EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 183
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46247 Posts
NJ hits top ranking in coronavirus analysis, showing positive trends and signs of hope https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/new-jersey/2020/06/19/nj-hits-top-ranking-coronavirus-analysis-showing-positive-trends/3221792001/?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&fbclid=IwAR1ZZ99udS6HrWN18dlpbb9dM3bhJyaaKlqY-VM-nqrodBUvmYNodHkEYZ4 New Jersey is one of three states on track to contain COVID-19, a remarkable turnaround for a state that once led the country in per capita deaths, according to the nonprofit Covid Act Now. The state's progress to "flatten the curve" of patients admitted to hospitals and dying of complications from the disease comes as states around the country that took less stringent containment measures are hitting peaks in deaths and new cases. Not only are cases steadily decreasing in New Jersey, but the state's COVID preparedness "meets or exceeds international standards," Covid Act Now said. New York and Michigan are the other two states rated by the organization to be on track to contain the coronavirus. "The great work millions of you have done so far to crush the curves has been working and we need to keep at it," Gov. Phil Murphy, who has been criticized for reopening the state too slowly, said at his briefing Friday. New Jersey still leads the nation in some areas. It ranks third in deaths, with 12,835, and fifth in hospitalizations, Murphy said. But those have dropped off dramatically since the peak in mid-April. And other key benchmarks show promise for a state that is among the most densely populated. The infection rate was 0.82 as of Thursday, which means that for each COVID-positive person they were on average infecting 0.82 other people. Because of that, the total number of cases is shrinking, according to Covid Act Now. The positive test rate was 1.8% as of Thursday, suggesting that there has been enough testing to detect most new cases and being able to identify and isolate people without resorting to lockdowns, the organization said. Covid Act Now is comprised of technologists, epidemiologists, health experts and public policy leaders. New Jersey is now in the second of three stages of its reopening from widespread business lockdowns and a stay-at-home order that lasted more than two months. Nail and hair salons, barber shops, spas and tattoo parlors will be allowed to open Monday, which Murphy said will be a significant test since those are the first types of businesses where people closely interact with each other. "We're going to have to be really, really careful, folks, on this one," Murphy said. "Everybody has to approach this with a sense of responsibility, not just for themselves but for the greater community." Alexandra Altman, a spokeswoman for Murphy, said his "strategic and comprehensive reopening plan" prioritizes public health with policies such as social distancing and masking. "It is clear that these aggressive efforts, as detailed by Covid Act Now’s analysis, have set New Jersey as a national leader in stemming the tide of the virus as we continue to see a decrease in COVID-19 cases, infection rate, and ventilator use," Altman said in an email. Based on the current trends, New Jersey would see a cumulative 29% of the population infected and 13,000 total deaths in 30 days, Covid Act Now said. It projected those figures to rise to 34% and 14,000, respectively, in the same period if all restrictions were lifted. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5617 Posts
On June 22 2020 03:57 KwarK wrote: Another way of describing herd immunity is just letting the disease kill everyone it can. It’s like a firefighting strategy that involves letting the fire burn down all the flammable buildings and trusting in stone building immunity. It’s the absence of a strategy dressed up in fancy words. No. The idea is that the herd protects the weak when enough people have had the disease that it cannot spread any longer in the population. Before that you have to isolate and protect the weak individuals from getting the disease. If that strategy is correct or not is another discussion altogether. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On June 23 2020 06:29 Elroi wrote: No. The idea is that the herd protects the weak when enough people have had the disease that it cannot spread any longer in the population. Before that you have to isolate and protect the weak individuals from getting the disease. If that strategy is correct or not is another discussion altogether. How do you propose to 'protect and isolate' the weak? Without the means to do that a 'herd immunity strategy' is identical to just letting the disease kill everyone it can. Modelling shows that to achieve herd immunity you need roughly 80% of the population to have been infected. And that's assuming reinfection is impossible which is by no means a given. ~15% of the US is over the age of 65, and half of those under 65 have an underlying condition that could put them at greater risk (including obesity). Even if you could control who gets covid you're not getting to any sort of herd immunity threshold without a bunch of at risk individuals getting covid. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46247 Posts
On June 23 2020 07:17 ZigguratOfUr wrote: How do you propose to 'protect and isolate' the weak? Without the means to do that a 'herd immunity strategy' is identical to just letting the disease kill everyone it can. Modelling shows that to achieve herd immunity you need roughly 80% of the population to have been infected. And that's assuming reinfection is impossible which is by no means a given. ~15% of the US is over the age of 65, and half of those under 65 have an underlying condition that could put them at greater risk (including obesity). Even if you could control who gets covid you're not getting to any sort of herd immunity threshold without a bunch of at risk individuals getting covid. Hypothetically, you could ask for the strongest 80% of the population to volunteer to be given the disease and be quarantined and treated gradually, although that would be quite complicated and I doubt many people would want to risk their lives for a strategy like this. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On June 23 2020 07:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Hypothetically, you could ask for the strongest 80% of the population to volunteer to be given the disease and be quarantined and treated gradually, although that would be quite complicated and I doubt many people would want to risk their lives for a strategy like this. If we had the sort of organizational ability to gradually infect the 80% without getting the other 20% sick, covid wouldn't have been a problem in the first place. | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On June 23 2020 07:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Hypothetically, you could ask for the strongest 80% of the population to volunteer to be given the disease and be quarantined and treated gradually, although that would be quite complicated and I doubt many people would want to risk their lives for a strategy like this. Here's a link to a reddit post with some links to studies. Basically, even if you're asymptomatic you could still have abnormal lung functions, and also damage to other vital organs too. Especially for lungs which don't have many pain receptors, unless you regularly do physical activity and it's suddenly a lot harder, you might not even notice the loss in lung capacity. I'd really rather not damage my health irreversibly if I can help it. A high percentage of people infected by the virus behind the ongoing deadly COVID-19 pandemic—up to 45%—may never show symptoms of the disease, according to the results of a Scripps Research analysis of public datasets on asymptomatic infections. The authors also conclude that the absence of symptoms may not imply an absence of harm. CT scans conducted on 54% of 76 asymptomatic individuals on the Diamond Princess cruise ship, appear to show significant subclinical lung abnormalities, raising the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection impacting lung function that might not be immediately apparent. The scientists say further research is needed to confirm the potential significance of this finding. the coronavirus attacks not just the lungs, but also the kidneys, brain, heart and liver. In rare cases, it seems to trigger a life-threatening inflammatory syndrome in children. “We’re seeing a startling number of young people who had a minor cough, or no recollection of viral symptoms at all, and they’re self-isolating at home like they’re supposed to — and they have a sudden stroke,” said Dr. Adam Dmytriw, a University of Toronto radiologist who is a co-author of a paper describing patients who suffered strokes related to Covid-19. The paper has not yet been peer reviewed. Though many of those patients had diabetes and hypertension, none had heart risks known to increase the odds of a stroke. Many were under age 65. For some, stroke was the first symptom of coronavirus infection, and they postponed going to the emergency room, fearing exposure. https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/hdgazy/hundreds_test_positive_at_tyson_foods_plant_in/fvlty65/ | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46247 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 23 2020 07:56 Amui wrote: Here's a link to a reddit post with some links to studies. Basically, even if you're asymptomatic you could still have abnormal lung functions, and also damage to other vital organs too. Especially for lungs which don't have many pain receptors, unless you regularly do physical activity and it's suddenly a lot harder, you might not even notice the loss in lung capacity. I'd really rather not damage my health irreversibly if I can help it. https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/hdgazy/hundreds_test_positive_at_tyson_foods_plant_in/fvlty65/ You missed the best part about the Tyson foods plant story: Of the 3,748 employees tested, 481 tested positive for COVID-19, and 455 were asymptomatic. 13% tested positive and only 5% had symptoms. 26 out of 481 were sick and had symptoms. Absolutely incredible to have that level of asymptomatic individuals. Also, out of Florida, we see how the positive tests have moved in terms of age: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/02EmsmE.png) The median age of positive tests have plunged below the median age of Floridians. The younger, particularly asymptomatic younger people, are getting tested as they go back to work and get freely available tests. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46247 Posts
On June 23 2020 10:25 JimmiC wrote: They are increasing in hospitalizations as well so it is not only that they are testing more. As well the percentages are going up. It is also that Florida is counting multiple negative tests on the same people to have the numbers look better. They are not count multiple positive test. With Healthcare taking daily tests this makes a pretty big difference and does not tell a accurate story. Is there a source for this? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46247 Posts
On June 23 2020 10:53 JimmiC wrote: Yes. I posted it earlier but I should have again. Apologies. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/14/876584284/fired-florida-data-scientist-launches-a-coronavirus-dashboard-of-her-own Damn that's crazy! Thanks for sharing this! | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8153 Posts
On June 23 2020 06:29 Elroi wrote: No. The idea is that the herd protects the weak when enough people have had the disease that it cannot spread any longer in the population. Before that you have to isolate and protect the weak individuals from getting the disease. If that strategy is correct or not is another discussion altogether. I think the difference of casualties between Sweden and Norway tells you all there is to know about said strategy. It doesn't work. | ||
Acrofales
Spain18399 Posts
Positive test rate can be interesting as it gives you an overall idea of how fast Rona is spreading in the society. In general, it is entirely correct to retest negative cases and report them. They don't fluff your statistics as long as you report your daily positive rate. If you report positive rates as some overall aggregated stat then they will fluff it and I don't know what Florida was doing with the stats, but it is not inherently wrong to count each negative tests as it comes in, even if that's the same person multiple times. You do, after all, want to test if and when people get Corona, even if they tested negative in the past. I wasn't entirely convinced the first time I read that npr article and still aren't. The fact that it's a statistician who got fired and started their own dash makes me think Florida was doing shady shit with the numbers, and they do make it sound like there's misleading reporting going on, but it isn't entirely clear to me yet that they're intentionally misleading rather than just having bureaucrats who don't understand numbers. Working as a data scientist, I know how hard it is to report numbers and have them interpreted correctly even in a technical environment. | ||
|
Elroi
Sweden5617 Posts
On June 23 2020 16:21 Biff The Understudy wrote: I think the difference of casualties between Sweden and Norway tells you all there is to know about said strategy. It doesn't work. I obviously didn't discuss that in my post though so I don't know why you would respond like that. But since you brought it up there is a discussion to be had on that topic that is difficult and needs a lot more nuance than you make it look like. The "difference of casualties between Sweden and Norway" does absolutely not tell me "all there is to know" about which strategy is the best cope with the virus. There is a lot more to take into account. For example: Did you know that about 15% of the workforce in Norway has been laid off since the start of the pandemic as a result of the lock down? Surely that is going to translate into deaths and misery since about every disease known to man correlates with poverty and unemployment? Another thing to keep in mind is that there is no excess mortality in Sweden right now. There has obviously been many deaths already, which is a tragedy - but it is important to keep in mind that Sweden has had regular flue seasons with similar or even higher number of casualties in 1993, 1996 and 2000 without any drastic measures taken to reduce the number of deaths. These are just some of the things to keep in mind when comparing strategies and outcomes between the two countries. The question is very complex and I don't know which strategy is the best. We probably can't tell until at least a year from now. What if Norway gets a new breakout of the disease because they don't have any immunity in the population? That would arguably make Sweden's strategy the most logical one. On the other hand, if there is a very efficient new cure that is discovered right now, that would probably make Norway's strategy the best. But I have a suspicion that you only care about the situation in Sweden/Norway because you can use it as a kind of strawman to criticize people like Trump, Johnson or Bolsonaro. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Neneu
Norway492 Posts
It is wrong that 15% of the workforce have been laid off since the pandemic as a result of the lockdown. Our current unemployment, if you include people who have part-time job or without a job at all, the rate is about 10.2% (2.07% higher than Sweden) . It is also wrong to say that most of the unemployment has come from the lockdown itself. Norway is a country which have most of its private sector jobs within exporting of goods or tourism, which has been heavily hit by the economic downturn, difficult to impossible logistics during pandemic, oil price crash, and a complete shutdown of foreign tourism. Sweden isn't going for herd immunity. Going for herd immunity while also having an R below 1, would take ages. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
