60% of US states are reporting increases in new cases

  • Thread starter Thread starter RidgeSprinter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
It’s good to hear if you like taking comfort from false information.

The fact is we are on track to have 300,000 dead by the end of the year.
I don’t wish to be confrontational but are you saying these claims are false and that the rate of hospitalisations and rate of deaths have increased?
No exactly. Yes, the death rates are not as high as the terrible days when New York and New Jersey were the hot spots and the health system was at the breaking point. But it is wrong to say that the death rate is decreasing, for it goes up and down on a daily basis. Yesterday it did go down from the day before, but the day before that it went up from the previous day. And the hospitalizations are going up overall. The only good news is that some new treatment protocols are saving more lives, such as delaying the use of ventilators and relying more on pure O2 and putting the patient on his stomach. Also Remdesivir is helping a little (very little). I think that is why the death rate is not tracking the hospitalization rate exactly. But if we have reduced the spread of the virus somewhat, it is undoubtably due to public compliance with recommendations like wearing masks and keeping distance indoors. The highest incidence of new cases is among those young people who have disregarded those recommendations and have gathered socially in close quarters indoors as if nothing was different.
 
The immune system is an amazing process…
 
Last edited:
What states are “the Trump states?”
The ones that beat Spade States this hand
:crazy_face:

Speaking statistically, we kind of planned on this with the whole “curve flattening” thing. That is, we made a deliberate effort to kick as many cases down the road as we could, so as to have more resources available per case, as well as more experience by the time some came.

This is not saying that we chose two cases, a now and a later, instead of one, but rather that given the choice of two now, and one now and another later, the second will give us more survivors and fewer of the more serious cases.

Also, as we get better at testing, and test more widely, it would be rather odd if we did not find more, even if the prevalence was unchanged.

As far as a herd resistance, again speaking statistically, it’s part of the package. The bottom line is to get the R, the number of additional cases from each new case, below 1 (ideally, as far below as possible).

Consider a bunch of people listed on a checkerboard (no, they don’t live there!). Now draw a line between each pair that came into contact with each other. Make the line darker if they came within six feet or were coughing, and lighter if they wore protection. Now, for each of those lines, draw lines half as wide to each person the other came into contact to, and then again, quarter wide, to each person those people came in contact with. You could repeat again for eight and sixteenth, but by fourths you nave most of if.

At this point, you will have a web of threads. The thicker/darker the web, the more ways to spread.

Each incremental thing (masks, more distance, sneezing, touching eyes) reduces or increases how much of this web there is. Each other person in a mask makes you safer by an increment, even though it is no protection to the wearer.

And when we mix in things like how contagious it is, how many cases are known in time and take extra precautions, general health, wind, and such, thee is an R value.

Each thread we can remove reduces the R. We can remove all of the lines to people who are not susceptible to catching it, perhaps by still having resistance (but there is evidence that that is less strong for this thing than we’re used to). Each better precaution lightens the threads to which it applies, and so forth. And each unprotected gathering make more heavy lines . . .

The is far from a perfect example, and can no doubt be improved. But I have an extremely abstract mind, and I’m trying to turn high dimensional math into a visual example . . .
 
40.png
JonNC:
Are we going to shut the economy down for the flu, too?
When there are 122,000 deaths in 4 months, we probably should
No. That is having a dramatic emotional impact. It is particularly damaging to children, especially at risk kids.
We need to figure out how to protect the most vulnerable. Closing down just delays the spread. It doesn’t prevent it.
 
I just read an article that showed Arizona getting hit hard in new hospitalizations. They spoke with the director of Banner Health which is the hospital chain I worked at in Colorado. Of course, they were very concerned about being overwhelmed.

I believe there is concern over this in Texas and Florida as well. As the economy opened back up and more testing is done, the rise in cases was expected…more testing finds more positives but a rise in hospitalizations is very concerning. I have no idea what these specific states plan to do about it but if their hospitals start getting overwhelmed again, they may have to backtrack a bit on their reopening plans.
 
I think you are right. I think this will be an ebb and flow thing for awhile.
 
Yes. It’s important for each state to have processes and plans in place for these scenarios. Just having an increase in positive tests isn’t a panic moment. This was expected…as were having some of those positives needing hospitalizations. But, if it starts overwhelming hospital facilities…that needs to be rapidly dealt with!

As painful as the shutdown was, it did accomplish what it set out to do…give hospitals the breathing room they needed to treat the patients. If cases start to overwhelm them again…better to backtrack a bit or else everything we did was moot.
 
They keep adding new symptoms which is perhaps why there are so many getting
tested.

I can’t help but feel there is a certain group that wants the positive cases to increase as well as the number of deaths. Sadly, covid-19 has been politicized and
they want Americans or the world to live in a state of fear.

Our lives have been turned upside down, our cities have been turned upside downl
and our liveihood has been turned upside down.
 
Are you claiming hospitalizations are going down or staying steady?
In my state they are, but in other states it is nearing disaster.
The Texas governor has put a hold on elective surgeries to keep the hospital beds open. Houston’s on a trajectory to run out of ICU beds in a couple of weeks.
 
Our lives have been turned upside down, our cities have been turned upside downl
and our liveihood has been turned upside down.
Are you in favor of mandatory mask wearing?

I ask because everyone wants the economy to get back up and running and the best way to help ensure it does is to wear masks! No, it’s not a perfect solution but with masks and maintaining social distancing, we can dramatically reduce not only the numbers of people getting infected but also the severity.

This is why I often get baffled when those screaming the loudest to get back to work/open up, also tend to refuse to wear masks.(not pointing a finger at you specifically). It makes no sense!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top