Buffalo_Gal Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 13 minutes ago, GG said: This was the initial, but faulty analysis by many, including Nial Ferguson, which set the stage for the lockdowns. Now with much more data in hand and two months of treatments in the highly infected regions in NYC metro, Italy & Spain, the actual rate is closer to 0.4% and possibly lower. There's virtually no reason every area of US outside immediate NYC area shouldn't start reopening immediately. Mortality rate remains the wrong measure for reopening now that we have a better sense of it. Hospital ICU capacity will remain the limiting resource from this point forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 28 minutes ago, BillStime said: I need examples. You need therapy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said: You need therapy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 17 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I see minimal harm in trying HCQ, but I ain't listenin to that quack. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, shoshin said: Mortality rate remains the wrong measure for reopening now that we have a better sense of it. Hospital ICU capacity will remain the limiting resource from this point forward. And we never hit capacity and are finding out more and more people have the antibodies. I believe we are safe. Sadly they keep feeding us partial info to keep us scared and under control!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 5 minutes ago, shoshin said: Mortality rate remains the wrong measure for reopening now that we have a better sense of it. Hospital ICU capacity will remain the limiting resource from this point forward. It's one of many measures. Hospitalizations are an artifact of new infections, whose growth has dropped dramatically. If you look at any statistic, it shows that we've been on a steep downward decline for the last 2 weeks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 43 minutes ago, shoshin said: Wrong. The count from yesterday, even on that site, is not 11, a number you stated twice, but 1154. It was a low day but every weekend seems to be. Last Saturday, 1156 people died. By Tuesday, it was up around 2500. Stranger how wrong his post was. Yes. I woke up at 4:30 and checked the numbers. I was in error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 If this was previously posted, apologies.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 7 minutes ago, GG said: It's one of many measures. Hospitalizations are an artifact of new infections, whose growth has dropped dramatically. If you look at any statistic, it shows that we've been on a steep downward decline for the last 2 weeks. There is only a minimal drop off in deaths and there is no steep drop in hospitalizations in some places. Both those trail cases, which of course are down with 6-8 weeks of shutdown. Since we lack adequate testing, as we reopen, we will only have hospitalization to function as a measure of our spread and outbreaks. It's a bad way to manage the disease but it's all we have. And since it's the limiting resource, governors will have to keep a close eye on regional hospital rates to ensure there are enough beds. Hospitalization bed availability will drive the reopenings, nothing else, until we get rapid testing/tracking online. Once we have rapid testing/tracking, that will drive things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF THE NUMBERS LOOK THIS WAY NATIONWIDE: Illinois: Elderly care facilities have accounted for 44% of the state’s coronavirus deaths and nearly one in seven confirmed cases, according to a Sun-Times count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 11 minutes ago, Nanker said: Yes. I woke up at 4:30 and checked the numbers. I was in error. Word to the wise. Always sleep in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: If this was previously posted, apologies.... Magox and I talked about this issue a lot but with 600 pages, who could follow all the talk here. This is a HUGE issue. My wife is seeing this daily with her patients and we were talking with a nurse cousin yesterday who was saying that they are not as busy right now in non-Covid cases, but the people coming in are SO much sicker than normal. 2 minutes ago, B-Man said: I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED IF THE NUMBERS LOOK THIS WAY NATIONWIDE: Illinois: Elderly care facilities have accounted for 44% of the state’s coronavirus deaths and nearly one in seven confirmed cases, according to a Sun-Times count. A week or so ago, it was 60+% in PA. Edited May 4, 2020 by shoshin 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 4 hours ago, shoshin said: Did Pompeo really say it was genetically modified or not? It’s like he didn’t listen to himself. I would say that he misspoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 (edited) 19 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said: Thanks for posting this breaking news about the dangers of tuning in to caucasian male talk show hosts. I found a separate article that I thought is on point as well. University of California at Berkley study finds statistical evidence suggesting that “greater viewership of Hannity relative to Leave It To Beaver reruns is strongly associated with a greater number of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the early stages of the pandemic” WRITTEN BY HOLDEN MAGROIN PUBLISHED 04/22/20 1:51 PM EDT According to the article, the study authors “calculate that Fox viewers who watched Hannity rather than Beaver were less likely to adhere to social distancing rules, and that areas where more people watched Hannity relative to Beaver had higher local rates of infection and death.” Researchers suggest that in spite of the dangers associated with COVID-19, there is no data that suggests Beaver watchers have any greater risk of catching the virus than the population as a whole. "Our message to the American people is clear, and it's good news for most. Enjoy all the Beaver you can, it's completely safe." said lead researcher C. Howett Fealz. Edited May 4, 2020 by leh-nerd skin-erd 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 1 hour ago, shoshin said: Wrong. The count from yesterday, even on that site, is not 11, a number you stated twice, but 1154. It was a low day but every weekend seems to be. Last Saturday, 1156 people died. By Tuesday, it was up around 2500. Stranger how wrong his post was. Honest mistake... It happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Magox said: I would say that he misspoke. Which time? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 59 minutes ago, GG said: There's a higher probability that he knows a lot more than what he's been saying publicly. It sort of reminds me of all those articles and twitter comments from journalists when refer to Trump's statements when he makes them "Without evidence", "not confirmed" , implying that he's full of *****. And then months or even sometimes years later it turns out that he was correct. Yet there are no retractions of these articles. 30 minutes ago, shoshin said: Mortality rate remains the wrong measure for reopening now that we have a better sense of it. Hospital ICU capacity will remain the limiting resource from this point forward. There is no "right" measure, there should be various metrics that are viewed and mortality rate certainly is an important one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said: The virus story is done! Stick a fork in it. We’re moving on to the political snarking and blame game. Good times! Quick! Someone wake up Joe and tell him it's time to get his finger on the pulse of America! And when you do this, remind him that by pulse we don't mean vahgina, and by America we don't mean female Biden staffers! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted May 4, 2020 Share Posted May 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Magox said: It sort of reminds me of all those articles and twitter comments from journalists when refer to Trump's statements when he makes them "Without evidence", "not confirmed" , implying that he's full of *****. And then months or even sometimes years later it turns out that he was correct. Yet there are no retractions of these articles. There is no "right" measure, there should be various metrics that are viewed and mortality rate certainly is an important one. The point now, IMO, is that mortality rate is something we will trail on knowing for a while but have a decent bead on, and especially mortality rate for a bunch of at risk people. Hospitalization is a really good measure through phased reopening. The Trump guideline of % positive test trend going down is OK...it's trying to get at the fact that we have inadequate testing, but I don't love that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts