ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
PBS correspondant with a report from Dr. Fauci testifying today.
100k a day infections a day? Jesus christ.
that's 5000 deaths a day give or take...
horrifying
500?
Nah, 5000. 5% death rate * 100k = 5k. And that's based on our experience thus far, it doesn't account for what things would look like in a scenario like Houston's, where the hospitals reach capacity and we just can't treat everybody.
The death rate is not 5%. The hospitalization rate isn't even believed to be 5%. You cannot use any aspect of US sampling data blindly to evaluate what the death rate is, because we have massive undersampling. Almost everyone has under sampling in fact, but, if you look at the places which have done best (and their, 'best', has almost nothing to do with actually being able to treat people better) we see...
New Zealand 22 deaths / 1528 cases. -> 1.4%
South Korea 282 deaths / 12800 cases. -> 2.2%
Iceland 10 deaths / 1824 cases. -> 0.5%
Singapore 23 deaths / 43907 cases. -> 0.1 %. (Singapore IS an outlier here, because their infections are overwhelmingly inside their worker blocks in young people, which is why their death rate is approaching what the death rate looks like for people 30 - 40 in well studied populations)
Hong Kong 7 deaths / 1207 cases. -> 0.6 %
You can even dive into the USA and look at some cities here which have been working harder at testing.
And what you notice even there is a strong relationship between how hard someone tests for the virus or how well a population is screened, and a reduced death rate. Since there is no strongly effective treatment to reduce death rate (other than perhaps better medical know how which has emerged over time) screening a population doesn't help people survive. It just helps stop additional infections.
The death rate is somewhere in the 0.5 - 1.5 % range. Most best estimates I've seen place it at around 0.7%. This is terrible, catastrophic. But it is not 5%.
Right now in the US we are having around 600 deaths a day. Which means we probably had 'truly' 60k infections a day around 3 weeks ago.
Now, perhaps what Fauci is saying here is that we should expect to DETECT 100k cases a day, and that he views at that point our ability to screen for cases will have collapsed, and so the deaths/detected cases 2-3 weeks earlier will be back at 5% again, which would mean that there were actually 500k cases a day. However, we do have significantly enhanced test capability right now, so I would expect our detected cases vs real cases number would stay a little better.
Where do those numbers come from? I would hope everyone is caught up with each other and saying more or less the same thing right now, but... just in case
For some reason I always assume it's not the CDC :P
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
I'm hoping that the fatality rate ends up being much lower than that, due to hospitals better understanding how to treat severe cases. I mean, that's about all we have to hold onto at this point in places like here in Texas. The fatality rate hasn't spiked here yet despite the massive rise in new cases--it's been pretty flat. But our case count didn't start rising dramatically until about 2 weeks ago, so the new deaths may just not be showing up yet. Still, I do have some hope that treatments like dexamethasone will make a difference and save a lot of lives and keep hospitals from being overwhelmed as quickly or as badly.
two weeks is just long enough for the leading edge of the death wave to start hitting. So...hold onto your butts and watch that death count.
Deaths lag hospitalizations; hospitalizations lag positive testing; positive tests lag rescinding quarantine.
It took longer for this new spike to hit than I would have guessed back in May when things reopened, so the increase in corpses may similarly take longer to manifest than worst case assumptions. Still, July is going to be rough.
This is pure conjecture, but my internal explanation for the longer-than-expected lag is that things started opening up May 1st, but people were still generally cautious. It took a few weeks for more and more people to start throwing caution to the wind, and then Memorial Day was probably a big day for people saying "fuck it, I'm still going to enjoy my summer." I'm worried that despite the cases exploding, July 4th is going to be the same.
I think it was reported that about 40% of the recent spikes are people under 35. While that age group can still have fatalities, it will still be lower than if the cases were more evenly spread out among age groups. I think that’s part of why we haven’t yet seen deaths rise too much yet.
Obviously just because that 35 and younger group won’t suffer as many deaths, they can still spread it to vulnerable groups. But that adds another layer of lag time, because all these young spreaders would have had to be contagious first, and anyone they infected wouldn’t start to become symptomatic until around this and last week.
So a combination of young cases with lag time is probably why the death count hasn’t caught up yet. But when that other shoe drops...
Mild Confusion on
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Looks like some businesses really do not want a liquor license
As though any orders are enforced anywhere.
As an example, LA 4th of July beaches being closed and on the same day the Sheriff for LA County put out an announcement that they won't bother enforcing it.
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
PBS correspondant with a report from Dr. Fauci testifying today.
100k a day infections a day? Jesus christ.
that's 5000 deaths a day give or take...
horrifying
500?
Nah, 5000. 5% death rate * 100k = 5k. And that's based on our experience thus far, it doesn't account for what things would look like in a scenario like Houston's, where the hospitals reach capacity and we just can't treat everybody.
The death rate is not 5%. The hospitalization rate isn't even believed to be 5%. You cannot use any aspect of US sampling data blindly to evaluate what the death rate is, because we have massive undersampling. Almost everyone has under sampling in fact, but, if you look at the places which have done best (and their, 'best', has almost nothing to do with actually being able to treat people better) we see...
New Zealand 22 deaths / 1528 cases. -> 1.4%
South Korea 282 deaths / 12800 cases. -> 2.2%
Iceland 10 deaths / 1824 cases. -> 0.5%
Singapore 23 deaths / 43907 cases. -> 0.1 %. (Singapore IS an outlier here, because their infections are overwhelmingly inside their worker blocks in young people, which is why their death rate is approaching what the death rate looks like for people 30 - 40 in well studied populations)
Hong Kong 7 deaths / 1207 cases. -> 0.6 %
You can even dive into the USA and look at some cities here which have been working harder at testing.
And what you notice even there is a strong relationship between how hard someone tests for the virus or how well a population is screened, and a reduced death rate. Since there is no strongly effective treatment to reduce death rate (other than perhaps better medical know how which has emerged over time) screening a population doesn't help people survive. It just helps stop additional infections.
The death rate is somewhere in the 0.5 - 1.5 % range. Most best estimates I've seen place it at around 0.7%. This is terrible, catastrophic. But it is not 5%.
Right now in the US we are having around 600 deaths a day. Which means we probably had 'truly' 60k infections a day around 3 weeks ago.
Now, perhaps what Fauci is saying here is that we should expect to DETECT 100k cases a day, and that he views at that point our ability to screen for cases will have collapsed, and so the deaths/detected cases 2-3 weeks earlier will be back at 5% again, which would mean that there were actually 500k cases a day. However, we do have significantly enhanced test capability right now, so I would expect our detected cases vs real cases number would stay a little better.
Where do those numbers come from? I would hope everyone is caught up with each other and saying more or less the same thing right now, but... just in case
For some reason I always assume it's not the CDC :P
The Italian data is from the italian version of the CDC, the link is in the post.
The country data is from worldometers, but, you can dig down into the national links for confirmations
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
That's the thing, even the really good antibody tests are just enough garbage that I dismiss a lot of that out of hand at this point. I probably shouldn't, but depending on which test was used (and they don't always say) it's still pretty difficult for me to take them seriously.
"ooh nuuu antibodies are gone after 6 months in mild cases" "uh huh which useless test were they using in that study"
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
+6
Options
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
PBS correspondant with a report from Dr. Fauci testifying today.
100k a day infections a day? Jesus christ.
that's 5000 deaths a day give or take...
horrifying
500?
Nah, 5000. 5% death rate * 100k = 5k. And that's based on our experience thus far, it doesn't account for what things would look like in a scenario like Houston's, where the hospitals reach capacity and we just can't treat everybody.
The death rate is not 5%. The hospitalization rate isn't even believed to be 5%. You cannot use any aspect of US sampling data blindly to evaluate what the death rate is, because we have massive undersampling. Almost everyone has under sampling in fact, but, if you look at the places which have done best (and their, 'best', has almost nothing to do with actually being able to treat people better) we see...
New Zealand 22 deaths / 1528 cases. -> 1.4%
South Korea 282 deaths / 12800 cases. -> 2.2%
Iceland 10 deaths / 1824 cases. -> 0.5%
Singapore 23 deaths / 43907 cases. -> 0.1 %. (Singapore IS an outlier here, because their infections are overwhelmingly inside their worker blocks in young people, which is why their death rate is approaching what the death rate looks like for people 30 - 40 in well studied populations)
Hong Kong 7 deaths / 1207 cases. -> 0.6 %
You can even dive into the USA and look at some cities here which have been working harder at testing.
And what you notice even there is a strong relationship between how hard someone tests for the virus or how well a population is screened, and a reduced death rate. Since there is no strongly effective treatment to reduce death rate (other than perhaps better medical know how which has emerged over time) screening a population doesn't help people survive. It just helps stop additional infections.
The death rate is somewhere in the 0.5 - 1.5 % range. Most best estimates I've seen place it at around 0.7%. This is terrible, catastrophic. But it is not 5%.
Right now in the US we are having around 600 deaths a day. Which means we probably had 'truly' 60k infections a day around 3 weeks ago.
Now, perhaps what Fauci is saying here is that we should expect to DETECT 100k cases a day, and that he views at that point our ability to screen for cases will have collapsed, and so the deaths/detected cases 2-3 weeks earlier will be back at 5% again, which would mean that there were actually 500k cases a day. However, we do have significantly enhanced test capability right now, so I would expect our detected cases vs real cases number would stay a little better.
Where do those numbers come from? I would hope everyone is caught up with each other and saying more or less the same thing right now, but... just in case
For some reason I always assume it's not the CDC :P
The Italian data is from the italian version of the CDC, the link is in the post.
The country data is from worldometers, but, you can dig down into the national links for confirmations
I don't need to dig around, I was more curious than anything. Are they all basically caught up with each other at this point? Lots of places were just using JHU stats for a really long time, then once the CDC decided there were more than 15 cases in the country they were used too. And I know that depending on how states report and to whom and at what level some of these tracking sites choose to source their data..................
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
NPR on the hearings today with Dr Fauci. Rand Paul was very much focused on "all you talk about is risk and maybe" which is just..YES THAT'S HOW THIS WORKS.
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
You have a source for that? I've seen the study referenced pretty continuously on from when the initial results were released in the end of April. Study below and accessable.
PBS correspondant with a report from Dr. Fauci testifying today.
100k a day infections a day? Jesus christ.
that's 5000 deaths a day give or take...
horrifying
500?
Nah, 5000. 5% death rate * 100k = 5k. And that's based on our experience thus far, it doesn't account for what things would look like in a scenario like Houston's, where the hospitals reach capacity and we just can't treat everybody.
The death rate is not 5%. The hospitalization rate isn't even believed to be 5%. You cannot use any aspect of US sampling data blindly to evaluate what the death rate is, because we have massive undersampling. Almost everyone has under sampling in fact, but, if you look at the places which have done best (and their, 'best', has almost nothing to do with actually being able to treat people better) we see...
New Zealand 22 deaths / 1528 cases. -> 1.4%
South Korea 282 deaths / 12800 cases. -> 2.2%
Iceland 10 deaths / 1824 cases. -> 0.5%
Singapore 23 deaths / 43907 cases. -> 0.1 %. (Singapore IS an outlier here, because their infections are overwhelmingly inside their worker blocks in young people, which is why their death rate is approaching what the death rate looks like for people 30 - 40 in well studied populations)
Hong Kong 7 deaths / 1207 cases. -> 0.6 %
You can even dive into the USA and look at some cities here which have been working harder at testing.
And what you notice even there is a strong relationship between how hard someone tests for the virus or how well a population is screened, and a reduced death rate. Since there is no strongly effective treatment to reduce death rate (other than perhaps better medical know how which has emerged over time) screening a population doesn't help people survive. It just helps stop additional infections.
The death rate is somewhere in the 0.5 - 1.5 % range. Most best estimates I've seen place it at around 0.7%. This is terrible, catastrophic. But it is not 5%.
Right now in the US we are having around 600 deaths a day. Which means we probably had 'truly' 60k infections a day around 3 weeks ago.
Now, perhaps what Fauci is saying here is that we should expect to DETECT 100k cases a day, and that he views at that point our ability to screen for cases will have collapsed, and so the deaths/detected cases 2-3 weeks earlier will be back at 5% again, which would mean that there were actually 500k cases a day. However, we do have significantly enhanced test capability right now, so I would expect our detected cases vs real cases number would stay a little better.
Where do those numbers come from? I would hope everyone is caught up with each other and saying more or less the same thing right now, but... just in case
For some reason I always assume it's not the CDC :P
The Italian data is from the italian version of the CDC, the link is in the post.
The country data is from worldometers, but, you can dig down into the national links for confirmations
I don't need to dig around, I was more curious than anything. Are they all basically caught up with each other at this point? Lots of places were just using JHU stats for a really long time, then once the CDC decided there were more than 15 cases in the country they were used too. And I know that depending on how states report and to whom and at what level some of these tracking sites choose to source their data..................
Worldometers is linking to the national healthcare system page for a country if they can for their data, or to newspaper aggregation stuff or state level dashboards otherwise. Everyone seems to be pretty much listing the same numbers, although some places are doing better at reporting things and giving better data (like, SF tries to report the date that they took the test on, rather than the date they returned the test)
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
NPR on the hearings today with Dr Fauci. Rand Paul was very much focused on "all you talk about is risk and maybe" which is just..YES THAT'S HOW THIS WORKS.
eeesh even Rand Paul's body language is obnoxious.
Rand Paul wants to be able to go back to dumping his green waste on his neighbor's yard. So much "can't do" during the pandemic!
Joking aside one of the top comments in reply to the video is someone saying that Rand Paul seems to be wanting to hear about the "upside" to COVID-19. His behavior and comments during this are just extremely bizarre and yeah, it comes across as a libertarian whining that there are some more temporary rules in place to further upset their ideology.
There is unironically one upshot to the pandemic, though it's narrow and not something Rand Paul gives a shit about; the climate has had things better than ever, as temporary as it may be.
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
That's the thing, even the really good antibody tests are just enough garbage that I dismiss a lot of that out of hand at this point. I probably shouldn't, but depending on which test was used (and they don't always say) it's still pretty difficult for me to take them seriously.
"ooh nuuu antibodies are gone after 6 months in mild cases" "uh huh which useless test were they using in that study"
"New research from Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital shows that many people with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 demonstrate so-called T-cell-mediated immunity to the new coronavirus, even if they have not tested positively for antibodies. According to the researchers, this means that public immunity is probably higher than antibody tests suggest." Link
If this shakes out we might be in a far better position than expected from the antibody tests.
NPR on the hearings today with Dr Fauci. Rand Paul was very much focused on "all you talk about is risk and maybe" which is just..YES THAT'S HOW THIS WORKS.
eeesh even Rand Paul's body language is obnoxious.
Rand Paul wants to be able to go back to dumping his green waste on his neighbor's yard. So much "can't do" during the pandemic!
Joking aside one of the top comments in reply to the video is someone saying that Rand Paul seems to be wanting to hear about the "upside" to COVID-19. His behavior and comments during this are just extremely bizarre and yeah, it comes across as a libertarian whining that there are some more temporary rules in place to further upset their ideology.
There is unironically one upshot to the pandemic, though it's narrow and not something Rand Paul gives a shit about; the climate has had things better than ever, as temporary as it may be.
The thing which annoys me so much about this is that there are many things you CAN do, but the federal government is unwilling to give people the support required to do them.
For example, I think that getting more sport back on the TV would help people stay the hell inside more. It would be a productive use of federal money to get baseball back on the air so that people would stay inside to watch it. You could almost certainly get a net supression on infection with a well controlled league, with plenty of testing support. But, to make it work you need to pass solid laws to say, "Here is how your league is going to work, and how you will test people, and you will pay us (the federal government) to produce an extra 5k tests a day so that you can run your league safely"
But the federal government refuses to run the damn testing! So we can't do anything, because without controls NOTHING works other than remaining indoors forever.
Unknowns aside, the death rate is variable based on how overloaded the medical system is. If everything's going ideally, it might be under a percent, but if things are completely overloaded, then 5% could be the worst case numbers. If we were getting 100k confirmed infections a day, that sure sounds like overloaded hospitals to me.
Unknowns aside, the death rate is variable based on how overloaded the medical system is. If everything's going ideally, it might be under a percent, but if things are completely overloaded, then 5% could be the worst case numbers. If we were getting 100k confirmed infections a day, that sure sounds like overloaded hospitals to me.
Yes, that is likely the most significant concern in a truly out of control outbreak, we would expect to see the actual death rate rise because the (for example) survival chance of people who needed ventilators would fall to 0% from like 30%, and those who needed oxygen would also see a rise in deaths. I would not expect to see death rates match hospitalization rates, but, they would certainly grow significantly.
A reminder that Rand Paul is a medical doctor and an idiot.
He’s an ophthalmologist whose license was certified by a company owned by his father.
Phillishere on
+33
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
My understanding is that the states with the highest spikes are already at or nearing capacity
This is going to be a horrorshow and I am skeptical that people will be able to see past their tribalism to hold the people (who largely did nothing when they could have done something) accountable
A reminder that Rand Paul is a medical doctor and an idiot.
He’s an ophthalmologist whose license was certified by a company owned by his father.
This was actually way more wild than I expected:
Paul attended Baylor University from fall 1981 to summer 1984 and was enrolled in the honors program. During the time he spent at Baylor, he was involved in the swim team and the Young Conservatives of Texas and was a member of a secret organization known as The NoZe Brotherhood. He regularly contributed to The Baylor Lariat student newspaper. Paul dropped out of Baylor without completing his baccalaureate degree, when he was accepted into his father's alma mater, the Duke University School of Medicine, which, at the time, did not require an undergraduate degree for admission to its graduate school. He earned an M.D. degree in 1988 and completed his residency in 1993.
My understanding is that the states with the highest spikes are already at or nearing capacity
This is going to be a horrorshow and I am skeptical that people will be able to see past their tribalism to hold the people (who largely did nothing when they could have done something) accountable
Effectively the problem is that we need the federal government to stand up and say,
"OK, we have a problem here. National lockdown is back on. Here is program X, Y and Z so that you don't all go broke doing that. We will double testing within 30 days, and double it again within 60, and noone opens up until their state has a test positivity rate below 3%, and when a state opens, it's borders are closed to all non 3% states."
My understanding is that the states with the highest spikes are already at or nearing capacity
This is going to be a horrorshow and I am skeptical that people will be able to see past their tribalism to hold the people (who largely did nothing when they could have done something) accountable
Effectively the problem is that we need the federal government to stand up and say,
"OK, we have a problem here. National lockdown is back on. Here is program X, Y and Z so that you don't all go broke doing that. We will double testing within 30 days, and double it again within 60, and noone opens up until their state has a test positivity rate below 3%, and when a state opens, it's borders are closed to all non 3% states."
Yes, this is what is necessary
With Trump in the executive, and McConnell in the Senate, it will not happen
My understanding is that the states with the highest spikes are already at or nearing capacity
This is going to be a horrorshow and I am skeptical that people will be able to see past their tribalism to hold the people (who largely did nothing when they could have done something) accountable
Trump's approval rating is down massively, several Senate races which were looking like safe Republican seats are now competitive, and both of those appear to be largely driven by some combination of his poor handling of COVID-19 along with the economic repercussions (which are obviously linked). Texas is looking to be about tied in the polling and Florida is currently leaning heavily against Trump.
My point is, it does appear that the voters are currently holding the GOP responsible for their failures regarding the coronavirus situation, as they should be.
My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
Further complicating school plans: it turns out a bunch of book publishers are complete shitheads and will not allow libraries to lend their textbooks in electronic format.
So if you're no longer able to go to the library because COVID and can't afford the books...sucks to be you I guess? No distance learning allowed! Fucking hell.
(Our copyright system is a disaster for allowing this but that's another thread)
Further complicating school plans: it turns out a bunch of book publishers are complete shitheads and will not allow libraries to lend their textbooks in electronic format.
So if you're no longer able to go to the library because COVID and can't afford the books...sucks to be you I guess? No distance learning allowed! Fucking hell.
(Our copyright system is a disaster for allowing this but that's another thread)
This is more about protecting the illusions that keep textbook prices so overinflated
So this is something of a tangent at best, but could someone from California PM me about what restrictions there are related to funerals? This is relevant and time sensitive, and I can't find anything more recent than May. I do not know whether they were sick or not at this point.
The death rate alone isn't that bad (as these things could go....), but the effort to keep people alive is so high it causes huge problems.
First, if you go catastrophic your health care system gets overwhelmed, you can't ventilate properly, and this may roughly double the death rate.
Second, the people who survive the ventilation are severely weakened, needing months to a year of revalidation.
Those people also stay in the hospital for a long time. 2-4 weeks of IC. Huge pressure on the medical staff.
Third, the hospitals have to wind down elective surgery, routine screenings and testings. A preliminary report here in NL is that for every lifeyear lost directly to covid19 during March - May, 1.2 to 1.5 lifeyears were lost because the hospitals and GPs were knocked out of the routine.
Fourth, even people who do not get hospitalized can still have severe longterm issues from this.
My friend is a 36y guy who trained judo 4x a week. He got the virus in the initial wave, has very little memory of the week of fever, then for a month the humidity of the shower was enough to give him coughing fits. It took 2 months to not get out of breath walking stairs.
Have they even figured out a reliable antibody test yet? Last I recall the FDA hadn't signed off on any, it was just dozens of choose your own antibody adventure.
Schools in South Korea (SOUTH KOREA) have reopened and closed twice since March, and they have their shit together in responding to the pandemic relatively speaking. Beijing in the last week or so has had to close schools again and they're properly screening/testing everyone.
It is absolutely insane to see state k-12 ed departments in the US treat reopening as if schools are in a vacuum and community transmission isn't a thing. ESPECIALLY when testing students and faculty isn't a thing. It is immoral for states to be talking about anything other than remote learning until there is a vaccine. People will get the virus from being back in schools.
If we collectively gave enough of a shit, we could have spent these past few months finding ways to make remote/distance learning more manageable, if not necessarily more effective, while accepting the reality that schools being closed for a year+ is a consequence of an MIA federal government. Schools, and children transmitting the virus, only seem like low risk scenarios BECAUSE SCHOOLS CLOSED AND CHILDREN STAYED HOME BEFORE THE FIRST WAVE HIT.
Sped educator from Mass for reference, and yes the document for fall reopening from DESE last week is political wishful thinking written in the language of pseudo empiricism and science. That biogen superspreader event from March? Conference attendees were parents of kids in Boston metro area school districts and cases duly started to spread between people at schools.
The American Academy of Pediatrics also needs to be censured as an institution.
CptKemzik on
+6
Options
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
You have a source for that? I've seen the study referenced pretty continuously on from when the initial results were released in the end of April. Study below and accessable.
That's the problem. Right now (although hopefully this is changing, just a month ago it was the case) some of these studies are preliminary at best being touted as definitive knowledge carved into stone for laypeople who don't know what peer review is. These studies get rolled into meta-studies and meta-analyses before they're peer reviewed, then the analyses are released and lauded before they're peer reviewed, and it's been happening sometimes before the original studies are even properly put to print. When even one study is based on bad data from shitty tests or is designed poorly in some other way it all magically transforms into garbage.
Even reputable publications known for their rigor are shoving these things out the door because covid is hot; so many people who don't understand why peer review is crucial (and don't usually bother reading science papers) are taking them as gospel, and it creates chaos and worse, it erodes trust in these institutions and the scientific community as a whole.
I could go on all day. And have.
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
We could have done a lot of things if we collectively gave a shit enough to have people in charge who actually used the last 6+months to do literally anything other than find a way to simultaneously have their head both buried in the sand and shoved up their own asses.
A reminder that Rand Paul is a medical doctor and an idiot.
He’s an ophthalmologist whose license was certified by a company owned by his father.
And who was so mad the medical board was going to make him take a test to be a board certified doctor, that he created his own medical board association, certified himself, and tried to get other doctors to join his cause. Apparently he even did regular surgeries -how he never got lit up for malpractice is beyond me.
His behavior during the Pandemic, from his refusal to wear a mask because he had a positive antibody test (I still think he made it up), to his attitude in these hearings, has once again highlighted how he is a walking example of the arrogant, know it all, out of touch doctor type.
Dark_Side on
0
Options
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
Testing in spring was basically non existent. Antibody testing in NYC at the end of April estimated that around 20% of residents had had COVID. That is 2.7m people- but NYC only had 150k confirmed cases at the time. In April the only way to get tested was to be basically be admitted to a hospital levels of sick. Less sever cases just weren't getting tested at all. As testing has expanded-however inadequately - that was always going to drive down the death rate.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
That's the thing, even the really good antibody tests are just enough garbage that I dismiss a lot of that out of hand at this point. I probably shouldn't, but depending on which test was used (and they don't always say) it's still pretty difficult for me to take them seriously.
"ooh nuuu antibodies are gone after 6 months in mild cases" "uh huh which useless test were they using in that study"
"New research from Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital shows that many people with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 demonstrate so-called T-cell-mediated immunity to the new coronavirus, even if they have not tested positively for antibodies. According to the researchers, this means that public immunity is probably higher than antibody tests suggest." Link
If this shakes out we might be in a far better position than expected from the antibody tests.
Not peer reviewed BUT I really appreciate the fact that this site mentioned pre-print and says this:
What is a preprint server?
Scientific papers in the medical field normally undergo a process of peer review in which they are examined by fellow researchers before publication in a scientific journal. As it is a time-consuming process that can take many months, much COVID-19 research is initially published on a preprint server. Science’s understanding of coronavirus and COVID-19 is improving rapidly, and if society is to respond to the new knowledge generated, the information must be made as readily available as possible to the scientific community, the authorities and the general public. There are a wide range of preprint servers in different research fields that publish the first version of scientific papers, and many researchers also submit the same manuscript to a journal for peer review at the same time. The downside of publishing a paper on a preprint server only is that it is harder for a layperson to judge the quality of the research it describes.
That's amazing. I want to see it on every preprint paper or article about one put out there right now. I want to bind it to a mouse key I can press every time someone links to a paper on a preprint server.
ceres on
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
0
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
The co-founder of a movement to reopen Maryland at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic has tested positive for the virus after refusing to wear a face mask.
Tim Walters helped organize rallies with the group ReOpen Maryland, demanding that Maryland Governor Larry Hogan rescind his stay-at-home order in April. Earlier this week, Walters said he had tested positive for COVID-19 in a series of Facebook videos, some of which have since been deleted.
"I was diagnosed yesterday at the ER with COVID-19 and here I am months after not wearing a mask at rallies, churches and so on and so it's funny how capricious this thing is," Walters said in a video on Tuesday, according to The Capital Gazette, who first reported on the test result.
Walters suggested that those he has recently come into contact with should monitor their symptoms. However, he is refusing to cooperate with Maryland contact tracers by providing any personal information that could help them contain the virus.
"I will not share anybody's information with the government. I will not do it," Walters reportedly said.
"We told you if we passed the ACA we'd get death panels eventually! Thanks, Obama!"
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
So Governor DeSantis today said there would be no “going back” for Florida. No restrictions on businesses, no closings, nothing.
Says it’s all just young people socializing that’s spreading it, not people going to businesses. Literally said “Go out to eat, get seated, and have a drink. It’s fine”
+6
Options
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, Moderatormod
Where the hell does he think young people socialize
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
"I will not share anybody's information with the government. I will not do it open myself up to lawsuits for being a foolish tool or risk it being made public how many people I put at risk."
Posts
Where do those numbers come from? I would hope everyone is caught up with each other and saying more or less the same thing right now, but... just in case
For some reason I always assume it's not the CDC :P
I think it was reported that about 40% of the recent spikes are people under 35. While that age group can still have fatalities, it will still be lower than if the cases were more evenly spread out among age groups. I think that’s part of why we haven’t yet seen deaths rise too much yet.
Obviously just because that 35 and younger group won’t suffer as many deaths, they can still spread it to vulnerable groups. But that adds another layer of lag time, because all these young spreaders would have had to be contagious first, and anyone they infected wouldn’t start to become symptomatic until around this and last week.
So a combination of young cases with lag time is probably why the death count hasn’t caught up yet. But when that other shoe drops...
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
As though any orders are enforced anywhere.
As an example, LA 4th of July beaches being closed and on the same day the Sheriff for LA County put out an announcement that they won't bother enforcing it.
2.7m was based on estimates from antibody tests that turned out to be faulty.
The Italian data is from the italian version of the CDC, the link is in the post.
The country data is from worldometers, but, you can dig down into the national links for confirmations
The San Francisco data is from here...
https://data.sfgov.org/stories/s/fjki-2fab
That's the thing, even the really good antibody tests are just enough garbage that I dismiss a lot of that out of hand at this point. I probably shouldn't, but depending on which test was used (and they don't always say) it's still pretty difficult for me to take them seriously.
"ooh nuuu antibodies are gone after 6 months in mild cases" "uh huh which useless test were they using in that study"
I don't need to dig around, I was more curious than anything. Are they all basically caught up with each other at this point? Lots of places were just using JHU stats for a really long time, then once the CDC decided there were more than 15 cases in the country they were used too. And I know that depending on how states report and to whom and at what level some of these tracking sites choose to source their data..................
eeesh even Rand Paul's body language is obnoxious.
You have a source for that? I've seen the study referenced pretty continuously on from when the initial results were released in the end of April. Study below and accessable.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1047279720302015
Worldometers is linking to the national healthcare system page for a country if they can for their data, or to newspaper aggregation stuff or state level dashboards otherwise. Everyone seems to be pretty much listing the same numbers, although some places are doing better at reporting things and giving better data (like, SF tries to report the date that they took the test on, rather than the date they returned the test)
Joking aside one of the top comments in reply to the video is someone saying that Rand Paul seems to be wanting to hear about the "upside" to COVID-19. His behavior and comments during this are just extremely bizarre and yeah, it comes across as a libertarian whining that there are some more temporary rules in place to further upset their ideology.
There is unironically one upshot to the pandemic, though it's narrow and not something Rand Paul gives a shit about; the climate has had things better than ever, as temporary as it may be.
"New research from Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital shows that many people with mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 demonstrate so-called T-cell-mediated immunity to the new coronavirus, even if they have not tested positively for antibodies. According to the researchers, this means that public immunity is probably higher than antibody tests suggest." Link
If this shakes out we might be in a far better position than expected from the antibody tests.
The thing which annoys me so much about this is that there are many things you CAN do, but the federal government is unwilling to give people the support required to do them.
For example, I think that getting more sport back on the TV would help people stay the hell inside more. It would be a productive use of federal money to get baseball back on the air so that people would stay inside to watch it. You could almost certainly get a net supression on infection with a well controlled league, with plenty of testing support. But, to make it work you need to pass solid laws to say, "Here is how your league is going to work, and how you will test people, and you will pay us (the federal government) to produce an extra 5k tests a day so that you can run your league safely"
But the federal government refuses to run the damn testing! So we can't do anything, because without controls NOTHING works other than remaining indoors forever.
Yes, that is likely the most significant concern in a truly out of control outbreak, we would expect to see the actual death rate rise because the (for example) survival chance of people who needed ventilators would fall to 0% from like 30%, and those who needed oxygen would also see a rise in deaths. I would not expect to see death rates match hospitalization rates, but, they would certainly grow significantly.
He’s an ophthalmologist whose license was certified by a company owned by his father.
This is going to be a horrorshow and I am skeptical that people will be able to see past their tribalism to hold the people (who largely did nothing when they could have done something) accountable
This was actually way more wild than I expected:
Effectively the problem is that we need the federal government to stand up and say,
"OK, we have a problem here. National lockdown is back on. Here is program X, Y and Z so that you don't all go broke doing that. We will double testing within 30 days, and double it again within 60, and noone opens up until their state has a test positivity rate below 3%, and when a state opens, it's borders are closed to all non 3% states."
Yes, this is what is necessary
With Trump in the executive, and McConnell in the Senate, it will not happen
Trump's approval rating is down massively, several Senate races which were looking like safe Republican seats are now competitive, and both of those appear to be largely driven by some combination of his poor handling of COVID-19 along with the economic repercussions (which are obviously linked). Texas is looking to be about tied in the polling and Florida is currently leaning heavily against Trump.
My point is, it does appear that the voters are currently holding the GOP responsible for their failures regarding the coronavirus situation, as they should be.
https://www.gvsu.edu/library/statement-on-textbooks-in-the-library-collection-92.htm
So if you're no longer able to go to the library because COVID and can't afford the books...sucks to be you I guess? No distance learning allowed! Fucking hell.
(Our copyright system is a disaster for allowing this but that's another thread)
I mean they were in the 2008 election but then Dems got the shit kicked out of them until 2018
This is more about protecting the illusions that keep textbook prices so overinflated
First, if you go catastrophic your health care system gets overwhelmed, you can't ventilate properly, and this may roughly double the death rate.
Second, the people who survive the ventilation are severely weakened, needing months to a year of revalidation.
Those people also stay in the hospital for a long time. 2-4 weeks of IC. Huge pressure on the medical staff.
Third, the hospitals have to wind down elective surgery, routine screenings and testings. A preliminary report here in NL is that for every lifeyear lost directly to covid19 during March - May, 1.2 to 1.5 lifeyears were lost because the hospitals and GPs were knocked out of the routine.
Fourth, even people who do not get hospitalized can still have severe longterm issues from this.
My friend is a 36y guy who trained judo 4x a week. He got the virus in the initial wave, has very little memory of the week of fever, then for a month the humidity of the shower was enough to give him coughing fits. It took 2 months to not get out of breath walking stairs.
Schools in South Korea (SOUTH KOREA) have reopened and closed twice since March, and they have their shit together in responding to the pandemic relatively speaking. Beijing in the last week or so has had to close schools again and they're properly screening/testing everyone.
It is absolutely insane to see state k-12 ed departments in the US treat reopening as if schools are in a vacuum and community transmission isn't a thing. ESPECIALLY when testing students and faculty isn't a thing. It is immoral for states to be talking about anything other than remote learning until there is a vaccine. People will get the virus from being back in schools.
If we collectively gave enough of a shit, we could have spent these past few months finding ways to make remote/distance learning more manageable, if not necessarily more effective, while accepting the reality that schools being closed for a year+ is a consequence of an MIA federal government. Schools, and children transmitting the virus, only seem like low risk scenarios BECAUSE SCHOOLS CLOSED AND CHILDREN STAYED HOME BEFORE THE FIRST WAVE HIT.
Sped educator from Mass for reference, and yes the document for fall reopening from DESE last week is political wishful thinking written in the language of pseudo empiricism and science. That biogen superspreader event from March? Conference attendees were parents of kids in Boston metro area school districts and cases duly started to spread between people at schools.
The American Academy of Pediatrics also needs to be censured as an institution.
That's the problem. Right now (although hopefully this is changing, just a month ago it was the case) some of these studies are preliminary at best being touted as definitive knowledge carved into stone for laypeople who don't know what peer review is. These studies get rolled into meta-studies and meta-analyses before they're peer reviewed, then the analyses are released and lauded before they're peer reviewed, and it's been happening sometimes before the original studies are even properly put to print. When even one study is based on bad data from shitty tests or is designed poorly in some other way it all magically transforms into garbage.
Even reputable publications known for their rigor are shoving these things out the door because covid is hot; so many people who don't understand why peer review is crucial (and don't usually bother reading science papers) are taking them as gospel, and it creates chaos and worse, it erodes trust in these institutions and the scientific community as a whole.
I could go on all day. And have.
I'm sure Fox News is going to erupt about it...any second now....
And who was so mad the medical board was going to make him take a test to be a board certified doctor, that he created his own medical board association, certified himself, and tried to get other doctors to join his cause. Apparently he even did regular surgeries -how he never got lit up for malpractice is beyond me.
His behavior during the Pandemic, from his refusal to wear a mask because he had a positive antibody test (I still think he made it up), to his attitude in these hearings, has once again highlighted how he is a walking example of the arrogant, know it all, out of touch doctor type.
Not peer reviewed BUT I really appreciate the fact that this site mentioned pre-print and says this:
That's amazing. I want to see it on every preprint paper or article about one put out there right now. I want to bind it to a mouse key I can press every time someone links to a paper on a preprint server.
"We told you if we passed the ACA we'd get death panels eventually! Thanks, Obama!"
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Says it’s all just young people socializing that’s spreading it, not people going to businesses. Literally said “Go out to eat, get seated, and have a drink. It’s fine”
Yeah. Positively hilarious.