COVID concerns in the Northeast

[VTKilarney]

I bet “books will be written” about not enough being done.

I'm not so sure about that. My gut tells me that history will view our response as an overreaction. In my opinion, we should have protected the vulnerable but allowed the healthy more freedom. But what do I know...

 

[JimG.]

For better or worse, NY does not 'require' or 'recommend' quarantining after visiting contiguous states.

Since I ski in NY this season I've not looked at any of the restrictions in a while. You are quite correct.

I often forget who my state's genius governor is. Wow.

 

[Edd]

I'm not so sure about that. My gut tells me that history will view our response as an overreaction. In my opinion, we should have protected the vulnerable but allowed the healthy more freedom. But what do I know...

Time will tell for sure but relentless bemoaning about government actions seem frequently accompanied by complete lack of concern about deaths (nearly 500k in the US currently).

 

[Not Sure]

Then it sounds as if you’re speculating entirely. I get that you’re sad about wine bottles and restaurants closing but state governments were compelled to do something. I bet “books will be written” about not enough being done.

It's rational to assume that people who contract the virus are asked questions by there physicians . I'm around the area enough to know if an outbreak occurred . As others have mentioned it seems like social events where people spend an extended time together is where transmission is most likely.

I'm actually concerned my neighbors are becoming alcoholics ..........."state governments were compelled to do something" LOL my business partner has a saying "Do something , even if it's wrong" . As bad as someone having inside knowledge to front run the stock market is ,removing a parent from a nursing home while telling everyone else it's ok to remain is criminal !!!! That person is now in a higher position than when they made that call? Not a good start for a new administration . Shutting down was justified early on but the goal posts were moved to benefit big business .

Another malady concern I have besides the increase in cirrhosis is COPD . I seem to be spitting out mask fibers all the time ,maybe I have to look around for better quality masks? Telling the population a lie about masks to prevent a run on N95 masks to save them for healthcare workers could have been handled differently .

 

[VTKilarney]

Time will tell for sure but relentless bemoaning about government actions seem frequently accompanied by complete lack of concern about deaths (nearly 500k in the US currently).

There seems to be a direct correlation between the unhealthiness of a population and the number of deaths. The United States was always going to have a somewhat high death count for that reason alone.

 

[abc]

I'm not so sure about that. My gut tells me that history will view our response as an overreaction. In my opinion, we should have protected the vulnerable but allowed the healthy more freedom

Protect? Like how?

The reality being, the highest incidence of spread is family! Somehow, people can't grasp the concept that their children can be death on 2 legs.

It's precisely when the "young" are out and about, catch it, have little or no symptoms... pass it on to their elderly or vulnerable family members that led to the worst outbreaks.

 

[tnt1234]

I'm not so sure about that. My gut tells me that history will view our response as an overreaction. In my opinion, we should have protected the vulnerable but allowed the healthy more freedom. But what do I know...

I would agree with that if we coupled it with extensive - like twice a week - testing and vigorous contact tracing.
Otherwise there really is no way to protect the vulnerable.

 

[Edd]

There seems to be a direct correlation between the unhealthiness of a population and the number of deaths. The United States was always going to have a somewhat high death count for that reason alone.

Sure, I’ll buy that.

 

[machski]

I would agree with that if we coupled it with extensive - like twice a week - testing and vigorous contact tracing.
Otherwise there really is no way to protect the vulnerable.

Seriously? Have an imagination. How many people have we lost in nursing homes and other long term care facilities? How did it get in to those mostly isolated communities of folks? The required employees. So the Federal Government should have set up a robust testing protocol for the empoyees of those facilities and restricted visitation by all others. The one issue with this was that initially, it wasn't known it would have the mortality rate it does on the old. By the time it was clear, many of these facilitieshad already been exposed. Then even after it, as we went into the fall, these faacilities still took it hard. I don't knw the actual numbers, but it would not shock me to learn down the road half the deaths were found in similar facilities from this pandemic.

So I'm not sure the testing needed to be twice a week and extensive, it likely needed to be twice a week and highly focused to protect the most vulnerable who couldn't protect themselves.

 

[abc]

So I'm not sure the testing needed to be twice a week and extensive, it likely needed to be twice a week and highly focused to protect the most vulnerable who couldn't protect themselves.

Hospitals test their doctors and nurses frequently (probably not twice a week, maybe once a week?)

Perhaps the reason we're not testing nursing home employees is because nobody wants to pay for it?

 

[ss20]

Now that we are fully into the "better days ahead" part of this pandemic, it'll be interesting who/what/where restrictions are gradually lifted first and who holds out. Get the popcorn ready, because there's gonna be bonehead decisions on both sides of the spectrum of "reopen now and lets lick everyone in the process" and "don't step foot outside your bedroom and wipe down all your groceries".

 

[Puck it]

Hmmm. A tale of two cities.

• California Gov Gavin Newsom took a very strict approach during the coronavirus pandemic and closed bars and indoor dining, issued mask mandates and limited gathering
• By comparison, Florida Gov Ron DeSantis has issued very few closures and said he has trusted Floridian to 'use common sense' to control the spread of the virus
• Historically, when adjusting for population, Florida has had 8,306 cases and 117 deaths per 100,000 residents and California has had about 8,499 cases per 100,000 residents and 130 deaths per 100,000
• Currently, each states is recording between 200 and 400 cases per million people and between 10 and 20 deaths per million, showing a very similar curve over the last two months
• Hospitalization rates are also very similar with California reporting 24 hospitalizations per 100,000 while Florida has recorded about 22 per 100,000

 

[tnt1234]

Seriously? Have an imagination. How many people have we lost in nursing homes and other long term care facilities? How did it get in to those mostly isolated communities of folks? The required employees. So the Federal Government should have set up a robust testing protocol for the empoyees of those facilities and restricted visitation by all others. The one issue with this was that initially, it wasn't known it would have the mortality rate it does on the old. By the time it was clear, many of these facilitieshad already been exposed. Then even after it, as we went into the fall, these faacilities still took it hard. I don't knw the actual numbers, but it would not shock me to learn down the road half the deaths were found in similar facilities from this pandemic.

So I'm not sure the testing needed to be twice a week and extensive, it likely needed to be twice a week and highly focused to protect the most vulnerable who couldn't protect themselves.

That's one vulnerable populations.

What about the elderly that live at home and depend on family to care for the? Elderly who live with their kids? Elderly who live alone? Elderly who still work?

What about those with medical conditions? How do you isolate a 45yo with lung issues from his healthy wife and kids? Make them live in the basement?

What do you do about an immunocompromised waiter? Or CEO? They just can't go to work?

You can minimize the need for shutdowns with aggressive testing and contact tracing. Otherwise it's impossible to protect all the vulnerable populations.

 

[tnt1234]

Hmmm. A tale of two cities.

• California Gov Gavin Newsom took a very strict approach during the coronavirus pandemic and closed bars and indoor dining, issued mask mandates and limited gathering
• By comparison, Florida Gov Ron DeSantis has issued very few closures and said he has trusted Floridian to 'use common sense' to control the spread of the virus
• Historically, when adjusting for population, Florida has had 8,306 cases and 117 deaths per 100,000 residents and California has had about 8,499 cases per 100,000 residents and 130 deaths per 100,000
• Currently, each states is recording between 200 and 400 cases per million people and between 10 and 20 deaths per million, showing a very similar curve over the last two months
• Hospitalization rates are also very similar with California reporting 24 hospitalizations per 100,000 while Florida has recorded about 22 per 100,000

Not sure where you are getting your info.

This article says FLA has about twice the deaths and hospitalizations as CA.

How FL and CA have seen similar case, hospitalizations and deaths

California and Florida took different approaches when it came to lockdowns but ended up with similar curves in coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths.

www.dailymail.co.uk

• Adjusting for population, Florida has 5,043 COVID-19 cases and 91 deaths per 100,000 residents while California has about 4,595 cases and 51 deaths per 100,000, showing a similar curve
• Historically, Florida was reporting about 44 hospitalizations per 100,000 while California has about 22 per 100,000, with both states seeing a spike in mid-January and now a decline

 

[machski]

That's one vulnerable populations.

What about the elderly that live at home and depend on family to care for the? Elderly who live with their kids? Elderly who live alone? Elderly who still work?

What about those with medical conditions? How do you isolate a 45yo with lung issues from his healthy wife and kids? Make them live in the basement?

What do you do about an immunocompromised waiter? Or CEO? They just can't go to work?

You can minimize the need for shutdowns with aggressive testing and contact tracing. Otherwise it's impossible to protect all the vulnerable populations.

Look I took one group that has been hit hard and suggested some different paths that may have cut back on it. One off cases are more difficult and by their nature, will require individual decisions. I'm a pilot, I have to travel for my livelihood and my elderly mother in law lives with us. My wife is a teacher and they have been in school most of the year. Yet we have maintained health of all of us without copious testing multiple times a week. Have we all taken increased precautions in our lives, both essential errands and work? Absolutely. We made some choices as well, as I elected to take unpaid leave early on until my company developed a better plan moving forward.

That's one vulnerable populations.

What about the elderly that live at home and depend on family to care for the? Elderly who live with their kids? Elderly who live alone? Elderly who still work?

What about those with medical conditions? How do you isolate a 45yo with lung issues from his healthy wife and kids? Make them live in the basement?

What do you do about an immunocompromised waiter? Or CEO? They just can't go to work?

You can minimize the need for shutdowns with aggressive testing and contact tracing. Otherwise it's impossible to protect all the vulnerable populations.

I picked long term care facilities as they house a group of vulnerable folks not able to protect themselves. Sure, there are many vulnerable folks out there that are in more individual situations. Those would require individual decisions to be made in each case. Better national guidance would have been great for these folks, perhaps having targeted the financial payouts more to these groups should they elect to not work, etc in stead of just tossing checks to a certain income level and below. In the end, we live in what we consider to be a free country. Individual cases need to make the best decisions for their situations, it cannot be a one size fits the entire country. If this virus had the transmission rate it does and the lethality of say Ebola, then maybe a one size howitzer approach. But this, can't be a one size approach. Has to be more regional and even down to an individual in terms of how best to protect.

 

[tnt1234]

Look I took one group that has been hit hard and suggested some different paths that may have cut back on it. One off cases are more difficult and by their nature, will require individual decisions. I'm a pilot, I have to travel for my livelihood and my elderly mother in law lives with us. My wife is a teacher and they have been in school most of the year. Yet we have maintained health of all of us without copious testing multiple times a week. Have we all taken increased precautions in our lives, both essential errands and work? Absolutely. We made some choices as well, as I elected to take unpaid leave early on until my company developed a better plan moving forward.

I picked long term care facilities as they house a group of vulnerable folks not able to protect themselves. Sure, there are many vulnerable folks out there that are in more individual situations. Those would require individual decisions to be made in each case. Better national guidance would have been great for these folks, perhaps having targeted the financial payouts more to these groups should they elect to not work, etc in stead of just tossing checks to a certain income level and below. In the end, we live in what we consider to be a free country. Individual cases need to make the best decisions for their situations, it cannot be a one size fits the entire country. If this virus had the transmission rate it does and the lethality of say Ebola, then maybe a one size howitzer approach. But this, can't be a one size approach. Has to be more regional and even down to an individual in terms of how best to protect.

I don't disagree with all that. I just think you can't say 'protect the vulnerable population while letting everyone else go back to normal'. It just can't work.

And I think testing and tracing could have been used to good effect no matter the regional or state approach.

 

[Puck it]

Not sure where you are getting your info.

This article says FLA has about twice the deaths and hospitalizations as CA.

How FL and CA have seen similar case, hospitalizations and deaths

California and Florida took different approaches when it came to lockdowns but ended up with similar curves in coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths.

www.dailymail.co.uk

• Adjusting for population, Florida has 5,043 COVID-19 cases and 91 deaths per 100,000 residents while California has about 4,595 cases and 51 deaths per 100,000, showing a similar curve
• Historically, Florida was reporting about 44 hospitalizations per 100,000 while California has about 22 per 100,000, with both states seeing a spike in mid-January and now a decline

Not sure where your snipit came from. It makes no sense. The snipit I pulled was from the same article in a different section. It has different verbiage. Odd.

 

[tnt1234]

Not sure where your snipit came from. It makes no sense.

It comes from teh article I posted there. Data is within the article.

Where did your stats come from?

 

[Puck it]

It comes from teh article I posted there. Data is within the article.

Where did your stats come from?

It is the same article but from a different section. Everything in the article I reed and reread is different from your snipit. I clipped mine from the US home section.

The snipit that you posted does not even support the byline.

California and Florida took different approaches and had same result


https://mol.im/a/9262397

 

[tnt1234]

It is the same article but from a different section. Everything in the article I reed and reread is different from your snipit.

huh. Thats weird! My quote was the bullet points at the top.


Found it!

The bullet point seems to come from this quote:

For example, in late July, Florida was reporting about 44 hospitalizations per 100,000 while California has about 22 per 100,000.

Seems misleading to bullet that.

I think your assertion seems correct.