '60s in terms of racial matters. That, I simply don't understand.
If there actually is a “second wave” of any size, I suspect that is exactly what will happen. At least I sure hope and pray that is the case.
Hindsight is 20/20...let’s hope we’ve learned our lesson. It sure has been an expensive one.
The end does not justify the means. I won't argue that freedom isn't risky, it most certainly is. The benefits of having it outweigh those risks.
There are an unending list of normal activities that could result in less injury or death of they were outlawed or severely restricted.
Public safety is actually at the top of the list of reasons used to take away freedom. It's been that way throughout history.
The elderly and those with compromised immune systems were at greatest risk - so those in govt decided to shut down our economy and make everyone “shelter in place”. These same govt officials put people with active Covid into nursing homes and long term health care facilities - I’d say the govt’s handling of this is nothing short or incompetent. This same govt that was threatening to permanently “shut down” churches if they dared to assemble has encouraged the “peaceful protesting” with thousands who aren’t social distancing or taking any other recommended precautions.
The citizens we’re ratting each other out and calling in businesses that remained open that they didn’t deem essential. Unreal. That is something I’d hoped would never occur in my lifetime - it was old Soviet Union type nonsense.
I hope we as a nation have learned from this, but I don’t have much confidence that we have.
Thanks for your thoughtful and civil response.
As for the often repeated nursing home story, do you have any evidence that occurred anywhere but NY? If so, please share. If not, I would warn against lumping all of our governments responses into the same basket as one misguided state.
And again, I haven't seen this reported government encouragement of protesting without recommended precautions. I have seen a few politicos encourage people to stand up for perceived racial injustices, which I find ridiculous, but they've all been with a caveat to do it safely and with all necessary precautions. Is it surprising to anyone that these protesting idiots aren't listening? If anyone is deserving of this virus, it's the thugs who think looting and burning down businesses is somehow an appropriate response to the actions of a few bad cops.
Closure is one thing if it’s a one size fits all. It isn’t fine as prescribed and outlined by government through this whole thing. We had chosen winners and losers. If we agree to disagree, I’m fine with that. I just can’t think of one reason to say this was the right approach by government once data started showing what this virus is.
Freedom costs certain things and demands responsibility out of those who posses it. Laying down to o e side which has doubled down when proven incorrect, isn’t either. Trump knows it. Governors country wide know it. Mayors know it. But, a good bit keep hammering awa under their totalitarian approach.
I also don't think the government measures were as "one size fits all" as you claim. Each Governor implemented measures that he thought were in the best interest of his state's citizens. The timing and extent of those measures were all different, as are the lifting of those restrictions.
We will have years to debate this, and I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. My hope is the end result will be a more unified nation from this experience. That may be rose colored glasses thinking, but I've always found optimism to be more inspiring than the alternative.
You are not picking here. My whole point is no government associated with America has the right to dictate personal choice. No matter who thinks differently.
I too hope we find a place to agree across this country. We won’t. Too many sheeple. Money talks.
One thing this situation has reinforced for me is that politics is religion. And when you have folks on both sides of the political spectrum so entrenched in political dogma, progress is likely not possible.
It's a story. Unfortunately, it's not fiction.
No doubt many were put in a difficult spot and made bad decisions, and it’s always easy for the non decision makers to second guess the decisions that were made, but mercy, some leaders made it real easy for us to criticize them with their lack of common sense and rational behavior. No need for me to rehash all that again though.
Matt - NY is the only place I know where the nursing homes were intentionally exposed. No doubt some politicians handled this correctly, I was speaking more as a whole. As a whole I think govt really messed this up.
K Cummings's Link
The information is readily available for anyone interested in finding it.
It would appear that it is 42% nationwide, but some states are significantly higher than that.
As far as nursing home deaths - I think the data speaks for itself as far as how widespread and devastating Covid was in the nursing homes. Of course the Natl media didn’t frame the deaths that way - we just got an hour to hour update of deaths to further fan the flames of panic.
Same thing just happened here locally. It was reported that we had a sudden spike in cases - like phase 2 was coming in. When you dug into the spike in cases you found that 80% of this spike consisted of those in a nursing home and a construction crew that was traveling through town.
And they wonder why we won’t take their reporting at face value...
Mic-drop on that one my friend.
I fear we are heading for a modern "religious" Crusade... a bloody one. I never thought I'd see this in the USA :(
We have the Bill of Rights. It’s written to define personal liberties. Expressly, there is no other reason for it then to assure American citizens a set of rights not to be infringed upon by others or government.
With this knowledge, You have one side that says it is ok to apply It in degrees when it fits their agenda. Then you have the other side that says it out trumps any perceived situation. You can blame both sides from a critical position. However, what you can’t do is circumvent those rights Given to citizens because someone thinks they don’t apply during a “pandemic”.
If that is entrenched, I’ll take it. However, what I suspect is most Americans would say the same thing. Yet, it appears by actions and words that is not truly how they feel.
"I think Matt was referring to the govt intentionally placing people with active Covid into the nursing homes."
In PA, see my last link above, the EO was to place "medically stable" COVID patients back in nursing homes. So yes, they intentionally placed COVID patients among the most vulnerable. Intentionally introducing? How they hell could you NOT know what was going to happen?
Recession or Depression By: George Friedman In March, we declared our 2020 forecast null and void. The COVID-19 pandemic had essentially rendered it irrelevant. The question we posed in March was whether the disease and the steps taken to manage it would lead to a recession or a depression. A recession is a cyclical financial process inherent in the business cycle. It is inevitable, stabilizing and somewhat painful. A depression is entirely different. It includes myriad financial dimensions as well as an added element of physical economic damage. It can destroy businesses and dramatically increase unemployment and thus transform our very existence. I would encourage you to read Studs Terkel’s “Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression.” The greatest effect of a depression is on the existential reality of daily life. In that sense, we must all care about what this is. The answer has not yet emerged – I will explain why below – but the numbers are ominous. We are close to completing the second quarter of 2020 and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is predicting a 48.5 percent decline in gross domestic product. Others are speaking of a 30-40 percent decline. Unemployment is at 15 percent and climbing. Even the more optimistic numbers are staggering not simply because of the size of the contraction but because of the speed with which it is happening. In the United Kingdom, the economy contracted by 20 percent in May alone. Germany expresses the most confidence: a 10 percent contraction in the second quarter. Most countries are expecting more modest declines in the third quarter, and then recovery in the fourth quarter. Numbers of this sort indicate massive dysfunction in the economy, but the question is whether it is recoverable, and how quickly. The airline industry, for example, dramatically curbed its operations, leaving many pilots, ticket agents, mechanics and baggage handlers out of work. But unless all these workers found employment elsewhere already, the industry will probably survive and probably rehire them as soon as the economy recovers. (The airlines were among the hardest hit businesses. The kind of economic damage they suffered may well affect other businesses later, but for now it’s most visible in the airlines.) An equally ominous but not quite clear force is the apparent increase in hospitalizations of COVID-19 cases in states that “opened up” in early June. There’s a debate over whether the increases signal a new wave. I am certainly not an expert, but if the virus is as infectious, and if it is as deadly, then it would seem that ending sequestering would simply have the same effect now as before. And if that’s true, and people who know more than I do disagree, then we should see not another wave but the consequences of opening up. The root of the economic crisis is based on the fact that medical research has so far yielded no vaccine nor much in the way of mitigation. The only medical solution was sequestration. That meant that people should avoid contact with other people, since they could be infectious without knowing they carried the disease. In a sense, the medical problem was not the cause. Medicine, except for helpful suggestions, was irrelevant. What drove the problem was that the only viable solution would hurt the economy. There is, after all, a social aversion to accepting deaths in return for a viable economy. Therefore, if there’s a chance that the disease will swell as reopening occurs, and that that will lead to the reimposition of sequestration, then we are heading to a depression. Or rather, we are in a depression according to the numbers, but we are protected temporarily from a full depression by the speed by which it is taking place. That speed buys time to make economic reconstruction possible. But it is a window that will close. Using March 1 as the starting date, we have now been in this cycle for nearly four months. If we assume that we will reverse in September, it would be seven months. That’s a long time for a business with thin margins to survive without layoffs, and a long time for the unemployed to wait for reemployment. The primary reason that forecasters are looking for a turnaround in the third or fourth quarter is the expectation that a vaccine will be developed. There are indications that there may be one by then, and even that production is already on the way. The problem is that it is unlikely to match demand (especially global demand) by then. As important, the logistics of distributing and administering the vaccine in the context of a massively disrupted economy will mean that at least two months will be required. You will recall how long it took to manufacture and distribute ventilators. If my assumption is correct, and if an effective vaccine is released on, say, Sept. 15, then administering the vaccine would take until Nov. 15 at the earliest, which would be nearly nine months from the time the country was shut down. It also means five months of soaring unemployment and economic contraction on a global scale. It’s hard to imagine that we would be able to rapidly reconstruct the economy by this point. Obviously, the government could print more money, and that would basically fulfill both John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman’s prescription. Keynes called it increasing demand, and Friedman called it monetary management, but in both cases it uses increased money to prime demand. However, in this case there is a difference. The foundation of economics is land, labor and capital. The origin of this crisis is the shortage of labor. The problem is not lack of demand but lack of supply. What you get from that is inflation, as happened in Weimar Germany. There are two arrestors in this process. One is a massive shift in the public’s willingness to accept the risk of disease. The second is a rapid medical solution. A change in public attitude is possible for two reasons. The first is that time routinizes risks. People may be shifting their risk models. The second is that the meaning of depression has been abstract for them. We have not seen a depression for 80 years. I am old enough to have known some of those who lived through the Great Depression. I remember one clearly. He was in his second year of medical school during the Depression, but the money wasn’t there to finish. He got a job in a Kosher deli on Jerome Ave. in the Bronx. Forty years later he was still there. The Depression robbed him of the life he dreamt of. If you get a chance, read Terkel’s book. Gambling with this virus is dangerous. But we all need to see that the economic problem isn’t about banks and corporations. It is how the Great Depression destroyed lives. Am I predicting a depression? I still can’t. The ability of the American people to rally is enormous. The power of American science is remarkable. Still, the numbers we are seeing, if they pan out, are stunning.
Again, I know it happened in NYC and PA. And those were perhaps the most ill-conceived measures that any states took. But, lumping ALL government measures in the same class based on those monumental mistakes is like lumping all LEOs in the same class based on the actions of a few bad cops.
Does anyone honestly think that cancelling all sporting, entertainment, or other events that involved large public gatherings in confined areas wasn't a reasonable measure? How about cancelling international flights, especially to and from some of the "hot spot" countries? Was not being able to go to your favorite beauty saloon or tattoo parlor for a few months really such an assault on your liberties?
Having said that, I will agree there was little rhyme or reason for some of the arbitrary shutdowns, or lack thereof. Deeming liquor and pot stores "essential", while shutting down other more useful business was...well...dumb, IMO.
Anyway, thanks for the discussion, fellas. I need to get off my butt, and put several miles on my e-bike while the sun is still shining.
But, I've personally met and know dozens and dozens that found it..... empowering. That's not even counting the Karens (wasn't even really a popular term until all this) that felt it their duty to report anyone not "complying" (or capitulating, whatever your perspective.) Seems your loss of freedoms was their gain. And honestly, many others who's lives suddenly held some new meaning, purpose or cause for whatever reason. Maybe just a distraction from normal life. Anything different is good.... Some, herd animals who felt once again a part of the herd. Or Borg....
The human response was all over the place. But a good number of us who lost our freedom by government decree simply were threatened (and still are) with the loss of everything they have. Threatened by a government mandated shut down, not any illness. Even on this thread it would seem clear which perspective folks are coming from. Those who know they will still be getting a paycheck and not a foreclosure notice seem to have a bit different angle on it all. Go figure....
This went from a health care panic, understandable and justifiable in the short term until things were sorted out, risks known. To a blatant political opportunity..... looking like their ONLY opportunity left after all the other scams and shenanigans... to reacquire control, Making the continuation of economic and social stress a political necessity. Any argument otherwise was blown out of the water with pictures of leftist officials marching arms linked with protesters numbering in the thousands. Yet these SAME OFFICIALS declare lockdowns must persist? For your own good. Must be who ya know.... or rather, who they think you may vote for...
Perpetual outrage apparently is a temporary cure..... who'da thunk...
Rut Nut's Link
And Bowbender forgot to mention that our(PA's) Secretary of Health removed his/her? mother from a PA nursing home and put her in a hotel WHILE ordering nursing homes to accept COVID 19 positive patients. Talk about HIPOCRACY! : (
I doubt the economy will recover before I retire and that scares me a little bit
K Cummings's Link
Not only did Michigan do it, but our illustrious Governor appears to still be defending it.
"Michigan Gov. Whitmer defends placing COVID-19 patients in nursing homes with healthy residents"
Your post illustrates how vastly different our communities must be. I live in rural, mostly red, central Colorado. I haven't witnessed a single person who felt "empowered" to make others comply with government restrictions or guidelines. For example, at our local Walmart, some people wear masks, some don't, most are respectful of space, but nobody seems to care what others choose to do. They go about their business, some occasionally stopping to chat with fellow shoppers who they know (which can be irritating when they block the entire isle), but it's mostly life as usual, sans the masks and shortage of toilet paper and disinfecting products.
I guess we are all products of our environment to some degree. I feel fortunate to live amongst mostly independent-thinking individuals. Most of my neighbors are ranchers who are tending their cattle and crops as usual. In town, a few restaurants and beauty salons shut down, but all the businesses I consider "essential" remained open for business. We've had no stupid demonstrations, or other nonsense. Generally speaking, people seem to be happy and mostly unaffected by the government mandates.
That's why I have a hard time relating to all these political conspiracy theories, and doom and gloom socioeconomic predictions.
Based on the hunting websites I frequent, I thought it was settled science that it was a Republican/Democrat thing.
Charlie, you bring up a good point, but I'd make a few points for consideration:
1. It's better than locking everyone down, even if that age group's freedom is taking one for the team. It's also easier for them to lockdown as most of them are retired and don't have to go to work.
2. Saying you're willing to take your chances is righteous on its own merit only until it impinges on the well-being of someone else. People over 65 die/are hospitalized at much higher rates from COVID than younger populations and would thus make up the bulk of the healthcare system's theoretical collapse. There is some truth to the defenders of the shutdown's point that the government does have the right to impinge people's freedom in some instances of National emergency and when individual's rights affect other's well-being.
One could claim that he'd like to roll the dice and have the liberty to drink and drive. The problem is, it doesn't just affect the drunk driver because he poses a risk to the public.
Now, we can debate all day whether any level of lockdown was necessary or not, but if it is necessary, I feel the government has the right to intervene, just as they did in prior times of rioting, like in New Orleans and Los Angeles.
3. There is historical precedent for asking a certain subset of the population to take one for the team: The U.S. Military Draft: The draft of the Vietnam era was for young men only. If I found myself in that situation, couldn't I claim that's it's not fair to just ask a certain subset of the population's demographics to be drafted? There's a good reason to only draft young men into war, just as there's a good reason to isolate older people from COVID.
I talked with colleagues who I know well and trust implicitly that were and still are working the ERs and ICUs in Boston and NYC - a few of them in fact. It got really bad. One ER doc I know told me that on more than one night, she had multiple people die in the waiting room before they ever saw a doctor. Yes, some hospitals are empty, but the bulk of Medicine in this country is not the ERs and ICUs, which is where all these people end up.
The ERs and ICUs in certain areas were nearly over-run and the case can be made that on a micro level, they WERE over run, albeit temporarily and NYC only got about 20% exposed. It could have been much worse.
There is a good argument to say that the lockdown saved net lives, not just temporarily. The cost of those lives is catastrophic and its merits can be debated - indeed, we may have overreacted, but that's really an entirely different discussion.
EDIT: I'd say that for older Americans, they should be given the option, but strongly encouraged to do everything they can to avoid contracting the virus.
The bigger problem is the nursing homes. It's tragic what's happening there. How do you isolate nursing homes when the old cannot take care of themselves and rely on the young?
That’s where this gets hinky. No one should be able to tell you how to approach this. Surround yourself with those that share the same ideas. If the rowdy bunch gets sick and dies, you can always say I told you so if you think it’s irresponsible in the way they approached it. Vice versa too.
God Bless fellas.
If your neighbor looses their job it’s a recession, if you loose your job it’s a depression. I didn’t loose my job but I did have to reduce staff significantly and did take a significant cut in compensation in 2020 but we’re fine. Not so much with other current and former colleagues who live check to check.
Hindsight is 20/20 but we aren’t at that point.
Many forgot the steps in the “Scientific Method” and assume science has it wrong before science has reached a conclusion.
If the country continues to separate more and more on ideology our government will be less and less effective. It seems worse now than ever but my parents probably felt the same way 30 years ago. Just like I can’t believe the crappy music kids listen to now.
In conclusion, if the Seahawks had only run the damn ball!
My opinion has always been that the lock downs were probably necessary in the beginning if the goal was indeed to "flatten the curve."
That was accomplished in most areas relatively early on.
Unfortunately, in many people's opinion (including mine), the goal posts are continually moving and therefore resulting in what may be (in many cases have been) irreparable damage to individuals, businesses, communities, health care systems, etc..
Yes, in the macro, as a nation we will recover financially. Unfortunately in the micro, many individuals never will.
I realize many startup businesses take on debt to get rolling, and they may not show actual profits for quite a while. Obviously servicing debt with no income is difficult to impossible, but I'm reading that many lenders are offering relief to customers who are affected by COVID. There's also the billions of dollars of PPP loans that taxpayers funded to help many of these businesses thru the shutdowns.
Many have predicted the hospitality industry will be one the hardest hit post-COVID. But if the Inn that my buddy manages in Florida is any indication, they should survive just fine. He took full advantage of the PPP loans, and was able to keep his staff employed while his Inn was shutdown. 2 days after he was given the OK to reopen at 50% capacity, he had exactly half of the Inn occupied. Same thing when he was allowed to open 100%. He's back up and running full steam, now.
So, who are the individuals and businesses that will never recover from this crisis?
You must be in a red state, I'm not, and even before the "pandemic" we had a migration of people leaving. We don't have people, we have "sheeple" and it is maddening to consider the rest of this year as "life behind a mask and social distancing", the new normal. Small stores and restaurants are not viable on a mandated 50% of normal, for who knows how long. It is tyranny and terrible here.
I live in Colorado. While some of the rural areas are still red, the state's political landscape is dominated by the liberal high population urban areas. Overall, Colorado is hardly a "red state", sadly. We have the exact opposite problem as you described. Colorado's population has been expanding at an alarming rate for decades.
Well Florida has a Governor that handled it perfectly. New York and New Jersey are a different situation. The PPP definitely helps but figuring out how much will be forgiven is a problem and a lot of small businesses have to pay someone to handle. Doing business in NY & NJ is tough to begin with and then you have Governors that are constantly threatening the public with further restrictions. Then you have the riots and trashing of businesses. Add on the high minimum wage and that people don't want to come back to work because of the Fed unemployment $600 check and you have problems. Then you have the sky high rents. If the economy shoots back up I think they will be able to weather the storm but if it doesn't then a lot will fold. The big thing is the unknown, if they locked us down once they might do it again so why would business owners throw their life savings into saving a business when a Governor can shut them down on a whim?
I acknowledge there are areas where recovering will more difficult. If I was a business owner in NYC , and I found that conditions weren't conducive to saving my business there, I'd either relocate my business, or find another line of work.
I'll offer another COVID success story that I'm familiar with. One of our best friends is a young self-employed hair stylist. When the salon that she rented space from was shutdown, she continued to service her best clients by doing house-calls. During that time, she also negotiated a lease on a larger, fully enclosed, space in a much nicer salon, for a cheaper rate than she was paying before. She just had her best ever month income-wise, clearing over $10K. She and her husband also just found their first home to purchase, and will be closing on it in about a week. They couldn't be more excited.
I realize my anecdotal success stories don't represent the whole any more than your failure stories do, but they do give me pause when I hear all the overly-generalized doom and gloom predictions. Opportunities do exist for those who look for them, even in the toughest of times.
Good point. There are legitimate concerns given COVID and the state of the economy, but the media has amplified the negative tone in the country right now. If folks would cease thinking it is just the "other side" and stop going out of their way to find things to be upset about, we would all be better off for it.
I'm pretty sure you didn't mean to sound like Governor Cuomo, "You want to go to work? Go take a job as an essential worker", yeah, like a liquor store clerk or abortion clinic worker.
My point was, I don't have empathy or feel compelled to help people who don't help themselves. Like the laid-off workers who aren't looking for new jobs because they are making more money from unemployment. Or the business owners who operated on a shoestring pre-COVID, and suddenly find themselves in dire straights, now. Empathy is mostly earned, not deserved, IMO.
This is absolutely true and is a huge problem. It's not sustainable.
As far as the loans, if you are a new or growing business, as many were, these loans aren’t as hunky dorey as they sound. They take last years payroll. Meaning, the employees you had last year to compute your eligibility.
If you’ve added more the first quarter, which in small business could mean a 100% or higher increase in employees since your last tax return, you my friend are screwed. If you’ve invested in growth Prior to the Covid outbreak, there is nothing granted for that in these loans. These loans weren’t meant for anything except to be used as payroll for your employees.
No sustainable funds to pay over head, minus employee costs are available with any grace. Meaning you will pay back every dime you borrow to keep the business bills paid. The owners cannot claim any money to be borrowed for their income either. And, in order to have percentages of grace on those Bailouts, you must agree to keep the same employees after this is over. Or, be forced to pay the whole Thing back. All this is what I was told by the loan managers here when I applied for these funds.
With all this as reality, it truly hurts when you consider that a growing economy demands consumer confidence. No matter the business, if people don’t justify the services small business offers, then you are sailing a sinking ship. And, Incase you missed it, a good bit of this whole fiasco politically has been to ruin consumer confidence. So, it hurts Trumps re-election bid.
That’s reality for a good bit of small business America. It is Just the way it is and nothing is going to change that. No matter how you rationalize it.
Yes. obviously these businesses shut down and possibly bankrupted by the government deserved it.
Nobody is asking for anyone's sympathy. And empathy seems totally out of reach for some. I highly doubt many feel they must "earn" any such thing.... from anyone.
If a person is fine, they're set. Good. Glad to hear it.
"That's good, just one less thing to worry about......"
Not exactly true. The loans can be used for payroll, mortgage interest, rent, and utilities. At least 60% of the loan must used for payroll, over a 24 week period, to be forgivable. The forgivable amount scales up in proportion to the amount you spend on payroll, up to to the full amount.
The loan amounts are based on the average monthly payroll in 2019, So, the loan amounts do factor in for growth over that period, just not on a dollar for dollar basis. You are correct, any increase in payroll that occurred in the first few months of 2020 are not factored into the loan amounts. You do have to maintain the same or higher employee head count over the 24 week period. If the head count reduces, then the forgivable amount is adjusted accordingly.
Furthermore, S corp owners who take regular salaries from their companies can include their salaries (up to $100K) in their payroll calculations. Owner draws and distributions cannot be used.
I'd say the "loan managers" you spoke with gave you some bad info, or you didn't retain the info correctly.
Owners of small businesses are the backbone of our country and they are suffering. Yes they may operate on a shoestring month to month but they are getting it done. Big Corp is a different animal.
My best guess is the people that want to keep things locked down have a pension that they think is secure. It isn't by the way.
Side note. Many of my clients can't hire staff back because they are making more on unemployment.
Just curious Matt, what is your business specifically, and how has the shut down affected you personally? Have you stayed working? Has your spouse continued to work?
I learned long ago that you make or break your own opportunities, more than others give or take them from you. That lesson has helped me thru several hard times. This one is no different.
There never was grace money for many small business owners to use for their income due to their circumstances. Because, many small business's no longer had employees when this come about. And, with no incentive for former employees to work or, current employees from last year not making bail out equal money to continue to work, it left them ineligible for grace money. There are several other variables there you have over looked with your reciting of the borrowing guidelines. Just sum them up with the knowledge that acquiring new debt is not something any small business owner is/was looking at as an option.
I rationalize many business owners in this predicament decided it would have been rather dumb to borrow unforgivable funds to float this out with all the political banter that this was the new norm. I'm happy for those that were in a position to do it. But, I'm also level headed enough to know that many were not due to circumstances.
FWIW, I doubt any business owners expect or want your empathy. And, while you are no doubt in a position that allows constructive criticism, many are not nor, would they if they were. Circumstances outlined on paper never tell the whole story or, even remotely a decent rendition of reality in the story. And, I wasn't misinformed or, misunderstood what I was told.
Which state would it be?
And why california?
“Kevin, my business isn’t relevant to this discussion, nor is yours, or anyone’s, for that matter.“
I find it rather interesting that you would ask the question about what individuals and/or businesses are affected by the shut down, then when asked about your own situation you make the statement that your personal experience is irrelevant...as is everyone else’s.
When someone takes the stance that others should basically suck it up and find a way to make it through, I happen to believe that the position they make that statement from is very relevant. I’m confident that most would agree.
It’s been my personal experience that when a person refuses to be candid, that in and of itself speaks volumes.
Was that the case when you asked it of others?
"So, who are the individuals and businesses that will never recover from this crisis?“
As I have shared before, even though my business is considered essential, my income as well as how I interact with clients has been affected. Even so, because of the way my business is structured, my business as well as my income will be fine.
My wife works for a company that makes masks and breathing apparatus for the military and first responders. Not only are they essential, they are so busy with the current covid situation that they can barely meet the demand. Now add civil unrest in major cities and around the world, and they are working round the clock.
Fortunately, we are both working because we choose to, not because we have to so while it would be very easy to tell those that are not in the same position to suck it up and quit whining, we know the reality for many is not the same as ours.
Just yesterday, the MI legislature passed (71-32) a resolution that would stop this practice.
Knowing what we know now, I'd love to hear the reason why 32 legislators voted against this resolution.
We know of others that their income actually went up being unemployed. I think Matt's point might at least partially be that government policies may be unwisely contributing to some of the observed unemployment.
But, continue on with parsing words and more "gotcha" moments, it surely is entertaining for those at home voluntarily unemployed.
Now, I have to take the trash down to our gate, because our new trash truck driver is an early riser, and he won't come back for a week if I miss him.
Apparently Governor Witmer is in the health care business and told them to do so. The legislature was countering the Governor's wisdom, some could not do so, 32 to be exact. Master Planners are never wrong and have no compulsion to apologize. Cuomo blames his blunder on Trump's administration.
K Cummings's Link
Again Matt, what adversity in terms of your livelihood have you had to handle? Why can't you just be candid?
Yes, your buddy in who lives in a state that was one of the least hit by a shut down probably wasn't affected that much. Great for him...I wish Michigan (and many others) were the same.
And yes, the hairdressers and salon owners here in MI could have broken the law like your friend apparently did. Some tried and were reported and subsequently threatened with license revocation and legal battles (see attached link for an example in my small home town) that would have made their situations even worse than it already was.
As to political conspiracies, I would note that to my knowledge, all 32 representatives that voted to continue placing covid19 infected patients in nursing homes here in MI were all of the same political party.
I'll leave it to others to opine on why that might be.
Now some of the measures taken today compared to then are warranted. But poverty kills too, famine kills too in massive numbers in the long haul. We must use common sense but we must get this economy rolling again. China with their cover up and other issues must pay dearly for this at the same time. I own properties in several states, east, Midwest, west. I have first hand observed how both governments and populace have responded to this virus. I will say this, there should have been serious spikes in the long term in some areas where little precautions are being practiced. For the most part, there hasn't been. The nursing home thing bothers me more than any other one thing.
New cases are up and not just due to more testing, but this is to be expected with re-opening the economy.
New cases are now skewing much more heavily toward young folks who have had a relatively low level of serious disease and hospitalization, which accounts for the declining hospitalization/deaths in most place (sounds like AZ and a few other states are exceptions).
The article also suggested that the folks who are more at risk (60+, underlying conditions) are now generally aware of the risks and are playing it safe.
That explanation made a lot of sense.
Grey Ghost's Link
Perhaps Florida's less strict shutdown measures, and their reopening earlier than most may have contributed to what's going on now? Hmmm....
But, I'm sure the media is just overblowing it.
Nursing homes are big business. I wonder how many of those 32 have investments in or take contributions from them or their lobbies? Follow the Money. It's out there skippin' down the road hand in hand with Power....
K Cummings's Link
I hadn't heard that but you might be right.
"Coronavirus patients could be cash cows for nursing homes"
The nurse referred to things like this in the video that was posted on this thread last week.
I'd sure hate to think money was the driving force behind care decisions.
That does make a lot of sense Matt. From the beginning, more infections were expected as the economy opened back up. After all, "flattening the curve" was about spreading infections out (so as not to overwhelm the HC system), not preventing them.
The notion that it was intended to prevent overall infections is just another example of the goal posts being moved.
In other news.... In NYC teams of what are called "Contact Tracers" have been instructed NOT to ask if people had participated in any of the recent riots..... er, protests.... and not to note it if information is volunteered. Huh.
Perpetual outrage really is the cure.....
He's a pimp :)
Take a hard look at the picture you posted and see what they actually voted on. Either, nice try with the fake news or nice test for the rest of us!
K Cummings's Link
Here is the resolution that was passed.
"A resolution to oppose the Governor's policies regarding the placement of COVID-19 patients into nursing homes."
That makes a little more sense.
I would think that people in that industry are very susceptible to various viruses.
Combine that with the fact that people who support that particular industry don't usually pay much attention to "stay home stay safe" orders and you could have a real problem.
Do pimps qualify for PPP loans?
It’s my understanding that icu beds are where those with the virus and worse symptoms are being monitored. Not that they are in dire straits. Just my understandings.
I'm not fear-mongering. Just saying......
That would be about as many abortions as we have in a single year.
And those are considered "essential." Just saying.....
Out of what population?
What fatality rate are you assuming out of what infection rate?
Of the closed systems that have been studied - several cruise ships and a few military ships, the fatality rate has been very low. Based on the testing of those individuals, there was a very high infection rate. However, In all of those cases, it seems like there is about a 50% chance or more to be asymptomatic. Of the people testing positive that actually have symptoms, about 5-10% required a higher level of care. The fatality rates seemed to be around 1% of the ones that had any symptoms...
Will you get Covid? Good chance you will.
Will you survive? Probably.
This is panning out to not be the zombie apocalypse, and seems to be acting like every other virus.
The economic shut down to help sustain distance is really hard. We have to work out of it. So do the other two and get on with life. Maybe you cant always be 6 feet plus away, but you can come close. Maybe you don't have a commercial mask, who cares, the clinical evidence shows a dang cotton bit of cloth helps a ton too.
The rest of this is an issue that will be debated until the end of time and politicized like crazy. In the end, if you want to minimize cases, deaths and have less impact on health care and the economy, manage your proximity with others as possible, wear a mask in public spaces and wash your hands a lot.
Those things are clearly emerging as solidly reducing spread of the virus. They are a win for all of us and can happen as economies re-open.
I'm always a bit puzzled, in this post modern, mostly post Christian era why many people believe we will be or should be immune to death by any means other than very old age. That "somebody" should save us from all perils. The death of a loved one is always sad, but is death by one disease sadder than another, other than possibly the struggle at the end or a life cut very short. How many deaths (and misery) from alcohol, tobacco and drugs are there every year. No national or government tears shed for them.
I think it will be shown in two years that nobody (with the exclusion of a few absolute moronic to the point of criminal negligence places like NYC and Italy) had a better way to deal with it. In the end the graph curves will average out to the same numbers. Front loading or end loading.
Disease has come upon mankind in the past, has now and will again. The pedestals we've placed ourselves on are only high ground until the water rises higher.
And the whole reason for “flattening the curve“ was to avoid overloading the front end.
US has 330,000,000people x .00015 would have been 49,000 deaths. Much better than what the the US has actually had. We will have to see what these upticks turn into and of course flu season will give us a lot more information.
Only in retrospect some time down the road will we even have a clue if the actions taken were more beneficial or less so, IMHO.
NPR: “Mounting Evidence” Suggests COVID Not As Deadly as Thought. Did the Experts Fail Again?
You come up with what is likely a GROSSLY inflated number.
For the most part, the only people being tested are those in certain risk/exposure categories, or with symptoms great enough to warrant testing.
Therefore, if you are going to try to extrapolate over an entire population, you have to test an entire population, symptomatic or not.
Glunt's method would likely be more accurate across an entire population.
I’m going to post what I’ve shared on multiple forums going as far back as early March when some were convinced that the end was indeed near. I advised caution, both in terms of personal and interpersonal conduct and also in interpreting much of what was being reported (and misreported was probably a more accurate descriptor.)
Initially and even in the following months from when the scope of this pandemic became clear there were many voices questioning the need if not the medical basis for the lockdown. What health agencies went by unfortunately were inaccurate models in terms of the R0 (R-nought) or infectivity of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the likely mortality (you may recall the model forecasting 2.2 million deaths in the US alone). As the physicians maxim is “first do no harm” the decision was made initially to consider the worst-case scenario and do all possible to mitigate its impact. In addition to the models a few realities fueled this decision; first, there was no effective treatment for the disease and second, and most importantly there was no vaccine and the time to develop an effective vaccine is ordinarily between 3-4.5 years. Some floated the idea (and some countries not only floated it but initially adopted it) of allowing “herd immunity” to develop; good in theory but when you have a novel pathogen you have no baseline to determine how effective an immune response, even in the most immunocompetent people will be. It’s not up there with Russian roulette but it carries risks above what most health experts agreed on a comparative scale to a lockdown.
Now I’m going to jump around a bit here and I hope you’ll bear with me; much has been made, and without question, at least some answers need to be determined for the recent spike in some states in the number of cases. Back in late March I advised friends that they should be prepared to see a rise, and likely a sizable rise for weeks if not longer in the number of positive cases; this is a function of simple math; when you begin with a testing capacity of 10-20,000 tests a week and eventually achieve a capacity in the same time frame of close to a million tests you are going to detect more positives. This must be tempered with the reality that up to 80% of positive cases will either be asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic (we’ve expanded testing from only those displaying symptoms to a much broader scope owing to the availability of testing). So what I have advised people to focus on today is not the number of new positive cases but the number of hospitalizations as that is where the greatest ramification would be witnessed. Additionally (and I haven’t had the time to dive into the demographics of those requiring hospitalizations-I apologize!) we need to look at the overall health and immune status of those new hospitilizations, e.g. what % are elderly, what % have underlying, chronic morbidities, etc.
Now I’m going to hop back to an important point that the MSM, much to their growing shame never really reported on to the degree they really should have; epidemiological tracking of a pandemic’s impact is never possible at the onset and even at the point we are today; we simply don’t have the data to confidently assert that we know a)the true R0 of the virus, b)the mortality rate of the virus and c)we have no clue as to the ability of our immune system to produce long-lasting antibodies owing to either exposure (with or without infection and/or symptoms) and of course the ability to produce long-lasting antibodies as a result of vaccination.
Now here’s why we have no clue at this point on real numbers; it is a given that we never detected positive cases early on as a)asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic people (which can account for as much as 80% of infections) were never tested early on. Even as we began testing we still never tested a sizable population of possible infected people due to the testing capacity being low initially.
Now it’s all well and good to talk about numbers missed but is there any way to gauge how many? Actually, there is; I am aware of at least 2 large samplings of antibody testing (NYC and SoCal) where they detected antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 at rates of 20% and 34% in people who had never been testing for antigen. Right away, owing to those locations and the initial impact of the pandemic we can reasonably extrapolate a good, if not high likelihood that at minimum the infectivity rate as a % and the mortality rate as a % are likely at least 20-34% higher than the actual reality.
Only when we have widespread antibody testing will we truly have a sense of how many people were infected and only then can we have a reasonably accurate picture of the true impact of this pandemic.
Lastly, I want to add something that I felt compelled to jump into the social media hysteria over; the castigation of the Trump administrations response to the virus. I am speaking now solely as a clinical microbiologist and virologist with over 30 years of experience in the infectious disease field. During that time I have had the good fortune to work with some of the best and brightest in that arena including those in the CDC, NIH and USAMRIID. While not perfect I can state that the response was far, far removed from the bungling incompetency the MSM and many liberal Democrats cast it as.
I’ll limit this to a few highlights as this has already been a marathon post; we had developed moderately complex diagnostic tests and had them available within 5 weeks of recognizing we were in an outbreak; the normal time to accomplish this is 2-3 years. We have several promising candidates for vaccines, a few of which have the very real possibility of being available in mass quantities in the US before the end of 2020, or in about 9-10 months since R&D began; as I mentioned earlier the normal timeframe is 3-4.5 years. None of this happens without quick and decisive leadership owing to the mountains of red tape and bureaucracy that need to be overcome, not to mention the resources (financial and otherwise) that need to go to the manufacturers of these vaccines. This is not being asleep at the wheel, this is quickly assessing the situation, determining how to address it and then ensuring that all resources required are expeditiously brought to bear. From an infectious disease management standpoint and given how hamstrung we were initially by deliberate misrepresentation of the disease by China and then by the WHO this was pretty damn good.
Sorry for the length folks-stay well!
I, for one, appreciate you taking the time to weigh in on the subject. It's always nice to hear from an actual "expert," or at least someone who is as close to one as most of us are likely to have access to.
Take care and as always, I hope all is well with you and yours.
I'm planning on taking advantage of it, since I have a strong feeling I had Coronavirus symptoms in early January.
thanks much. good info. keep those lil webbed feet churning.....
This sure seems very accurate from someone who has zero medical knowledge, but we are hearing of a possible vaccine as early as September? Wow! A lot of folks deserve credit that we can even talk of the possibility IMHO. Certainly those in the administration responsible deserve recognition, all the way to the top. I pray it happens!
I've heard the possibility of a deliverable vaccine as early as September as well; can it happen? Yes, but literally everything has to fall into place perfectly for that to happen. Things get critical when you get into Phase 3 or human clinical trials; this is where you test not only the ability of the vaccine to provoke a strong immune response (production of long-lasting antibodies) but very importantly, the safety of the vaccine.
Over the years there have been some promising vaccines and treatments that never made it to market owing to being too toxic (the saying "the cure is worse than the disease" was made for these situations.)
I subscribe to a number of infectious disease and medical journals online so if I do hear something definitive I'll be sure to post it on this site and give you all a heads-up.
Now, I think you leave choices to the people. They should make us fully aware of what’s out there and leave it to us to decide what we want to do, as individuals and businesses. If a business is empty and it’s economical to shit down you let them make that decision and maybe put forth some relief. However the relief can’t be for thrival, only survival that way there’s no incentive to keep ripping off the tax base!!
Then on top all of that, if there is going to be government officials telling business what they can or can’t do we make it simple. If 50% of business have to shit down govt employees take a 50% cut, that way they all feel the same pain.
However, states who are required to balance budgets are in for a big shock when it comes to the loss of tax revenue caused by the shutting down of the economy. Something is going to have to give and it isn't going to be pretty for many state employees.
Many of the "stay home stay safe - we're all in this together" crowd are going to be screaming bloody murder.
When you choke the goose that lays the golden eggs...
Government over stepped their bounds and they know it.
First off, the long length of time needed to create a vaccine of 4ish years: That may be true for a non-epidemic vaccine, for instance, some of the newer shots your kids get on a routine basis or vaccines of decades past.
But not so for modern epidemics. We make a new Influenza vaccine every year and it takes less than a year. That 4 year timeline is intellectually dishonest because it's comparing vaccines for pathogens that are largely non-epidemic (PCV, HPV, etc).
"I am aware of at least 2 large samplings of antibody testing (NYC and SoCal) where they detected antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 at rates of 20% and 34% in people who had never been testing for antigen."
The Stanford study he references was in Santa Clara County (which is in Central Cal, not Southern Cal) and did NOT have a 34% prevalence rate of antibodies in previously untested people. It was <2% with a margin of error that could result in the number being as high as 4% on the high end, but more likely 1.2-1.8%. I linked the study if you want to read it yourself.
And this study has been highly criticized by experts in the field because of it's sample bias: They recruited people off of Facebook that would naturally have pulled from a population that wanted to get tested for antibodies because they suspected they'd been either exposed or infected, potentially testing a group of people with a higher prevalence rate than the general public.
Nonetheless, even if it was a true sampling of the general public, 2-4% is a FAR CRY from 34% - the author of that post is either highly intellectually dishonest, made an egregious error thus making his opinion highly suspect, or is not an expert in the field to be off by such a factor.
The NYC study was <20%, but at 19% and change, so the rounding up is acceptable. But we'd expect far greater numbers in NYC because that's where the epicenter of this outbreak has been in this country and NYC has the perfect storm of demographics and people stacked on people for a major outbreak as opposed to California, where people are spread out. 30,000 people have died in New York from COVID. There's no other state that even comes close to touching that number. Also, if we're quoting that study, it extrapolated a death rate of 1.1%. 1.1% of the population of the USA is >3.5 million souls. If he's going to quote that study, it disproves his premise.
The NYC study has also been criticized for its sampling as people were not randomly assigned to the test. Again, it was all-volunteer in a public place (ie: grocery store parking lots), not a randomly assigned study. While the results are still noteworthy and the study was large enough (about 19K people) to avoid some effects of selection bias, it still wasn't an ideal test.
Lastly, this person linked two studies than gave two numbers and didn't include the word "respectively" after them to indicate that the two former and latter were linked. Now, this may sound like ticky-tacky grammar Nazism, but this is standard stuff for someone with those credentials and they ought to know this and would not make this sort of a gaffe if they truly knew wtf they were talking about because one would look like a fool in front of his peers for such an error.
This person, for linking their supposed credentials, seems woefully inaccurate and un-scholarly. If he's basing his opinion on CA being 34% exposed, then his summation of the "facts" is completely off, because that's not what the study showed.
You obviously don't know Mike in CT very well. He's probably the most highly respected person who visits this site. He's earned that reputation for being the voice of reason in many, many debates, while always being a true gentleman and scholar. Based on what I've seen of your posts, you couldn't hold a candle to Mike's intellect, or wit. Implying he plagiarized his post is, well, laughable.
He certainly doesn't need me to defend him, either. I'm sure he'll respond to your criticisms in a manner that makes you feel small...and you will like it and learn from it. Just wait for it. He's a busy guy right now.
Nonetheless, Matt, you are defending him even though you say you don't need to and that makes you look smaller than you accuse me of - sort of the, "My dad can beat up your dad," childishness.
I also didn't really mean any disrespect even though my words were disrespectful and I'll admit that was in poor form. But my points are valid; I notice you didn't have any reply to them, just to call me small and insult my intelligence. I'm sorry I poked holes in his take that aligns with your world view. But facts are facts. I will continue to scrutinize especially those who believe as I do because we lose legitimacy when we don't stick to the facts or misrepresent them.
FWIW, like many here, I favor opening up the economy and believe, again like many here, that the pandemic has been overblown - by myself, too, I'll admit, because of the limited data we had and still have.
"I’m going to post what I’ve shared on multiple forums going as far back as early March when some were convinced that the end was indeed near."
The New York study he mentions was performed [EDIT: published] in late April, a good 6 weeks after "early March."
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that he's just updating his take, but the beginning of the post lead me to believe that he was copy-pasting. That's especially dangerous when you're claiming, not-so-much clairvoyance, but an understanding of things to come - that your speculation into the future is correct, and then, walla, ends up being correct in hindsight. Using future facts/studies in hindsight to shore up a claim you made months prior is always going to be torn apart by the other side when you claim to have been right all along.
Again, even if the gist of the post was correct, intellectual dishonestly undermines the credibility of the message.
EDIT: I will say, though, I've generally enjoyed/agreed with your posts this past decade and have had significant respect for you up until today.
Yeah, we haven't worn them there either.
I don't really care if you've lost respect for me today. Mike has earned my respect from numerous in-depth discussions on a variety of topics. You and I haven't had that pleasure. Perhaps this will be a start.
I appreciate the respect more than I can say and also the defense; I'll address Ike's points now and will begin by saying he is not completely off-base and some of that is my fault for a bit of assumption mixed with some lack of clarity.
For starters I took you asking about a cut-and-paste as an honest question and not even a hint of, let alone a charge of plagiarism. For clarity should future posts mirror my initial one I will either place another's words in quotes of attach a link and then reference that link if I either quote directly from it or paraphrase it.
Now for the errors you mentioned.
1. I was more than passingly familiar with the data from NYC as I work with all of the major hospitals in the area and it didn't surprise me at all given NYC was one of the original epicenters of the US outbreak; if anything, I think the 20% (I believe the actual number was 19.6% with a few other decimals) underestimated the % of the population who had developed some level of antibody response.
The Stanford study on the other hand I recalled from a brief conversation with a colleague about 6-8 weeks ago; when I started writing about the NYC data I recalled that conversation and included it; I should have researched it first to confirm the accuracy and accept full responsibility for that omission and thank you for the needed clarification.
2. The time to develop a vaccine; I do notice from time to time that I have a flaw in that when discussing a subject I have a habit at times of continuing my train of thought as if everyone reading what I write is onboard the train (in my head) and knows my exact meaning; I need to work on removing this habit as it does lead to misinterpretation as happened here.
When I referred to a timeline for deliverable to market for vaccines what I wrote, to every lay person and even to some in the field clearly made it appear as though I was referring to ALL vaccines; my meaning was vaccines developed for novel pathogens but absent everyone's ability to read my mind from what I wrote there was simply no way to know this.
You mention the influenza virus vaccine given annually and this is a good example to demonstrate the contrast in timeframes; we have the template for the influenza virus and whether the vaccine will be a trivalent or quadrivalent forumulation the hard labor of determining suitable antigenic sites has already been done and the pathway to licensing by the FDA is much shorter, whether by the traditional or accelerated licensing pathway.
For a novel pathogen the road is longer because there is no template to begin from so there are more steps in the process. Once a developer gets to Phase 3 trials (human trials) assuming the trial goes well the data is then compiled and put into an FDA submission form which, once received may take up to 180 days to be reviewed and either approved, returned for clarifications or denied. It is not common that a submission gets through on the first try but it does happen; if it doesn't and there are questions (usually requests for more data) once the revisions/additions have been submitted the 180 days begins again and, God forbid a second set of questions is issued the dance begins anew.
The 3-4.5 year timeframe I referenced for this scenario is not off-base; when discussions of vaccine development began early on timelines being discussed with removal of regulatory obstacles still placed a deliverable vaccine at a minimum of 15-18 months, which, if I recall correctly would have put one sometime between 2/2021 and 5/2021. Even that I thought was really moving the needle.
3. Posting 2 studies and not adding "respectively"; if I were defending a thesis I'd be a lot more specific and a lot more in line with the expectation of peer review. When I'm speaking to largely lay people I try not to get lost in the weeds. I don't think you're being a grammar Nazi but given the audience I did find the gripe trivial.
4. The lack of randomization for the NYC data; in an ideal world an RCT (randomized controlled trial) is always preferable but the study did yield worthwhile data nonetheless. With regard to your statement about the study disproving my premise based on extrapolated death rates I think you're now making the mistake you're accusing me of making and ignoring my earlier remarks about when we would be in a position to accurately access mortality rates.
Yes, the number of deaths in NY are about 2.5 times that of the closest state (NJ) and if no other factors were involved we could compare numbers as if they represented an apples-to-apples comparison. The reality is there are many variables that do not allow such a simplistic analysis; patient demographics being the most critical; immune status, chronic underlying morbidities, etc. all need to be factored in.
Another consideration for the numbers in NY lies in the ill-advised policy of dumping known COVID-19 infected patients into nursing homes. Was this practice adopted universally in all 50 states? If not, do you think exposing the most vulnerable population might have had something to do with a higher death toll?
Your last point about my referencing posting as far back as March; I'll allow for not being extremely specific but I did mention "jumping around a bit"; most of what I shared on other forums in March (early through the end) was contained in my post; the studies I referenced were never referred to as falling in this timeframe; while not unfounded you assumed I was posting as if either clairvoyant or really bad with dates. I'm good with chalking this one up to an honest misunderstanding, for which I am willing to accept some of the fault.
With regard to your the last sentence of your last post (intellectual dishonesty) that should have been dispelled by this reply; if not, that is your prerogative but I can assure you it will not result in any loss of sleep on my part.
you absolutely dispelled any question of intellectual dishonesty with your post and I regret using the phrase so loosely. I apologize.
I promise you that I've made more inaccurate claims than you have (I'm an odds guy).
Please allow me to back up a little: I have colleagues, friends, that are sending (have been) me pictures from NYC and Boston. Pictures that would make anyone's skin crawl. I've seen bodies stacked like cord wood (granted, it was a matter of a few days/a couple of weeks). This is not usual Emergency Room day-to-day operations. I've talked with friends who have seen people die in waiting rooms before they saw a physician. I believe them because I know them.
That said, it bothers me when people say, "it's just another flu." It's not another flu. As you know, it's worse than the flu. But it's not MERS or SARS.
I believe that the entire lock-down culture came out of China. They did it, so we did it. And it worked for them (did it?). But it was probably not the best idea for us.
What I rile against, is the conspiracy theorist, "just another flu," "I'm a rebel without a clue so I'm not going to wear a mask" mentality. It wreaks of partisan politics. Perhaps (current science says so) wearing a mask will help and so we should do it. -Matthew 22:39
As a scientist, you very well know the lens you are under. Extra weight is given to what you say, so you need to be spot on - an impossible responsibility. If not for your misquote of the California numbers, I wouldn't have said anything.
I commend you for correcting that, as any good scientist would.
Again, I apologize for my disrespectful tone. That's not the man I try to be and I thank Matt for pointing it out.
Thanks for your response and I can assure you that I am a spotless 0-my life as far as rolling out of bed perfect!
The important thing is we got this sorted out and we both recognize that this is something very serious and for better or for worse, the likelihood is that all of our lives have been changed and whatever "normal" eventually settles on could be vastly different that pre-COVID-19.
Given what you shared with me your pushing back was completely understandable; I've worked with a couple of large NE hospitals in the past few months on implementing new protocols for handling COVID-19 patients, one of them being in MA. If it provides you some comfort they have seen some very encouraging results; they have cut down on the number of ICU patients with COVID-19 needing dialysis by just over 90% since they implemented this new protocol. That kind of result makes the frenetic demands on my time the past few months more than worth it.
I've seen some real heroes on the front lines and as much as I respected them before that respect has grown exponentially.
It's a small world, isn't it?
Good health to you too and to all fellow hunters.
...and to think they are gluten and fat free!!
Mike n Ike. Sounds like a franchise. Kudos to you both for the work you do.
But if you want to read more about how woefully flawed the California (Stanford) study was, please see this link
Thanks for the link-sobering to say the least! As I mentioned in my response to Ike this was a major eff-up on my part in going with an almost 2-months old passing conversation with a colleague and posting it as if it had been peer-reviewed or at least well vetted. Believe me, I have made a mental note that regardless of how well I know someone and what their credentials are I'm checking for myself before sharing!
Hope you and yours are and remain well!
I believe so too and it's very disappointing that we don't have more of these studies from around the country already done and published so that we could be making decisions with better data.
Mask and social distancing recommendations are based on science. They aren't working because there a bunch of people in our society that are dumb enough to think liberty will give them immunity to a virus so they don't utilize them.
As a friend of mine put it aptly: "if you wear a mask, the worst that can come of it is that you wore a mask."
First declaration from Dr Fauci was that masks will not protect you from a virus. The most recent declaration from Dr Fauci is that masks are symbolic.
So much for your "science god".
What some have learned from this pandemic is that some things are more important than medicine, liberty being one of them.
You could also look at the studies that demonstrate masks and social distancing are effective in reducing the spread of COVID. But then, you'd have to turn off what they refer to on FOX as news.
I can tell your an "idealist", somebody doesn't want to follow orders and the master plan will not work because of that. I guess you would have no problem killing all the deplorable people in the world, that is, if they survive the gulag. You and John Lennon, "imagine", whirled peas.
When you called me and countless others "dumb" I thought you would expect such things, I am right again.
Dumb is a physical disability which does not allow a person to speak.
You've been lied to and you're convinced the lie is true.
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
And apparently some know more than the brightest statisticians...like your rather feeble attempt at extrapolating fatality numbers over an entire population.
"As the physicians maxim is “first do no harm” the decision was made initially to consider the worst-case scenario and do all possible to mitigate its impact. In addition to the models a few realities fueled this decision; first, there was no effective treatment for the disease and second, and most importantly there was no vaccine and the time to develop an effective vaccine is ordinarily between 3-4.5 years. Some floated the idea (and some countries not only floated it but initially adopted it) of allowing “herd immunity” to develop; good in theory but when you have a novel pathogen you have no baseline to determine how effective an immune response, even in the most immunocompetent people will be. It’s not up there with Russian roulette but it carries risks above what most health experts agreed on a comparative scale to a lockdown."
And in summary this:
"The important thing is we get this sorted out and we both recognize that this is something very serious and for better or for worse, the likelihood is that all of our lives have been changed and whatever "normal" eventually settles on could be vastly different that pre-COVID-19."
Those words speak volumes over the political rants of conspiracy theorists and clueless rebels complaining about loss of freedoms, to me. So, go ahead and throw your masks in the trash, if you want. It's certainly your choice. Just keep your distance from me, and I'll do the same.
"Back in late March I advised friends that they should be prepared to see a rise, and likely a sizable rise for weeks if not longer in the number of positive cases; this is a function of simple math; when you begin with a testing capacity of 10-20,000 tests a week and eventually achieve a capacity in the same time frame of close to a million tests you are going to detect more positives. This must be tempered with the reality that up to 80% of positive cases will either be asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic (we’ve expanded testing from only those displaying symptoms to a much broader scope owing to the availability of testing)."
"Lastly, I want to add something that I felt compelled to jump into the social media hysteria over; the castigation of the Trump administrations response to the virus. I am speaking now solely as a clinical microbiologist and virologist with over 30 years of experience in the infectious disease field. During that time I have had the good fortune to work with some of the best and brightest in that arena including those in the CDC, NIH and USAMRIID. While not perfect I can state that the response was far, far removed from the bungling incompetency the MSM and many liberal Democrats cast it as.
I would never attempt to put words in Mike's mouth but it would at least appear that the MSM and at least some politicians have indeed been mischaracterizing this.
Intentional? Conspiracy? Certainly not out of the question. To what end? People can make their own judgement on that. However, to think that the way this is being covered, and even to a certain extent handled, is not happening to advance a certain agenda or a certain narrative is just being naive.
The perspective of a small business owner in a rural town with zero or near zero cases and no deaths, will obviously be vastly different than a frontline healthcare worker, epidemiologist, environmental health professional, etc in a densely-populated hard hit area.
ICUs are starting to fill in our metro, and you are right, it's not because of testing. It seems to be surging, and this is June. Looking more like the call to shutdown in late winter may have been effective at flattening the curve after all.
Regarding stats, more tests confirming, all other things being equal, will reflect a lower mortality rate as will the reported increase in young people testing positive but having higher rates of recovery. But we all know seldom do all other variables remain constant.
Speaking of Mike, I really appreciate his style of never pointing out how the strong man stumbled or the doer of deeds could have done better. Personally, I learn a lot from the man. Thanks Mike.
Better get ready. It’s going to keep hitting. You’ve got two choices. Stay at home and isolate. Or live life with common sense. That’s it. Anything else is just selfish conjuncture. Because preaching doom and gloom while not living that way it the definition of condescending. .
It’s time to shut up up or put up.
That said, Matt's point here is correct:
"As a friend of mine put it aptly: 'if you wear a mask, the worst that can come of it is that you wore a mask.' "
Initially, it was not thought that masks would do much. Then there was a study that showed that they do, indeed do something in the case of COVID. Anything other than an N95 will not protect you as the wearer, but it will provide a little protection to those around you IF you have COVID since people spit when they talk and there's now evidence that just talking loud aerosolizes saliva. Makes sense doesn't it? Look at the transmission rates and the numbers of people without symptoms (ie: cough). I even had a hypothesis that it was being transmitted by farts. If you smell it, you're breathing in particles that were at one point in someone's colon after all.... :)
The entire reason surgeons wear surgical masks is for no reason other than to keep microbe-infested saliva from going into surgical wounds as they speak.
So maybe it doesn't do much or maybe it does a little?
Personally, I feel it's a matter of patriotism and love of thy neighbor to wear a mask because it might keep someone from getting exposed. And you'll never know if you were a good Samaritan and did the right thing and saved someone's life or did your part to slow the spread which let a doctor get a critically ill person in an ICU bed that would have otherwise been full. You'll never know. But God will.
On an individual level, I'm probably not making a difference, but I wear one anyways, just in case. Pros vs cons. Upside: Maybe I save a life. Downside: I wore a mask.
If the Federal Govt and all 50 State Govts did NOT mandate that you had to wear a mask, but rather, recommended it as something for the good of the Nation, would you wear a mask?
Is your resistance to it just because it's mandated? If so, perhaps you should ask yourself what gets so deeply to your sense of right and wrong on their part and your part.
Back in the 1940s, there were lots of things the Federal Govt did that restricted freedom because of a different type of crisis. People drove really slow and called it "Freedom Speed," to save gas, among countless other self-sacrificing things people did out of patriotism.
Maybe you should call your mask a "Freedom Mask," and it'd sit a little different on your face than thinking about it as a "Tyranny Mask." It is, after all, in word at least, for the good of the common man and America.
Many of the things done in the 40s made no difference to the war effort or it's result. But people did them anyways and were proud to do everything they could for the country, no matter how small a thing it was or how inconsequential its results.
An individual patriot, on his own, rarely accomplishes much for the good of the Country. But the collection of the entire American people as strong patriots is what has made this Country an insurmountable institution.
Its not the mask. They are annoying but I wore one for my own protection at work 10-20 hours a week before Covid anyway. Probably the biggest threat Covid has had for me personally was the inability to get decent masks for work when demand skyrocketed.
Remember a few weeks ago when we were all in this together? We stepped up and closed the economy, cancelled graduations, missed funerals, weddings, cancelled travel, somehow home schooled our kids with no time to prepare for it and we started wearing masks. And now is when the radical left decides to tear the country apart with riots, looting, destroying property and tearing down history? There are people to be upset with for not doing their part. A guy running into the store to buy a gallon of milk without his mask on isn't any concern for me.
The one thing pro mask for all people keep forgetting is the idea that they don’t get to decide what is taboo or normal. And, hide it behind a veil of what’s best for America.
Yet, Facebook and hunting sites are full of people so seemingly scared of those who choose to decide for themselves what’s best. Instead of wear a stupid mask that from my personal observation, is no more effective then without one the way people are using them.
Bottom line is, you do you. I’ll do me.
Fact = mitigation was intended to flatten the curve. That was done and the curve is no longer relevant. Hospitals were busy, but not nearly as what was "predicted".
Fact = legislators with no concern about killing babies are suddenly in charge of the safety of adults. Hence, Cuomo(pro death) dumps Covid into nursing homes, De Santis(pro life) isolates them, which would you rather were looking out for you?
Medicine is a valuable resource, but does not qualify as a governing principle. Just like meteorology doesn't stop all wars, weddings or births. Astronomy can predict an earth impact, but we are a long way from stopping such an event(good movie material).
The alternative to liberty is tyranny, and mankind, outside of constitutional government still lives under that today. Freedom does not come from government, but rather, restricts it from it's tyrannical inclination, and that was known to our founding fathers as a first hand experience. Egyptian enslavement of the Jews was clearly understood long long before Africans were shipped overseas to be slaves.
Prognostication is better done by God, but man keeps trying, to his own disappointment.
Habitat for Wildlife's Link
The masks help prevent spread by people who don't know they are carriers.
Given our ICUs are filling in some areas, which prevents hospitals from possibly scheduling other needed procedures, I can accept mandatory face masks as something other than tyranny.
The only reason I can think of for the aversion to wearing masks and relate it to fighting tyranny is that President Trump refuses to wear one. Talk about sheeple!
Some of theses same people lack consistency in seeing tyranny when our government executes a person by kneeling on their neck for 8 minutes with some excuses of why it happened.
Wouldn't have believed such intellectual dishonesty could exist until I read it here and elsewhere.
3, 2, 1....
By chance do you have a crystal ball at home?! I was just in the process of posting something to address some of the recent points and had a chuckle when I saw your post!
The answer is yes, I have been wearing a mask, have a small container of hand sanitizer with me which is use liberally when shopping and even with the mask on (which by the way is a surgical mask; FYI, when this pandemic was taking off I wore an N95 mask when going out due to necessity). I've never worked in a BSL-4 (most dangerous pathogens) lab but I have been in one and if anyone saw the movie "Outbreak" that's as close an example to the reality as I've seen; any pathogen has to be taken seriously when it has the ability to spread as efficiently as this virus-period.
Without question some of the push back we're seeing was spawned by either poorly disseminated information or worse, misrepresentations (and at this point in all honesty the motivation is irrelevant; the horse is long since out of the barn).
I hear a lot (and Ike, I'm sure you do as well) "but I'm not symptomatic" so why do I need a mask? I've also heard (and this is technically correct) that if a person doesn't have an N95 mask virus can still enter or exit a cloth or other type of mask.
As Ike pointed to above the greatest value of the mask is blocking a primary means of viral transmission; the coughing or sneezing that releases virus into the air and can travel 6-10' depending on conditions. A cloth mask will contain your expectorated material and will protect against others; they don't call the practice "preventative measures" for nothing.
OK, but what about all the conflicting information about asymptomatic people not being infectious? Is it possible that some asymptomatic people are not capable of transmitting the disease; yes, if there viral load is so low and if you are fortunate to have a super-functioning immune system you may escape exposure to such a person unscathed. Question; how many here would rely on a fire extinguisher that had a label stating "may work to put out a fire but no guarantee?"
I've attached a link and I know of late the CDC hasn't helped burnish their cred but this is a good article and speaks to the reality that there is a good likelihood of spread by asymptomatic and presymptomatic people; this should serve as a cautionary tale and I hope prompts some mask skeptics to reconsider.
None of us would ever sit on a stand 20' or more above the ground without a safety harness; I'm sure none of us intend to fall but we recognize the risk and the consequences of not taking this precaution; this is no different but in one critical way; each one of us unknowingly can infect 2-3 people who can repeat that process and that reality can be strongly mitigated by something as simple as wearing a mask.
We are our brother's keeper and we owe our neighbor the same consideration for placing value on the safety of his family as we would expect the reciprocal act.
I hate to sound like the prophet of doom but folks, we live in a very globally connected world and I can assure you this is not going to be the last novel pathogen with potential devastating consequences we see; the lessons we learn (or don't learn) from this one will play a large role in the outcome of the next pandemic.
Stay safe people!
"My partners and I have barely seen any Covid cases up here. We keep looking for it......but we’ve been lucky. We have seen, however, a massive increase in people with very severe depression and sometimes crippling anxiety. People that were keeping a lid on it before are doing way worse. And lots of people who’ve never had any problems are getting overwhelmed and coming in."
Few people would deny that we were successful in flattening the covid curve, but at what cost? What other "curves" are we creating/ignoring in the process?
I actually know people, perfectly healthy young people, who are literally terrified to leave their homes. The longer this goes on, I believe the more we are at risk of not getting these people back any time soon...if at all. Do we really think a vaccine is going "flip a switch" in their brains, and all of a sudden they are going to be comfortable to go out again. Not likely. Anyone that knows anything about anxiety knows that's not how it works.
PS: Before anyone asks, the physician quoted above is far from a covid denier. Quite the opposite actually. For the most part, he has been on the extremely cautious side of this.
Mike in CT's Link
No crystal ball, my friend, not even a bowling ball. I just know the common sense that you have, and your ability to express it in a manner that doesn't rile or offend others. I wish I had your talent. Nah, who am I kidding, I love riling some people. ;-)
We also have people dying because they cannot have needed procedures performed.
Most of us get that there is room for disagreement on how to handle this. That same group mentally healthy enough to allow for disagreement are not the ones typically seeing a conspiracy behind every corner.
re: surgical masks vs N95 masks
My stepson works at one of the largest boat manufacturers in the world. Prior to them closing down for covid19, he was required to wear an N95 mask every day due to fiberglass dust and fumes. It was part of their daily protocol long before covid19 was ever a thing.
Fast forward to their re-opening a few weeks ago, now they are required (under threat of termination) to wear disposable surgical masks, NOT the N95 masks they originally wore all along.
When he questioned why they were not allowed to wear the N95 masks, he was told that the the state required the surgical masks and if there was an inspection they would be in serious trouble if employees weren't wearing them.
On the flip side, my wife works for a company that makes gas masks and breathing apparatus for the military and first responders. They never shut down at all as they are considered essential. For them, wearing masks of any kind is voluntary. Some do, some don't.
Same state, same town...totally different protocol.
Go into our local Home Depot an you will see less than 10% of the customers wearing masks.
Go to Menards and you will not get in the front door without one. If you don't have one they will sell you one for a dollar.
In my opinion, things like this is why many people are confused and frustrated.
I had a doctor tell me he thinks the cloth mask wearers may benefit their selves some. It may prevent them from receiving the full virul load from someone else, and possibly this lower load will be defensible by their immunity system. Sounded reasonable to me.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin
Masks and social distancing are a token thing, liberty is an essential principle being disrespected today, and goes far beyond flu season.
This whole thread is a squeak in the world roaring towards an end, and it isn't utopia.
Go along to get along is a shortcut to hell on earth.
That's not honest. If it were true, you wouldn't be pushing them as you have on this thread. Same thing as pro death politicians caring for flu victims, it smacks of insincerity.
I'm tired of being lied to and told to like it.
I can't speak for anyone else but simply asking questions doesn't constitute push back.
I literally walked out to my truck just now and snapped the above pic. Like Mike, I am cautious when I am in public. I wear a mask when I go into a business and I use hand sanitizer very liberally, and I have no problem doing either. I fill that little hand sanitizer bottle every two or three days.
I find it rather interesting that many of the people that say "follow the science" are the same people that seem to have a problem with people questioning things.
Isn't "science" all about asking questions?
"Not all that
wander wonder are lost."
Bill, what smacks of insincerity is your constant referencing of Covid-19 as the "flu". As for my honesty, I was referencing Kevin's post in which he talked about the different protocols from one business to the other, and how that was "confusing and frustrating" to people. There's nothing confusing or frustrating about it, to me. I honestly don't care if an establishment requires masks or makes them voluntary. I'm going to wear one, either way, because I think it's common sense. People who are way smarter than me seem to agree (see Mike's posts)
I'm 68, overweight with a Heart problem, hell yes I'm wearing a mask, I'm not trying to plat Russian roulette with my health.
If you took my protocol questions as push back, you are indeed confused. Never have I pushed back on the use of masks, hand sanitizer, or any other precaution that someone chooses to take. Hell if you want to wear a condom over your head, be my guest.
What an individual chooses to do and what they must do is totally different. One would think that the minimum of the "must do" would at least be consistent.
When a company demands (under the threat of termination) the use of a less effective surgical mask over the use of a more effective N95 mask, it begs the question "why?"
The answer might be something as simple as cost, availability, or an attempt to protect the supply of the N95 for other workers.
I literally have no idea, that is why I was illustrating the inconsistency to Mike. If anyone here would know why, it would be him.
As far as work, I run a large manufacturing plant and we’ve been following all the same protocols. We’ve also deep cleaned the entire 700,000 square foot industrial areas and the now vacant (most are working from home) 400,000 square foot of administrative and engineering spacing. For whatever reason we were deemed “essential”, as was all manufacturing in NV, and have never closed except for two short periods when we had three isolated employees in separate incidents who either tested positive or live with someone who tested positive or were presumed to have tested positive. We invested in high tech temperature checking equipment for each entrance, shut down the gym and cafeteria, deployed signage throughout the facility and severely restricted access to the site to only employees, such as production and logistics, who must be present to work. We do allow nearly any time of mask, including home made, as long as it’s not a ventilated mask and is worn properly. We supply new surgical masks daily, as requested and many employees have made and sold masks to their coworkers. The leadership team also meets three times per week to review and adjust protocols based on current site events, conditions and information gathered by our EH&S manager who has 20+ years of military experience.
I’m certain without these protocols we wouldn’t have been as successful in keeping the business running and people working. All has not been perfect since a significant portion of the N America staff was placed on furlough and I had to manage through a lay off of a significant percentage of my staff. One of the two B to C industries we support with product shut down totally worldwide.
I also oversee smaller manufacturing sites on 4 other continents and 7 countries and the protocol and restrictions in each of these countries has been far more restrictive than ours.
I see choosing not wearing a mask in public as POSSIBLY putting myself and OTHERS at risk and that is a very selfish act as far as I’m concerned. It may be proven harmful to others in a similar fashion to second hand smoke and drinking and driving.
As far as losing freedom..... As stated in other’s posts above, if you wear a mask and take other precautions the worst thing that’ll happen is you wore a mask and wasted some money on hand sanitizer. As with choosing to drink and drive, if you choose to take a cab or an Uber instead you’ll for sure be out $20 - $40, but you aren’t personally putting others at risk and the risk of drinking and driving is well known.
I didn't mean to imply your questions to Mike were "pushing back" at wearing masks. I'm happy to read that you wear one regularly. I knew were a smart guy. ;-)
There are several people on here, however, who are clearly pushing back at wearing masks. Those are the folks I was eluding to.
For me, it's not a matter of "choose to do" or "must do". It's a matter of what should you do, for your own safety and that of others? To me, the answer to that is a no-brainer.
The example you provided of your stepson's work situation to me perfectly encapsulates the issues that too often arise with government intervention; though well-intentioned it is tragically misinformed. What the government is doing is mandating a less effective mask that what was commonly worn; there's no way to label this as anything but stupid.
Now, could I understand the government's position if they wanted to ensure a supply of N95 masks for first responders and ICU staff? Of course, but you haven't indicated that was ever part of the directive. It's easy to understand why people are confused as the state mandate runs contrary to best practice, which, when the objective is to contain the spread of an infectious agent should be THE standard-period.
I would imagine that having the need to wear N95 masks there would have been inventory so I can't see the state arguing that inventory for the key personnel I mentioned would be sacrificed; again, it seems to boil down to the government acting unilaterally and not considering the validity of their action.
For the record, I understand people questioning protocol and I feel "the experts" should clearly communicate the why and not feel as if a mandate is all the explanation required. I think this country has a long and well-documented history of coming together in times of crisis and I think we, as a nation deserved complete openness.
I don't believe all information inevitably leads to panic, rather it is a lack of information, and worse, the appearance of "hiding something" (what aren't you telling us) that led to things such as the mass hording of toilet paper for a great example.
I've always been of the mind, "give me the news, however bad it might be and I'll adjust as needed."
A lot of good points have been made on this thread; one of the better ones and in a realization of the irony, this thread is a lot of what the CF could have and should have always been.
Thanks to all the participants!
I still believe that decision will be seen as one of the biggest and longest lasting failures of this entire pandemic.
Interestingly enough, I asked my son that very question about availability. He said because they have been using them all along anyway, they have a huge stockpile of them just sitting there.
The funny thing is, he said that most of the employees would rather wear the N95 masks as he claims they are much more comfortable and easier to breathe through. Unfortunately, they are specifically told they cannot wear them.
Now, I don’t know if this is accurate or not but he also tells me that the surgical masks they are required to wear don’t meet the OSHA particulate matter requirement for their normal working conditions.
Confused? Frustrated? You bet!
Since you seem to have a little free time this morning to answer our lay person questions, which I greatly appreciate, I have a hand sanitizer question. When COVID-19 first became a part of our vernacular, I noticed that medical experts were recommending sanitizers with at least 70% alcohol in them. So, thinking that more is better, I purchased a gallon of 99% isopropyl alcohol. That's what I've been using for hand sanitizer, as well as for general sanitizing spray for things like gas station nozzles and shopping carts.
Is 99% isopropyl alcohol an effective sanitizer as I've been using it? And are there any potential health risks to using it, especially on my skin? Are there any risks from occasionally inhaling the strong fumes from it?
Never did I think I would see that sort of rejection of science based on political ideology around a disease-related crisis here in the US.
Which "science" are you referring to?
The science that suggested that people should not wear masks because they were not effective (or even counterproductive), the science that said it was an option if it made one feel better, or the science that says it is necessary to reduce the spread.
All three came from the CDC.
See the problem?
noun: scientific method; plural noun: scientific methods a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses. "criticism is the backbone of the scientific method"
That definition in hand and if the steps of the scientific method are know and understood it’s easy to see many, if not all, of the recommendations were and have been communicated way too early in the process.
They are not the same thing.
Having said that, even though it’s a new virus, it’s still a virus, and if the “experts” At CDC don’t already know if face masks are effective in reducing the spread of airborne viruses, we are in trouble.
It’s not like we’re talking about degrees of effectiveness here.
We went from “don’t do it as it not effective, it could even be dangerous and if you care anything about others, you won't be so selfish as to use up all the masks for something that's not necessary" to “do it because it’s necessary and if you care anything about others, and you aren't selfish, you would do it for their protection."
Great question and I'm glad I've had some rare free time today! Actually the 70% isoprophyl acohol (IPA) is better than the 99% due to the higher water content. Water actually acts as a catalyst in denaturing microbial proteins (more beneficial for bacteria and fungi) and where virus inactivation is concerned the higher water concentration allows for slower evaporation than the 99% IPA (which is only 1% water content vs the 30% in the 70% IPA).
The longer the disinfectant contacts the agent you want to disinfect the greater the effectiveness.
With regard to safety prolonged exposure on the skin to 99% IPA can cause redness and swelling and you definitely don't want to get any in your eyes. The vapors can cause headache, dizziness and nausea if you are exposed to them for a long time or in a poorly ventilated area.
Stick with the 70% IPA; it will do the job and you'll have no headaches (literally).
"As for my honesty, I was referencing Kevin's post in which he talked about the different protocols from one business to the other, and how that was "confusing and frustrating" to people."
You are evading my point, that is, you care to an extreme.
As for me, I don't care if people want to wear a mask. I care when dishonest people order me to wear a mask, and those are the people you, Grey Ghost, are supporting.
"For me, it's not a matter of "choose to do" or "must do"."
And there's where we differ. When promised safety comes at the price of liberty forever lost, nobody will be safe from tyranny, and that's a "no brainer". Your faith in the master planners is evident. I see liberty as paramount to vaguely promised safety and the motivation for men to give their lives for. Not something to be discarded for convenience of the moment.
You joke about masks making some people better looking, maybe in your case that's so, but it also dehumanizes them by hiding facial expression, no joke.
A couple of years back there was a humorous video of a pair of Muslim women in full burka, at an outdoor restaurant, eating spaghetti. While I respect the devotion of those women in their habit, the expressions of the man in the background watching them was laughable. The lack of practicality was clearly evident. So I also find it sadly comical that our state government feels they have to tell people that they don't have to wear a mask when swimming in the ocean, or eating in a restaurant. It is not scientific concern that has planned out the "new normal", but rather a need to enforce compliance to their rules. I don't call them laws, because most of them have not gone through the legislative process of representative government, but rather, a governor and his cronies, in a contrived emergency.
And there you have it folks. Wild Bill has it all figured out. Covid-19 is just a "contrived" crisis, and the precautionary advice and mandates are a carefully scripted act of tyranny by our collective states and federal government.
Good grief! You can't make this stuff up.
The science that suggested that people should not wear masks because they were not effective (or even counterproductive), the science that said it was an option if it made one feel better, or the science that says it is necessary to reduce the spread.
All three came from the CDC."
If one read no more deeply than that and ignored the chronology when addressing a novel virus, I could see the problem. But given we have more information as our understanding of the means of transmission has become better and any rational adult should be able to reason through the chronology, I don't see the problem.
Apologies if this has been asked and answered above, but are you wearing a mask when you are in indoor situations where you are unable to maintain 6 feet from others (e.g. supermarket)?
" I just know the common sense that you have, and your ability to express it in a manner that doesn't rile or offend others. I wish I had your talent. Nah, who am I kidding, I love riling some people."
There you have it folks, he doesn't care, he's just here to rile folks and lie about his concern. Sounds like a resume for political office these days.
Mark Twain once wrote, "Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." I think I need to heed his advice.
Chris, I'm glad your rural area hasn't been hit hard by the virus....yet. Neither has mine. I think first responders and ER workers in larger cities of Texas, Florida, Arizona, California, and several other places might have a different perspective than yours, right now.
I've never advocated for people to lock themselves in their homes in fear. The reason I mentioned my trips was to demonstrate that you can still travel and enjoy your life, while being serious about this virus at the same time. I didn't break any laws, or mandates, on my 2 trips, nor did I expose myself or others unduly. Heck, I'm exposed more to the virus at our local grocery store than I was on those trips.
For the record, I spent last weekend on a solo scouting trip in the trophy elk unit that I drew this year, too. And, I'm going on another fly fishing trip to Wyoming in about a week. So, while you guys will undoubtedly still be arguing about masks and tyranny, I'l be getting on with my life, safely and cautiously.
At 71 I live self isolated, and love it. I live in the woods etc. The issue is in the crowded areas. I am lucky not to live in a nursing home. and for the record, it is never going to happen,, the nursing homes are death traps...............
It is obvious the protesters do not care.......................... carry on
WRT to political ideology and covid.... most of what I see is it's OK not to wear a mask or social distance if you are looting, burning something down, throwing bricks, etc. If in Oregon you don't have to wear one if you're black, only if you're white. Seattle? huh.... and if related to or work for the right people you can break quarantine, no masks, get your hair cut, take your boat out, have a party, etc..... no problem.
However anything associated with Orange is a life threatening dangerous serial killer...... must be what they mean by "the great unwashed..."
I also predict although treatments are starting to catch up to this stuff (early on "traditional" viral treatments in many case actually triggered auto-immune and other issues, made it worse in some cases) and death rates dropping more and more and more (especially when you don't dump covid patients into nursing homes)...... you won't hear anything about that, all you will hear about is what they have shifted to now (as testing etc. is ramping up as well) "rates of new cases are spiking...." and "red states opening up are the problem" all the way until November is my guess.....
You will get no positive news from the MSM. They could care less about "common" working Americans and improving their lives, putting out honest and factual information that can help people. Trump it seems is the real threat.... they would burn down America (it's evil anyway) and worry about it later to be rid of him.... they see this as helping to get rid of him. It's pretty glaring really, might say blinding even, they quit even trying to hide it a long time ago.
Yeah, I'd agree, this has been politicized to a GREAT degree.... but masks being politicized are in comparison a pimple on the gorillas azz......
ICUs filling up are not part of any anti-whatever campaign, it is just the sad truth and a reminder that this is not over and will probably remain fluid for the foreseeable future. I would be surprised to see any changes regarding the spread shortly after the election because I don't see a conspiracy with this.
What Polis mandate did I break?
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the impact of warm and hot summer weather on Covid vs the seasonal flu. The warmer weather doesn’t seem to be slowing Covid compared to the flu.
Check the dates for that mandate and get back to me.
I suspect that a likely explanation for why we're seeing an uptick in cases but not mortality is the virus may have mutated to a less virulent form. Although my evidence is largely anecdotal I am hearing from hospitals I work with that they aren't seeing the severity of symptoms in "vulnerable patients" as was seen in the March-May period of the pandemic.
With regard to the seasonality of the flu it's a lot of people congregating indoors that facilitates the spread during the winter and early spring and as those groups disperse into the outdoors with the warmer weather the infectious cycle is broken and the virus essentially drifts away.
At present it doesn't appear that SARS-CoV-2 will have this waning period over the summer like the flu; we only have some limited data at the moment but that suggests we won't see the same reprieve and the reason(s) are still being evaluated as to why this may be.
Although it is an RNA virus like the flu they are from different "families" (Coronaviridae vs Orthomyxoviridae) and having different compositions may also explain the differences with regard to seasonal peaks and valleys.
What we'll have to keep an eye on is from about 2 weeks post 4th of July weekend; if we're going to see a significant resurgence this summer we'll most likely see it sometime between the 3rd week of July and the beginning of August. If the virus regains it's earlier level of virulence this could get very ugly very quickly.
Hope this was at least somewhat helpful and stay well!
Interesting. Not much being said about where the deaths are coming from, as if the percentages, the risks were somehow equal across the board. Apparently it's not the young..... at all.
Stated before..... thousands and thousands of "essential" workers, millions likely, did not lock down. What is the study on their death rates? Pretty sure there should be one? I recall little to nothing reported about a rash of deaths coming from any of these groups, and it's been months now. Somehow these folks aren't "really" out there? They don't count? My guess is the info is there. It's just not what they want you to hear?
Again... the dire doom and gloom worst case information of fear and panic is not what being withheld, it's being amplified from watchtowers. (have you been to a walmart lately?) I think there is a good deal of facts and information that essentially is. For your own good of course.....
I don't trust them anymore, those in charge, the media. Nothing they say. Not even a little. Their honesty and integrity was lost years ago.
One thing is for sure, those prisoners will be sure to save lives with strict mask protocol.
While attending a graduation open house yesterday, I had a conversation with a local physician who stated that he was hearing this very thing.
Is this just a hunch within the medical community, or is there any research/evidence that would confirm this?
Furthermore, in your experience how common is it that a virus mutates into a less virulent strain as opposed to a more virulent strain.
"We attempted to contact his office, but no one returned our calls"
"He is out of the office and unavailable for comment"
I don't know how to respond to what I started- its just like what happened in "Wahoo," China, it turned out to be bigger than they ever imagined !
I have enjoyed the various positions and comments.
Good question; while a number of viruses by nature are capable of mutations, RNA virus like SARS-CoV-2 are inherently more mutagenic owing to the difference in replication processes. The degree to which they mutate and the direction can be as simple as the vagaries of genetic chance, environmental factors, host(s) involved, etc.
Influenza is a good example of a virus that can mutate seasonally (due to antigenic drift) from one season to another and the resultant virus can be either more pathogenic (H1N1 in 2009) or less (think of any of the exceptionally mild flu seasons).
While the medical (and especially the infectious disease segment) have speculated as to why a spike in infections hasn't (yet) produced a similar spike in deaths is being widely discussed and a couple of theories have emerged. In one, the virus has mutated to a less virulent form; obviously this is the scenario we'd prefer but it's way too early to celebrate. In another option the virus is still as virulent but for a reason or reasons not yet understood it has appeared to change in terms of the patient population in which it produces the more acute syndrome.
In the initial phase of the outbreak the odds were stacked against the elderly and those in their 20's and 30's seemed to rarely get a serious illness (absent of course underlying risk factors/conditions); this has seemed to flip and elderly patients who get infected aren't developing the acute symptoms they were just a few months ago and conversely, that young and healthy demographic seems to have an increasing frequency of serious infections.
There are some theories as to what's changed and to be clear, that's all they are right now-theories. Until they can be empirically tested they need to be taken with a large grain of salt! Some of what I'm hearing is that it may be due to a subtle change in receptor(s) or it may relate to some other host-specific factor(s). As I said, at present we're speculating as to the why.
One cautionary tale is that when we touch on the ability (and high likelihood) of this virus to mutate depending on the nature of that mutation it can impact the efficacy of any vaccine(s). Early on some pretty sharp minds speculated that we may wind up in a similar situation to the flu where this needs to be an annual vaccine, adjusted seasonally to try and match the likeliest prevalent strain. This could also inevitably lead to the development of a multivalent (a vaccine that incorporates multiple strains of a virus as we do with the Influenza virus which can be trivalent (3 strains) or quatrivalent (4 strains) vaccine.
We will crack this nut eventually but we're a good ways off from that level of comfort which is why every precaution can and should be taken. Our respective health is not something to gamble with.
Thanks for the question and to you and all here my continued best wishes for you and your families to remain in good health.
"this has seemed to flip and elderly patients who get infected aren't developing the acute symptoms they were just a few months ago..."
Is it possible that this is just simply a matter of those that were most susceptible to a bad outcome, even a fatal outcome, have already been taken out of the "pool" as it were? Without trying to sound insensitive, a "survival of the fittest" type situation.
In other words, is there any merit at all to a theory which says that of the percentage of our population that were most likely to dye from this virus, a lot of them are already gone, and the remaining population is more capable of fighting it off?
You've the makings of a fine epidemiologist! There's a lot of merit to what you said regarding the most susceptible being hardest hit during the initial months and that likely is a factor; as age weakens the immune system (regardless of "starting point") we still have a good-sized "vulnerable population" so there's clearly something going on with the virus itself.
Ironically, the phenomenon you allude to was the rationale in some circles for letting "herd immunity" develop in the most immunocompetent persons; sequester the vulnerable but let those most likely to survive infection (some absent any symptoms and a high percent with only mild symptoms) get infected and develop antibodies.
The thought is that this shrinks the pool of susceptible hosts for the virus so each emergence of the virus is less impactful.
Absolutely nowhere near a dumb question; a good observation!
I'm old enough to remember "pox parties."
Maybe what we need are "covid parties."
I even know of a beer maker that might want to sponsor them.
(so much for the makings of a fine epidemiologist...)
I have posted GPF (Geo Political Futures) articles/columns before, and it is a source worth reading. They identified younger people as starting to show higher numbers of infection and also some of what Mike has relayed above. That was the source for my previous post mentioning the younger being infected is helping to reduce the numerical mortality rate.
And from my perspective had much more clarity early on than maybe some of the contradictory releases from the CDC, yet as Mike alludes to we don't know everything and probably will not for some time. The situation will remain fluid and bring further surprises IMHO.
Mike, regarding the elderly maybe having taken the weakest first, was questioning just that as I thought about FL which had a low infection rate early but has had three record days in a row now. Lots of elderly down there and surprised we did not see bigger numbers at first, but also happy that we did not. Temps, sunlight etc. may have all played a role? Yet those same factors are even stronger now as the infection rate increases. Survival of the fittest with a twist possibly? The nursing home fiasco may have skewed the data initially causing us to believe it went after the elderly because of weakened immune systems, but without that data it may look different actually. I am sure statisticians will be pouring over the numbers for some time. Thanks.
Mike, Is there any definitive evidence that developing the antibodies for this virus actually makes a person immune from being infected again for any period of time?
Initially I did not agree with my college remaining closed for the Fall, but based on increasing case load and filling ICUs, good thing wiser folks than myself are at the helm. Matt, we just received a lengthy email from the college yesterday that established required protocols for those of us needing to return to campus for various resources. We are required to wear masks outside our office and anytime anyone is in our office. Hand sanitizers and masks will be issued initially. The protocols were recommended to us by our County Health Board which is recognized as having some highly competent individuals, and we are a mostly a conservative Republican leaning county.
Mike in CT's Link
At present this is yet another of the "great unknowns"; for that reason there was a lack of consensus on herd immunity. As this is a brand new virus we had no way of knowing a)would we mount an effective antibody response and b)would this be a long-lasting immunity?
Let me give a good example; smallpox was caused by the Variola virus which was fairly stable in terms of mutability. It also was a great target for the immune system and produced a vigorous and long-lasting immune response and these factors were vital in eradicating the disease.
SARS-CoV-2 is not likely to provide this excellent template and is much more likely to be similar to the flu and require seasonal vaccines and as I mentioned above it may require a multivalent vaccine. Right now these are questions for which we do not have answers.
We do have cause for optimism however; the link I've attached addresses the potential as a treatment using convalescent sera (plasma) from patients who recovered from infection has shown promise. The link is to a sampling far too small to draw definitive conclusions from but it points to a valid area that should be researched as the applications are both treatment and preventative.
We have a fight on our hands to be sure but we're a long way from beaten.
You, as others who have pointed to recent trends are on the mark that there is indeed "something going on"; that something is the subject of a lot of study and conjecture currently.
We know of at least 3 pathogenic strains of SARS-CoV-2; what started in Hubei province, what's in the US and what's in Europe. With the globalization of travel it's not out of the realm of possibility that there can be mixing of these strains (and that can open a whole new can of worms).
Florida is an interesting case given the elderly population but also the migration in and out of the state as a matter of routine (I know of a high number of elderly in CT who go back and forth to the Sunshine State). Of course there's also those ever-ready viral incubators, otherwise known as college students, who now, like probably a good deal of us in our youth assume they're bullet-proof. Hanging out with the buds at the beach and then visiting grandma and grandpa can kick-start a new infection cycle.
Interesting that you mention sunlight; one of the theses behind the flu and why it wanes as the weather warms is that while we're indoors during the winter we're getting less sunlight and may, to some extent suffer Vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D helps keep the immune system strong. I suppose if someone hasn't already they may advance that as a possible explanation for a less severe manifestation in the elderly now.
Another stupid question...
Could it be that the most effective way to handle this is to protect the vulnerable, and let the virus runs it's course, as opposed to locking everyone up, vulnerable or not, and prolonging the inevitable when you ultimately let them out?
Frank, as much as some people hate hearing the term "new normal", the reality is there certainly will be changes to our lives post-COVID. You're experiencing it now with your new campus protocols. I got a taste of it when I checked into the Inn that I stayed at in Florida in May. I was their first customer after the lockdown was lifted. They took my temperature, first, then they had a document containing about 30 COVID-related questions that I had to answer and sign. I'm assuming it was mostly for legal liability purposes, and I didn't mind, but it was certainly a "new normal".
Good point. When Robin's dental office re-opened, they now have to check temperature of every patient. I think the state mandated this. Also, the waiting room is not to be used.
Good point. When Robin's dental office re-opened, they now have to check temperature of every patient. I think the state mandated this. Also, the waiting room is not to be used.
You point out an obvious concern with diagnostic testing, for this virus and for any pathgoen; how reliable is the test?
I'll try and keep this simple; there are 2 critical components of a diagnostic test, sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity will tell you how many patients you test who come back positive and who DO have the disease (true positives) whereas Specificity will tell you how many patients you test who come back negative and who DO NOT have the disease (true negatives). From these 2 components you derive the PPV (Positive predictive value) and NPV (Negative predictive value) of the test.
Because of the nature of a disease it may be deemed more critical to have a high sensitivity test and sometimes the trade-off is you have a lower than optimal specificity. In this scenario you are less likely to have a false positive but you will have more false negatives than a high specificity test would.
Flip this (high specificity, low sensitivity) and you can run into the problems seen with False Positive tests; I am aware of one COVID-19 test on the market that suffers from this problem and I have heard a False Positivity rate of 30% for this test. I'll add that this particular test is what's considered a "rapid assay" (results in less than an hour) and sometimes there is a trade-off for speed.
There are some extremely good tests out there so a lot of doctors when confronted with a positive test that doesn't match the clinical presentation will order a repeat test, often with a different and most likely, more sensitive assay. In this pandemic I have great empathy for doctors as they are being put in the pressure cooker with much greater frequency than they had been even just 6-9 months ago.
Good question, and it touches on the idea of herd immunity. Again, in theory this can be a very effective way to mitigate the impact of an outbreak. This tactic had a number of advocates and my sense is that a risk/reward analysis tilted more towards the conservative approach (halt the influx as much as possible of possible carriers and lockdown to allow the virus to emerge in those infected but not yet symptomatic but in a setting where containment was possible).
We'll have a great opportunity to Monday-morning quarterback our decision when a vaccine (or vaccines) are developed and we start to get a sense of how effective it will be in eliciting a strong immune response with potentially long-lasting antibodies.
Man, there are a lot of you on this thread asking some great questions and making some really good observations!
I support the restrictions that make sense to me. The 10 mile restriction was idiotic, as were several other mandates, like determining that pot and liquor stores were "essential". I have to travel over 10 miles just to get to the nearest grocery store. As for my Florida trip, I have a business relationship with a friend down there, and we conducted a fair amount of business while I was there, it just happened to be on a fishing boat while we waited for a tarpon to bite. So, my trip wasn't technically just for recreation. ;-)
I really don't understand your beef with me. My support for common sense precautions, doesn't mean I have to support ALL the restrictions and mandates. As much as you'd like to paint me as a hypocrite, it's not an all or nothing deal like you implied earlier. Expecting people to wear a mask and keep their distance in public places seems like a trivial and common sense thing to do. Expecting people to limit there trips to under 10 miles from their home simply isn't practical for some people, and was...well...dumb.
The only thing I've advocated on this thread, and will continue to advocate, is using common sense precautions when in public places. Is that really what your beef is with me? If so, get used to it, because I'm not going to stop.
Good question; at this point all we can do is speculate owing to a lot of unknowns; a)has the virus changed in some way (mutated?) to a less virulent form? b)how many in those crowds were not wearing any type of protective mask and were infected, even if asymptomatic? c)how many people who went to protests, riots or rallies and were exposed will develop an infection or become asymptomatic carriers?
All we can safely say at this point is it's likely there were contacts between susceptible hosts and virus carriers; how that plays out remains to be seen.
It's possible some of the spikes we've seen have been a result of the riots and protests; the timeline fits as this virus has a 14-day incubation period. The timeframe to focus on going foward in my opinion will be from mid-July to the beginning of August. We'll add to the protest and riots with normal gatherings over the 4th of July weekend and from 2 weeks past that over the following week or two is when we may see if we've let the genie out of the bottle.
All of which circles back to the need to take appropriate precautions and do everything we can do to minimize the likelihood, if not the intensity of a possible new wave of infections.
So, when Trump shutdown international travel to and from "hot spots" around the world, do you think it was an act of tyranny, or do you think it was a common sense order for the safety of US citizens?
Good question, and it touches on the idea of herd immunity. Again, in theory this can be a very effective way to mitigate the impact of an outbreak. This tactic had a number of advocates and my sense is that a risk/reward analysis tilted more towards the conservative approach (halt the influx as much as possible of possible carriers and lockdown to allow the virus to emerge in those infected but not yet symptomatic but in a setting where containment was possible).“
To me (again, the admittedly uneducated), therein lies the dilemma.
Unless we are willing (and able) to stay completely shut down until there is an effective vaccine, we are only delaying the inevitable. And that’s assuming you have a very large percentage of the population that is willing to be vaccinated.
Every time we partially reopen, there is inevitably going to be a spike in positives.
And that’s ok, but let’s not act like the sky is falling every time that happens.
You have a point and one held by those who advocated for trying herd immunity! What we have, though not intended is something along those lines; all the people who have recovered and all those who had the virus but either remained asymptomatic or only had mild symptoms and who are immunocompetent are likely producing effective antibodies.
This sub-group of the population is no longer a portal for the virus to regain a foothold and spread so the mitigation of this "protected class" will lessen the spread. As you put it earlier, not to be callous but we've also had a thinning out of the most vulnerable in that 126K+ death toll.
I've heard more instances of Remdesivir being used as a treatment and there are ongoing clinical trials that may elevate that from an emergency use authorization to an actual treatment alternative.
Your point about a longer lockdown actually recalled earlier research I had done to see what the "expert consensus" was on how long a lockdown should be; it may not surprise you that 18-24 months was actually being floated. While this would have certainly bought us time to have an effective vaccine the patient (our economy) might not have survived the operation.
I think a more true statement regarding incubation is "up to 14 days," although there's been reports of it being longer.
I'm sure you know this, but the mean from multiple studies has it around 4.5-5.5 days and one study showed 97.5% converted by day 11.5.
Nonetheless, I think it's pretty safe to say that by the end of day 6 from exposure, most people have converted.
Thanks for catching that! I think the variance you point to may have to do with viral load at time of infection, immune status of the host and possibly a few other factors. I've gotten into the habit of advising friends to give it 2 weeks if they think they've been exposed to be especially cautious about contacts if not self-quarantining.
I do agree, however, the Chicken Little attitude doesn't do anybody any good. I fully support people getting on with their lives, as I've try to do. I just hope and pray we all do it safely and with some common sense.
Good grief, look what 3 months caused. If we were locked down for 18-24 months, there would be riots in the....
I fully and wholeheartedly agree.
It's just that common sense doesn't seem to be so common these days.
While I would tend to agree, let's not forget that the demographic that seems to be most affected since the re-opening has never really been known for an abundance of common sense.
I know when I was in my late teens to late twenties, not a whole lot was going to stand in the way of my fun and recreation.
There. FIFY. :)
Second is everyone must be too stupid to have as much sense as Grey Ghost. The man is on top of his little world. Which ironically, is the top of the world from his seat. And, he’s not afraid to tell you about it either.
A lot of the prevention protocols, and disinfection protocols are very similar to what we recommend with Norovirus and Rotavirus and Hepatitis A outbreaks. (makes sense since they are all easily person-to-person transmissible viral illnesses) Do you have a feel for co-incidental suppression or reduction of other viral illnesses along with COVID 19 control?
I ask because Noro case reports seem to have almost :"gone away" and a huge Hep A outbreak we had going in my area also seems to have fizzled.
Great observation! I would expect that the adoption of solid infection control/prevention practices would have additional benefits beyond addressing SARS-CoV-2 as they directly impact the person-to-person route of infection.
In particular, any virus like Norovirus which is efficiently transmitted via fecal-oral contamination would definitely be positively impacted by all of the protocols put in place that place an emphasis on not only personal hygiene but in rigorous disinfection of "common surfaces" (good example is the conveyor belt at the grocery store being disinfected in between customers).
If there is a silver lining to this pandemic I would argue it's a higher focus on personal hygiene and infection prevention practices; there's a lot of upside to this and it seems to be borne out by what you're seeing.
Thanks for sharing this information and stay well!
I do know that over the 10 million cases recorded thus far, not a single person has ever been confirmed to have caught covid a second time. Yet.
There was a report from South Korea where they had some concern about possible reinfections, but subsequent research determined it was just an error in reporting due to testing inaccuracies.
I'm screwed then. Excuse me.... I have some Wills and final request stuff I have to go over.... thank goodness I have so few trophies to disseminate.....
There you can see the curve showing average number of deaths for every week of the year. Generally we have been running well under the weekly average across all deaths and the entire country.
There was a noticeable small spike above the average curve during the terrible Jan 2018 flu season ( +10%) and that was positively dwarfed by the recent covid spike almost 40% above average in the worst weeks on this virus.
This takes into account ALL deaths of every type across the entire country, but nothing other than covid explains the very real deaths that have been occurring.
So, what's the history to this designation since COVID-19 is associated with the year 2019?
SARS-CoV-2 is the name of the virus that causes COVID-19. SARS-CoV was the virus behind the outbreak of SARS in 2003.
I had a person of reputable character tell me about a person having Covid-19, three times thus far.
I don't think the curve has flattened or will be flattening in the near future.
I certainly can’t speak for Mike, but I wouldn’t board a plane right now, if my left nut depended on it. They are human Petri dishes, IMO.
I would much rather drive, and perhaps touch a few gas station nozzles, than breath the air of multiple passengers on a plane for multiple hours.
Pre-COVID-19 airplanes could be viewed as Matt described them; as Ike has apprised you the airlines have made the necessary adjustments to mitigate the potential for spread and I agree with him 100% that the greatest risk is in the airports, not the airplanes.
This has to rank as one of the best threads and best use of this forum; great exchanges of information and some of you have made great points and asked great questions!
Each color, red, yellow and green represent 1/3 of the covid deaths in the US.
I want to say that I respect this man (Mike in CT) and have for many years, but my inability to recognize chat handles, while not a good excuse, allowed me to word above posts as I would not have otherwise.
Mike, I'm truly sorry.
I hold you in the highest regards,
My Dad used to advise me to never judge a person by a mistake they made but how they handled the recognition of it; you have nothing to apologize for; you made an honest mistake and I can assure you I have made a truckload myself.
It takes a helluva man to do what you just did and my respect for you is off the charts; I am humbled and feel privileged to know you and count you among my friends.
Thank you very, very much and God bless and keep you and yours always.
After reviewing this thread, I'm confused in regard to what you meant by the following:
Take a hard look at the picture you posted and see what they actually voted on. Either, nice try with the fake news or nice test for the rest of us!"
Care to elaborate?
I've never liked flying, anyway. COVID has given me a legitimate excuse not to fly for a long time.
If this were true, it would be pretty big news and ought to be documented on the internet in some medical journal. I would be very interested in the story if you or your friend could provide a link to the actual news article.
Thus far, in everything I have researched and read, no one has ever been confirmed to have caught covid more than once. Ever. And anytime someone thought this had happened, it turned out to be remnants of the original infection that showed up in new tests. But NOT a confirmed reinfection. The test is apparently not 100% accurate, and can flag a false positive from just lingering fragments of the original DNA string of the virus.
False positives have happened where people were told they had been reinfected... but subsequent testing and further research have always confirmed it was a mistake. No one has ever been infected more than once yet. And it would be a huge story that the entire world would need to know about if it ever happened.
I would describe as a man I know, that nows a man, who knows the person. I believe we are dealing with reputable persons in this situation.
With the way this virus is showing signs of mutation, I do not see where this is an unrealistic happening. Also, it could be like other diseases- looks like it's over but the disease is really "taking a rest" and reappears again. Nothing totally unordinary.
Was a vaccine developed for it and how different would it be from CoV-2?
Technically..... do you "catch the covid" or does it catch you?
The whole world is fighting this pandemic. Tens of thousands of doctors and the best scientists on earth. The idea of anti-body immunity is one of the most important discoveries in the world right now. And I'd have to think if your friend of a friend of a friend was the first known case on the planet it would be a major news story.
Also, I would not say the virus has ever looked like it was over. Slow or fast, it will keep spreading as long as there are people available without inherent immunity (anti-bodies or vaccine) or we eventually reach herd immunity at 60-80% of the entire population.
If you really know of someone who has been infected more than once, and can prove it, you need to alert the CDC and WHO right away because if true that would affect the lives of 7 billion people.
Mike in CT's Link
I'm attaching a link that's about as a good on read on the 2 viruses as I've found; there were a number of vaccines to SARS-CoV-1 that made it to animal trials but never to human (Phase 3) trials, largely due to the relative low number of cases and how the virus seemed to disappear.
SARS-CoV-2 is closely related but different enough to where a new vaccine would need to be developed and picking up where the old one left off wasn't an option.
I hope the linked article is helpful but please feel free to ask any questions you may have after you've had time to digest it.
"Buffalo1 - if this situation is that you know a guy, that knows a guy, that knows the person .... and the "reinfection" has never been documented or published in any news story or medical journal that we could see ... I am sorry but I'm not going to be able to believe you at this time."
I know what i heard, I believe what I heard. I would venture to say that the "events" would be recorded on a patient medical record. Whether that situation was shared with others in the medical community I don't know. I can understand your skepticism, but that doesn't make something that happened untrue. If you happen to read about the event, just remember, you heard it on Bowsite, before it was ever published for the public to read.
No one is deliberately lying, they are just mistaken about what the test results mean and the inherent limitations and inaccuracies of those tests.
Google any major news source or medical paper worldwide.... thus far no one has EVER been confirmed to have caught the Corona virus more than once.
I'm not sure that's is totally accurate. I get the Corona virus every damn time I go to Mexico.
Wait, maybe it was the Dos Equis flu.
I have no doubt that there will be a difficult-to-measure amount of mortality from cardiovascular disease just from people not going to their PCPs to get their blood pressure checked, hypertension being a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. I'm sure of it because I'm doing phone visits with my own patients and I can't check their blood pressures and I know this is happening across the country.
I was pretty ill this week and had 7 of the 13 Covid symptoms during the week. I’m over it but I’m typing this as I sit here waiting for the test results from yesterday that’ll likely come tomorrow.
Guess what I’m most likely to die from?
BTW - Wear a mask!!!
It's almost funny to cut the irony from people's comment when they preach someone else's lifestyle threatens their own, with no regard that they have a choice to subject themselves to those other choices.
Good one! I almost fell for it then I realized you’re on the East coast posting on Bowsite past midnight while having lots of fun and living a full life...
Sad thing is some people have no regard for others as long as their getting theirs. Drink and drive much?
That's why I only drink the beer, but apparently even that comes with it's own set of risks.
Nope, I don’t drink and drive. Nor do I do anything to harm others unwarranted.
This brought questions to my mind- could a person have immunity to one strain and not another?
Could a person experience a trifecta of these three know stains?
Will one vaccine handle all 3 strain or would 3 different vaccine be required in defense of the virus?
Could 2 different strains breed to create a new strain?
Mike in CT's Link
As I've mentioned in earlier posts the SARS-CoV-2 virus is an RNA virus and as such is inherently mutagenic. I'm attaching a link to a recent article that touches on this and probably addresses the point your friend brought up.
Your last point is a very good, and unfortunately a sobering one; 2 viruses can combine to form a new one and there is some evidence this may have produced SARS-CoV-2. As we continue to develop our understanding of the virus through research more light may be shed on this possibility. I'm attaching a good read at the bottom of this post that speaks to this point.
For all the discussion that has arisen in many media forms on masks, social distancing and lockdowns I'll add my perspective; we were absolutely flattening the curve and appeared to be heading in the right direction only some 6-8 weeks ago give or take. When I saw crowds in the anti-lockdown and subsequent BLM et al protests my worry was we could see a resurgence in this outbreak. The past few weeks seems to have borne out my concern (and God, I wish I had been as wrong as could be!).
The best thing we can do during an outbreak is take the first critical step; containment. We did that and the evidence strongly supports its effectiveness. I hate beyond words having the opinion that absent a significant shift back towards a positive trend we may be facing another lockdown.
Stay well and stay safe and encourage everyone you regularly contact to spread the word and do likewise.
On the question of a person being infected by multiple strains of the same virus the answer is yes this can and does happen. The severity of each subsequent infection depends on a few factors; the pathogenicity or virulence of the new mutation as a virus can move in either direction in terms of infective ability and lethality and that can be distilled down to the luck of the genetic draw essentially.
I can give you a good, common example in the flu; everyone here is aware the severity can vary, sometimes greatly from year to year in the flu; this is tied to the factors I just mentioned. It can also happen that a portion of a new mutation may be antigenically similar enough to an earlier version that a person can have some degree of partial immunity.
If we have 3 strains it's unlikely a single vaccine (assuming it is monovalent (only targets 1 strain)) would be effective against all 3; we may eventually see a polyvalent vaccine along the same lines as the current influenza vaccine.
I personally don't see the curve flattening anytime with the current lack of disciple and hard-headedness being displayed by the American people. I'm afraid we are our own worst enemy. As the number of cases continue to increase, I see that American hunters could have more difficulty with being allowed and welcomed back into other countries to hunt.
We can't stay in our homes forever. I firmly believe that the vast majority of the country is safe enough to get out there and resume life, albeit I am a mask proponent. If you're old and/or have risk factors, I totally understand quarantining yourself from young people/anybody and this is what we've done for my 98 year old grandfather.
Get on living or get on dying. The fallout from this is ruining more lives and futures than the virus.
All signs suggest it should reach it's peak on 11/2/2020...and drop precipitously after that.
Should be about the same time all the racial injustice and economic disparity issues are resolved.
Between the brow beating of not using an In reach and not pandering to the advice of the media on masks, shutdowns, etc...., I’m starting to think I really might be a careless sob.
Plenty folks have made more money in last 5-6months than most folks have in two lifetimes. All it took was a little fore thought and a tiny bit of wisdom of the American Condition.
Agreed! But think of all the emotional panic sellers who got out and stayed out. Having some dry powder sitting in tow made this last crash another rare opportunity to grow wealth. It has been a very fun ride back up! Also, think how many of those emotional panic sellers got out years ago thinking the last bull market could not keep going up over a decade only to see the S&P over 30% in 2019. The short sellers have been PO'ed. This much is for certain - history has proven that the stock market comes back 100% of the time.
Isn't it heartwarming the way he has selflessly chosen to use the "self checkout" so as not to endanger a cashier by getting too close?
On a side note, I couldn't help but notice that if this fine young un-masked American patriot actually learned how to use a hammer, he might be able to make a honest living with it.
Keeping with the underwear analogy Ike, it ain't about the stink, it's about the stripe.
Same with a mask.
Keeping with the underwear analogy Ike, it ain't about the stink, it's about the stripe.
"The number of Florida hospital intensive care units (ICUs) hitting capacity increased Tuesday, with at least 56 ICUs saying they have maxed out and another 35 saying their bed availability is at 10 percent or below." THE HILL
For example, most hospitals typically run above 80% occupancy rates in their critical care wards and more often the normal occupancy rate fluctuates between 80-90%. Hospitals that are citing they are full or have approximately 10% bed availability left are far from a sign of impending doom; they are more in line with annual statistics.
Of course, one could have arrived at this realization rather easily as opposed to, for example choosing instead to be an amplifier of misinformation.
Information is only as good as one's willingness to entertain every bit of it; especially those contrary to a desired narrative.
Mike in CT's Link
Actually, I'm not saying either; I'm trying to share historical norms to give better perspective than some of the overly hyped pieces convey. What I'm NOT saying is that we have nothing to be concerned about but there is a world of difference between being concerned and being panicked.
ICU's fall into a number of categories; CVICU (Cardiovascular ICU), CTICU (Cardiothoracic ICU) and these 2 are typically reserved for cardiac or thoracic surgery patients. SICU (Surgical ICU) can be where surgical patients go (this can be "routine" surgery, trauma related surgery or this can also be where post-cardiac surgery patients are managed). MICU (Medical ICU) is typically filled with medically unstable patients with a variety of ailments; sepsis, respiratory failure, DKA, renal failure, etc. This is the most likely landing spot for COVID-19 patients.
Depending on their patient mix, patient stability it is possible some ICU patients can be "fast-tracked" to either a step-down unit or a med/surg floor (regular room); all of course predicated upon the stability of those patients and the doctors clinical assessment.
When you look at earlier models of the outcome of this pandemic relating to stressing the US Healthcare system, and in particular, ICU beds there were projections significantly higher than what we're seeing in the state of Florida; I've attached a link that should provide sobering clarity to where we are versus where we could be.
I hope this puts a better focus on my earlier comment and I'll emphasize again that I am in no way whistling past the graveyard or living in denial that we're still at a critical juncture; we are and the next week to 2 weeks may find us in worse shape than we are today.
Mike- Thanks for the response. Based on the quote from the article you linked above, it appears that flattening the curve (should I say flattening again?) seems pretty important now as ever. So would you say wearing masks and social distancing are the two important factors that individuals can do to help?
I would think wearing masks and social distancing would help in the short term but why does no one talk about improving your diet, getting outside in the sun, and exercising. How about flattening the curve around your middle? If Americans weren't so damn fat and unhealthy, this pandemic wouldn't be half the killer it is and our ICU's wouldn't be at risk of filling up.
But it's a hell of a lot easier to mask shame someone than fat shame them, I guess.
I think I've brought this up before but it's an important point when we try to get a feel for exactly where we are "on the curve" today; that all-important baseline is simply an unknown; how many cases were never diagnosed, either due to people being asymptomatic or so mildly symptomatic they never considered testing, even when it became widely available. The lack of sufficient testing capacity for the first 6-8 weeks of this outbreak forced us to ration testing to only those who displayed symptoms consist with possibleinfection.
Owing to this reality we can only make a "best-guess" as to where we are today relative to what the baseline at the onset of the pandemic was. Is it possible we're above that baseline had we had the capability to test everyone who should have been screened? Yes, it is as it is possible we are below or equivalent to it; we can't say for certain and we won't have a better ability to compare until wholescale antibody testing is done and we get a more accurate sense of the total % of the population who were infected.
OK, even with that consideration we can quantify that we are seeing an increase above the mid-April through mid-May period when our testing capacity was significantly increased to meet the demand. That should give us pause and should create a greater application of basic infection control/prevention practices; hand-washing, social distancing, masks can act as agents of containment and that is and must be our main objective now-containment.
The only silver lining at the moment is that while it appears the virus has mutated to be more infectious it also appears to have mutated to a less virulent form; we should count our blessings but not get comfortable; if this spike continues on an upward trajectory over the next week or two I feel safe in saying we'll be hearing the word "lockdown" in some quarters again.
I don't think we need to go to that extreme provided we do everything I outlined in terms of preventative measures.
Stay safe people....
In my opinion because as true as that might be, that’s a down the road fix for a right now problem.
I've been associated with a number of hospitals over my career and I've never seen a hospital not go "on divert" for both the regular inpatient floor AND the ICU at given times throughout the year - mostly when Influenza is at its peak in that particular area.
I'm not saying that the S isn't HTF in Florida right now, but some perspective certainly changes things.
Also, when the S was HTF in Italy, France, and Spain, you'll see what hospitals do: They do what they have to do. It's not ideal, but the average Western hospital can do pretty well for people even with well-over their max capacity. It's like any other time of crisis: You buck up and do what you gotta do.
It's been 4 months. It's barely been mentioned.
Well, now that you mention it...
I posted on the KS forum a few days ago that one of my wife's dental patients is a supervising nurse at a major metropolitan hospital. Been there nearly 30 years.
She told Robin last week their ICU was full, mostly Covid, and she had not witnessed it that way ever. She responded to Robin's inquiry and was just matter of fact and calm, not an alarmist at all.
We are hearing similar reports now at other local hospitals. Our campus just reported a positive test case, and one of the dental office patients reported back he was positive. Both were tested after becoming sick and showing multiple Covid symptoms.
I do think the virus is spreading, not just testing at play here. A couple of new reports I read yesterday, one study says there is evidence that the virus can spread in the air, it is not limited to liquid droplets and another said there is evidence of permanent brain effects.
I continue to believe slowing the spread to buy time for a cure or better treatments to be known makes sense. Certainly need to reopen the economy, but airing on the side of caution via masks, social distancing, isolating the most vunerable etc. seems to be common sense sacrifices we should be willing to put up with, IMHO. Thanks.
I just SMH as someone points out the press is just using this as political fodder and making fun of our president for not wearing a mask, yet they show a picture of their own mask and hand sanitizer that is generously applied. It would be nice to be able to point out where we disagree with the president without him playing the victim card every time, and it would be even better if the press actually had objective and equal standards for all.
Watch though, some will gloss right over my criticism of the press to attack what I said about Trump. One of the loudest critics of the press here, has publically stated he does not respond to people he has determined have character flaws, one of those being a person playing the eternal victim. This person is one of the loudest defenders of Trump. It's OK when they have double standards, just not anyone else.
The change needed in this country has to begin with us, and looking inward. All of us. Maybe then we might be able to have productive adult style discussions on important matters like how to deal with Covid.
Habitat for Wildlife's Link
My guess is that it's not because they are too busy.
Low rates of deaths and hospitalizations linked to the coronavirus can create a "false sense of security," Henry Ford's Wright Lassiter III said. Those indicators lag increases in new cases by four to eight weeks, he said.
"The combination of rising case counts and declining vigilance by many is placing our state at a tipping point in our battle with this disease,” Lassiter added. "We cannot become complacent. We’ve come too far to yield hard-fought gains now."" https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/09/hospital-execs-michigan-tipping-point-covid-19-battle/5404992002/
The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services had tracked 67,237 cases of COVID-19 and 6,015 deaths through Wednesday.
When probable cases are added, Michigan's case total reaches 74,551, and the death toll is 6,262,including one new probable death reported Wednesday.
Wednesday's 610 confirmed cases was the largest single-day tally since May 20 when the state confirmed 659 cases.
Michigan has seen a rise in cases in the last three weeks but nothing like the record spikes reported in states such as Florida, Arizona and Texas.
The United States on Wednesday hit 3 million known cases of COVID-19, which has killed nearly 132,000 across the country, according to tracking by Johns Hopkins University.
Who's getting cocky? I'm just saying that many hospitals (our local one included) are starving. This is not because they are over crowded.
As to the "highest single day count." This is an irrelevant statistic without also knowing how it relates to increased testing as well as what it means in regard to hospitalizations and deaths.
So Pua you seem to know a lot about corvid, so are you a physician that specializes in infectious diseases?
Fat fingered that, edited to show the correct accuracy level of near 100%.
So is it fair the presume the 50% level you cited was anecdotal based on 4 tests and not on anything that would stand up to any sort of scrutiny?
To begin with I doubt many here (I know Ike understands and there are others that I'm sure do based on their comments) understand much about diagnostic tests and what sensitivity and specificity mean and in particular how the latter relates to false positives.
I'll try and not go off the technical deep end here. There aren't any tests out there with a 50% false positive (FP) rate though some of the rapid tests do have an FP of 30%. After I discuss sensitivity and specificity I'll address what a FP really is and why reporting FP statistics can be misleading absent knowledge of exactly what that means.
Sensitivity of a test is critical when the goal is to rule out who doesn't have a disease; for this you want a test with high sensitivity and this gives what's known as a Negative Predictive value (NPV) or a test. Let's say you have a test with a sensitivity of 99% and an NPV of 97%; this means if the test is negative there is a 97% likelihood the person doesn't have the disease. This type of test will have a low False Negative (FN) rate.
Specificity of a test is critical if you want a test to tell you who does have a disease and this relates to the Positive Predictive Value (PPV) of a test. Let's say you have a test with 96% specificity and a 94% PPV; if the test is positive there's a 94% likelihood the person has the disease.
In many cases there is a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity; if you have high sensitivity you may find the test has low specificity and hence a low PPV; there are tests out there that actually have PPV's in the 26-30% range. To the lay person that might lead them to believe these tests are worthless but as they are designed to rule out disease and not diagnose disease it's critical to know who you can rule out so the trade-off is acceptable. The downside of course is you'll have a high number of FP's.
On the other side of the coin you can have a test with low sensitivity and high specificity; this will give you a low NPV but high PPV and in this case you'll have a high number of FN's.
Now here's a critical fact about NPV and PPV; they are directly related to the prevalence of a disease; high prevalence will produce a low NPV but high PPV and low prevalence will yield a high NPV but low PPV.
Despite what some in the MSM and other circles might lead us to believe COVID-19 is a low prevalence disease and owing to that will have a high NPV but low PPV unless testing was ramped up exponentially to detect enough positives. The low PPV due to low prevalence predisposes all of the tests to have less than optimal PPV's which is why clinical assessment is always the deciding factor; the doctor is the final arbiter; lab tests are an adjunct to clinical decision making, they do not replace it.
Now, here's a critical point to understand about FP's. You need to understand exactly what the test is detecting in order to understand why a result while technically being a FP isn't completely wrong.
Many of the tests out there for COVID-19 are molecular assays; they are targeting viral RNA and due to the extremely high sensitivity of the test in terms of detecting very small amounts of virus or even viral particles the test will at times be positive when there is no viable virus present. In terms of active disease these are FP's but the test is not wrong in the sense of it's detecting viral RNA (or particles) that it was specifically designed to detect.
Doctors are aware of this "shortcoming" and this in part is why you seem some patients retested, particularly those who do not display the clinical manifestations of the disease.
When we look at reported statistics we need to understand if we are looking at number of tests or number of patients; the two may not be the same as in the case I just spoke about. Published statistics will include positive results but the epidemiology tracking reports of the disease will report just the patients regardless of how many tests they had run on them.
I hope this was helpful and if anyone has any questions by all means please post them and I'll get back to you as soon as I can.
This might be a stupid suggestion, and take too much of your time, but...
A thread where we could post the daily articles from reputable sources like WSJ, FOX etc. that report on new findings and get your judgment as to whether the premise of the article might be accurate or more likely poppycock, that would be useful, at least to some of us I think.
Any chance this might be something worthwhile from your perspective? Thanks.
Use the handle “pecker gnat” the next time you get kicked off Bowsite and come back. Because d#%n you are so small, annoying, and just won’t go away.
K Cummings's Link
“ A recent press release from Governor Whitmer’s office says that Black Michiganders are four times more likely to get COVID-19 than their white counterparts. Now, she is trying to lower that static by taking note of the racial disparities in the Michigan healthcare system. On Thursday, Governor Whitmer signed an executive order now requiring all healthcare professionals to under go implicit bias training.”
Personal behavior or systemic racism?
Flattening the curve or political opportunism?
Mike in CT's Link
It's interesting you ask about new articles etc. as I'm subscribed to a number of medical and science journals and probably look over 3-4 a day! I also have friends either email me or text me links to articles so you've hit on a great idea and I'd be happy to do whatever I can in that area.
Yesterday I came across an article (link) that has tremendous potential if what's been demonstrated in a petri dish can be duplicated in the human body.
By the way CT is hardly leading the pack in the number of deaths; that distinction goes to NY with 32,343 as of last night or almost 8x's as many as CT. Next comes NJ with 15,552 (about 3.5x's CT), then MA (8,268), IL (7,329), PA (6,904), CA (6,850), MI (6,271) then CT with 4,348.
Early on in this pandemic CT's case and death rates were high and the bulk of the cases and fatalities were in Fairfield County. For those unfamiliar with the state FFC over the years has basically become a suburb of NYC and many residents work in the Financial Sector and we have more than a fair amount in the entertainment industry who have daily commutes into the Big Apple.
Here's a good encapsulation of how well CT has been doing as of a few days ago.
Actually that statement is inaccurate; neither statistic can be quantified in the terms you list as you need to know the total number of infected patients in order to determine the all-important denominator. At this point infection rates, case rates and mortality rates are best presented as raw numbers and we can't even put forth a "best-guesstimate" absent confirmed data on the total number of people infected.
I've alluded to posts I've made many months ago on other forums where I've discussed the why's and wherefore's at length; the cold, hard reality is that only when we've tested EVERYONE for the presence of antibody to SARS-CoV2 will we know the extent of the pandemic and only then will we be able to determine the actual R0 (infection rate) and CFR (case fatality rate) for the disease.
Numbers absent proper context are little more than gibberish; I've had to suffer through months of the MSM vomiting out either purposeful or coincidental nonsense relying on the general public's lack of relevant knowledge on the subject matter to get away with it.
Please do not add to the chorus of the ill-informed.
Please start a thread. If you do not, the next article I read that I would like your opinion I will start a thread titled 'Let's Ask Mike' or another name if you like. Would like Ike's opinion as well. There is a lot of stuff out there and what you just did for HH and politely telling him his news is not accurate would be a big help to folks like myself that have zero medical knowledge but find you and Ike very credible. I kick myself now, I only took one biology course, sophomore year in high school and it was required. Lots of chemistry and physics, but no biology knowledge. I truly don't know what is credible or not. I wear the mask and use hand sanitizer, and then guys at WM look at me like I am some wimp or something, LOL. Lots of confusion abounds, even from the publicly anointed experts. Thanks!
When the flu kills 137K Americans in ~4 months and continues unabated into the summer, we will certainly seek you out for medical advice.
Didn't you post the following Thoreau quote on the Biden thread?
"That government is best which governs least"
Like it or not, the picture at your link is what "governs least" actually looks like.
Have that many people, with seemingly functioning brains, really became that bereft of normal reasoning skills?
At this rate, in NA, common sense may soon be recognized as a Super Power!
Doing his best to flatten the curve...
Lied to us. Like they continue to do
I know there is 0 convincing some of you on masks, but a powerful anecdotal story relates to 2 COVID symptomatic hairdressers who kept working but wore masks. Combined they cut the hair of ~140 people. 46 were tested for the disease, and not one person tested positive.
Compare that to an early contract tracing case where no masks were worn at a restaurant dinner with a pre-sympomatic person, which caused 4 of the other 9 people at their table to catch the disease as well as 5 of 11 people at adjacent tables to catch it.