Coronavirus is one mutation away from infecting millions

[pgardn]

The idea that this thing is gioing to react like normal flue regarding the weather ignores the fact that flu right now is clearing out because of the annual cycle and yet this one is doing anything but. If it was following the same heat related rule set as the flu, this pandemic wouldn't be an issue RIGHT NOW!

Some are clearly saying it will only be an issue for two weeks or so. There is a time line that is turning political right now.

[vy65]

Louisiana also had not one but two nursing home coronavirus bombs go off, is an infrastructural clusterfuck, and still has nearly half as many cases as Washington - the closest comp in terms of nursing home spread.

[MannyIsGod]

That state of emergency came on March 5th, a month and a week after two patients were confirmed in Los Angeles county. I live just outside, and for a whole month, nothing changed in SoCal after those reported cases. Clubs, Casinos, etc, etc, filled. All logic says that "ticking bomb" should've exploded by now. Why hasn't it? Yes, there's factors favorable that are reducing transmission, like pop density, not much use of public transit, average age and health of residents, etc.

Actually, the jury is still out on how the virality of coronaviruses changes in warmer weather.



What does "somewhat" mean? What does "modest" mean? What does more "readily" mean? See, there's no hard numbers here, so best we can do is correlate the data we have. Don't think I'm suggesting that the virus is just going "die" off in the Summer, but even if transmission rate is reduced by a "modest" 30 percent, that'll be big. One data point we have is that New York's test rate comes back 28% positive vs. 8% for the rest of the country:



New York's pop density is also a big, big factor here.

I'm not downplaying anything, just countering the doomsday "up-playing" that is trying to extrapolate an outcome for every region everywhere based on what is happening in Italy (why hasn't Mexico become the next Italy?). The data we have so far is suggesting some pretty clear trends.

Why hasn't X become the next Y? Because the outbreaks don't move instantly from one location to another. Mexico is going to fare badly. So are many places in the US. Mexico doesn't have nearly as much travel to China as the United States. But its there now, and its spreading, and its going to be bad. This is just a weird way of thinking about things. You're asking why one part of the forest hasnt' burned like another part has when the fire hasn't been there as long. Do you realize we're just at the start of a situation that is likely to go on for 18+ months? In 6 months we're going to have a shit ton of places that were as bad and some worse than lombardi. That's not doomsday, that's just the truth.

Population density definitely plays a roll, but most people live in places with high population densities As high as NY? No. But comparable to Lombardi? Absolutely.

There's no reason to believe that Italy is unique in it trajectory so I'm not sure why you think you can counter that?

[pgardn]

:tu

And vy's article really relies on the biological phenomena that happens in our nose and throat when humidity and temperature go up.

Our bodies ability to produce and move mucus out of the path to our lungs works much better in humid hotter environments. Well functioning respiratory systems catch so much crap in mucus and actually move it out of the trachea and back up into the mouth to be either swallowed or rid of in other ways. Same further up the tubes. I have to put some faith in this basic non immunological part of our defense.

[MannyIsGod]

Louisiana also had not one but two nursing home coronavirus bombs go off, is an infrastructural clusterfuck, and still has nearly half as many cases as Washington - the closest comp in terms of nursing home spread.

Washington has had it for far longer. Introduction to WA was in early January. With doubling rates as the are, Louisiana is going to pass Washington before the social distancing effects are fully realized.

[SnakeBoy]

The idea that this thing is gioing to react like normal flue regarding the weather ignores the fact that flu right now is clearing out because of the annual cycle and yet this one is doing anything but. If it was following the same heat related rule set as the flu, this pandemic wouldn't be an issue RIGHT NOW!

You can't make any accurate statements about seasonality. Influenza is seasonal here, year round elsewhere. The other 4 endemic human coronaviruses are seasonal. SARS and MERS are irrelevant as they were both failed mutations. Why there is seasonality in respiratory viruses is still poorly understood.

Also cannot draw any conclusion by northern vs southern hemisphere cases as we are now entering the transition period in regards to seasonality of respiratory viruses.

I'll continue to hope the change of seasons brings relief.


"We'll see what happens" - POTUS

[midnightpulp]

Louisiana also had not one but two nursing home coronavirus bombs go off, is an infrastructural clusterfuck, and still has nearly half as many cases as Washington - the closest comp in terms of nursing home spread.

Yeah, that fact is being overlooked here. Why hasn't Florida (which has a similar climate) and greater population density "gone off?" They were still spring breaking it up a week ago. There's other reasons why the flu doesn't transmit as much in the summer:


It is thought one reason why flu spreads less readily in summer is that people spend less time together in confined spaces. In particular, it could be linked to school closures, says John Edmunds, also at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2233249-will-the-covid-19-coronavirus-outbreak-die-out-in-the-summers-heat/#ixzz6HdY5Deyu

[CosmicCowboy]

Look at Eagle, Gunnison and Pitkin with ski areas that attract foreigners. Eagle started March 2 courtesy of an Italian. Ski areas in Eagle shut down March 17, now locals only. County has a population of 55,000 and now as of the 23rd 80 cases. Steady increase per day rate but not wildly exponential growth but way, way more than the healthcare system, which is good but focused almost entirely on orthopedics and oncoology with average remaining services can handle. For now they're shipping to Denver but when Denver’s saturated they’re fooked.

https://covid19.colorado.gov/case-data

The symptoms could especially suck at 8000 foot elevation.

[Splits]

density seems to play a factor regardless of climate. and NY/NJ alone is going to make Lombardy/Milan look like a Mediterranean cruise... no wait...

[pgardn]

You can't make any accurate statements about seasonality. Influenza is seasonal here, year round elsewhere. The other 4 endemic human coronaviruses are seasonal. SARS and MERS are irrelevant as they were both failed mutations. Why there is seasonality in respiratory viruses is still poorly understood.

Also cannot draw any conclusion by northern vs southern hemisphere cases as we are now entering the transition period in regards to seasonality of respiratory viruses.

I'll continue to hope the change of seasons brings relief.


"We'll see what happens" - POTUS

And from the POTUS.
The cure is worse than the disease itself.

[Nathan89]

i dont think you can extrapolate the tested :: positive ratio to the entire population because the people getting tested tend to be symptomatic, right?

No, you definitely can't do that. That calculation was based on the the 3200 hospitalized and the study I was responding to speculating that 1 in 1000 people with Wuhan virus are hospitalized.

[MannyIsGod]

Science says otherwise:

Abstract
The main route of transmission of SARS CoV infection is presumed to be respiratory droplets. However the virus is also detectable in other body fluids and excreta. The stability of the virus at different temperatures and relative humidity on smooth surfaces were studied. The dried virus on smooth surfaces retained its viability for over 5 days at temperatures of 22–25°C and relative humidity of 40–50%, that is, typical air-conditioned environments. However, virus viability was rapidly lost (>3 log10) at higher temperatures and higher relative humidity (e.g., 38°C, and relative humidity of >95%). The better stability of SARS coronavirus at low temperature and low humidity environment may facilitate its transmission in community in subtropical area (such as Hong Kong) during the spring and in air-conditioned environments. It may also explain why some Asian countries in tropical area (such as Malaysia, Indonesia or Thailand) with high temperature and high relative humidity environment did not have major community outbreaks of SARS.

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/av/2011/734690/

My dude, 38C and RH of 95 is a combo not found in any climate around the world. That temperature is 100 degrees F with a dewpoint of 95. The heat index is 185 degrees. So sure, I'll grant you that in places wit a heat index of 185 F are safe from COVID 19. Sadly, they're also safe from humans.

[pgardn]

Yeah, that fact is being overlooked here. Why hasn't Florida (which has a similar climate) and greater population density "gone off?" They were still spring breaking it up a week ago. There's other reasons why the flu doesn't transmit as much in the summer:

See post #5506

Biologist are not entirely confident with only the crowding phenomena.
I have presented another in response to vys article

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, that fact is being overlooked here. Why hasn't Florida (which has a similar climate) and greater population density "gone off?" They were still spring breaking it up a week ago. There's other reasons why the flu doesn't transmit as much in the summer:

Florida has almost the exact same number of cases as Louisiana. They are also not looking good. I think you're not realizing how many places across the country are going to be really badly off in a short period of time.

[midnightpulp]

Why hasn't X become the next Y? Because the outbreaks don't move instantly from one location to another. Mexico is going to fare badly. So are many places in the US. Mexico doesn't have nearly as much travel to China as the United States. But its there now, and its spreading, and its going to be bad. This is just a weird way of thinking about things. You're asking why one part of the forest hasnt' burned like another part has when the fire hasn't been there as long. Do you realize we're just at the start of a situation that is likely to go on for 18+ months? In 6 months we're going to have a shit ton of places that were as bad and some worse than lombardi. That's not doomsday, that's just the truth.

Population density definitely plays a roll, but most people live in places with high population densities As high as NY? No. But comparable to Lombardi? Absolutely.

There's no reason to believe that Italy is unique in it trajectory so I'm not sure why you think you can counter that?

You seem to be just guessing rather than looking at the data we have the moment and using that to forecast. I'll counter with California again. California probably has the most frequent (or maybe second behind NY) back-and-forth with China in the country as far as air travel, tourism goes. After Washington, we were the second ground zero, with two cases appearing in LA almost two months ago on Jan. 26. Italy's first confirmed cases were Jan. 30th. Italy went into lockdown quicker, and yet, their death rate is 6800 to 43 over the same time period. Australia has a large Chinese immigrant population, as well. Plenty of travel each way. 7 deaths over the past 20 days. If the Italy trend was imminent, it would've happened by now in these regions. "Just wait!" isn't a compelling counterargument.

[MannyIsGod]

You can't make any accurate statements about seasonality. Influenza is seasonal here, year round elsewhere. The other 4 endemic human coronaviruses are seasonal. SARS and MERS are irrelevant as they were both failed mutations. Why there is seasonality in respiratory viruses is still poorly understood.

Also cannot draw any conclusion by northern vs southern hemisphere cases as we are now entering the transition period in regards to seasonality of respiratory viruses.

I'll continue to hope the change of seasons brings relief.


"We'll see what happens" - POTUS

This is fair, but we can say that it is at the very least not as limited seasonally as the flu. Otherwise, ti would be dying down right now. It's not doing that, so it is overcoming the same seasonal problems that plague the flu. Will we hit a temperature point where it is a limiting factor? I don't think so, otherwise we wouldn't have seen spread in tropical nations and we have seen just that.

[midnightpulp]

My dude, 38C and RH of 95 is a combo not found in any climate around the world. That temperature is 100 degrees F with a dewpoint of 95. The heat index is 185 degrees. So sure, I'll grant you that in places wit a heat index of 185 F are safe from COVID 19. Sadly, they're also safe from humans.

Point is the virus loses stability as temperature increases.

[pgardn]

Now people are getting to the core of why biology is such a bitch compared to chemistry or physics.
Even in the lab, things are terribly difficult to control, way too many variables so looking back on past data has to be questioned as well.
Its all in the way people emphasize different ideas in their personal modeling, thus peer review can be very important.

Also, never do biology once at close down shop with an answer.

[vy65]

Washington has had it for far longer. Introduction to WA was in early January. With doubling rates as the are, Louisiana is going to pass Washington before the social distancing effects are fully realized.

There also hasn’t been enough testing done in Louisiana to draw any conclusions from it. 6% of those tested in Washington are positive. 20% in Louisiana. The sample size there (Louisiana) is so small as to be meaningless.

[MannyIsGod]

You seem to be just guessing rather than looking at the data we have the moment and using that to forecast. I'll counter with California again. California probably has the most frequent (or maybe second behind NY) back-and-forth with China in the country as far as air travel, tourism goes. After Washington, we were the second ground zero, with two cases appearing in LA almost two months ago on Jan. 26. Italy's first confirmed cases were Jan. 30th. Italy went into lockdown quicker, and yet, their death rate is 6800 to 43 over the same time period. Australia has a large Chinese immigrant population, as well. Plenty of travel each way. 7 deaths over the past 20 days. If the Italy trend was imminent, it would've happened by now in these regions. "Just wait!" isn't a compelling counterargument.

You keep countering with California while ignoring that California has acted early enough to possibly bend their curve. Same with Washington. I'm not sure what else you think is lowering the explosiveness of growth in those communities. Are you arguing that its heat? In Santa Clara county? Cause um, the bay area isn't exactly warm. Same thing with Seattle.

THe date of introduction isn't nearly as important as the date the infection reaches a critical mass for widespread community transmission.

Italy certainly isn't a given for every place. With proper action you can avoid that. But Florida and Lousiana havne't been taking the same kind of actions as they have in California. Look, you can disagree, and that's fine, but we'll check back in a couple of weeks. Hope you're right.

[midnightpulp]

Florida has almost the exact same number of cases as Louisiana. They are also not looking good. I think you're not realizing how many places across the country are going to be really badly off in a short period of time.

Number of cases can be a result of increased testing. Let's see how many people Florida has tested vs. Louisiana.

Florida: 15547/1412 positive. 9 percent positive rate.

LA: 8603/1388 positive. 16 percent rate.

Let's look at these numbers per capita:

FL: .000067/1000
LA: .00027/1000

LA's rate is about 4x higher.

[pgardn]

Point is the virus loses stability as temperature increases.

Its a curve. Its not viable at really low temps, becomes more viable, then less due to recognition proteins probability of losing the correct shape for binding due to "molecular shaking and breaking" at higher temps.
And it differs for different viruses because they have different recognition proteins.. There are very few proteins that work well at high temperatures which is why the bacteria that live and thrive in close to boiling water is so interesting. Viruses for the most part, are extraordinarily delicate. Most are really poor outside and exposed to sun.

If one were to look at this from a virus point of view, you want to be in a cell and producing more viruses. A virus does not want to be encapsulated and ready for transfer to a new body. This is a very scary period in the cycle of a virus. Or even inside a body looking for a cell to attach to ready be snatched away by defense systems inside the host.

[hater]

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1242480509923381248?s=20

called it sadly :(

[MannyIsGod]

Now people are getting to the core of why biology is such a bitch compared to chemistry or physics.
Even in the lab, things are terribly difficult to control, way too many variables so looking back on past data has to be questioned as well.
Its all in the way people emphasize different ideas in their personal modeling, thus peer review can be very important.

Also, never do biology once at close down shop with an answer.

My masters work was all about atmospheric chemistry. Good luck nailing down the variables there. It's all a bunch of hand waving trying to figure out pathways for chemical reactions. Limiting them in a lab environment isn't really possible so you essentially work out the statistical pathways which I'm not sure is all that different from much of the work involved with this type of situation. The statistics involved with viral spread seem pretty fucking similar to the reactions I had to learn about.

[MannyIsGod]

Number of cases can be a result of increased testing. Let's see how many people Florida has tested vs. Louisiana.

Florida: 15547/1412 positive. 9 percent positive rate.

LA: 8603/1388 positive. 16 percent rate.

Let's look at these numbers per capita:

FL: .000067/1000
LA: .00027/1000

LA's rate is about 4x higher.

I'm not sure why you think this helps your case? This means that there are more hidden cases in Lousiana and the true number is higher. Why would you think that is a good thing? But even if Florida is half as many cases as Louisiana right now with exponential growth and doubling times measured in days, that doesn't mean much. They're a few days behind. That's it.

[hater]

What new industries will be employing millions? Seems like if a new manufacturing facility is being built, they'd start with robots.

small businesses would also jump in to make masks, gloves, other equipment

a whole new Epidemiology dept will be made in USA(or expand CDC) may r a Corona/flu only

cretion of flu/fever clinics completely separate from hospitals/regular clinics

apps to track cases and notification(tracing)

the whole air travel industry will have to completely change

same for cruise (if it ever comes back)

temperature readers everywhere

restaurant industry will also change

and IF we ever want to have concerts/ballgames attended this will also completely change

so many industries will be created after this. remember a vaccine will not work on mutated viruses (as well) so corona is here to stay and we will forever have outbreaks

time to jump nigas :tu

[SnakeBoy]

This is fair, but we can say that it is at the very least not as limited seasonally as the flu. Otherwise, ti would be dying down right now. It's not doing that, so it is overcoming the same seasonal problems that plague the flu. Will we hit a temperature point where it is a limiting factor? I don't think so, otherwise we wouldn't have seen spread in tropical nations and we have seen just that.

It's completely fair not to compare it exactly to influenza. Here is a chart that might give some hope though. Of course we have no clue what happened the last 4 times a coronavirus became endemic to humans so it's all a guess. Maybe they raced through the population year round and then eventually evolved into a seasonal virus.

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/parainluenzavirus-090913100009-phpapp01/95/parainluenza-virus-3-728.jpg?cb=1252836058

[pgardn]

My masters work was all about atmospheric chemistry. Good luck nailing down the variables there. It's all a bunch of hand waving trying to figure out pathways for chemical reactions. Limiting them in a lab environment isn't really possible so you essentially work out the statistical pathways which I'm not sure is all that different from much of the work involved with this type of situation. The statistics involved with viral spread seem pretty fucking similar to the reactions I had to learn about.

Yep and thats why I stick with the biology for the most part. The statistics is a bitch for epidemiologists trying to put the right info into their models. And then how to weight the info... a mess, but better than nothing.

We will learn.

[MannyIsGod]

Oh , and if FL has 1/4 of the cases of LA, then they're all of a week behind LA. Exponential growth is a bitch.

[MannyIsGod]

It's completely fair not to compare it exactly to influenza. Here is a chart that might give some hope though. Of course we have no clue what happened the last 4 times a coronavirus became endemic to humans so it's all a guess. Maybe they raced through the population year round and then eventually evolved into a seasonal virus.

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/parainluenzavirus-090913100009-phpapp01/95/parainluenza-virus-3-728.jpg?cb=1252836058

Well lets hope.

[MannyIsGod]

There also hasn’t been enough testing done in Louisiana to draw any conclusions from it. 6% of those tested in Washington are positive. 20% in Louisiana. The sample size there (Louisiana) is so small as to be meaningless.

Sample sizes of thousands of people is plenty to do statistical analysis on and make statements about with a relatively good range of uncertainties. Its why public polling works with only hundreds to thousands of respondents, for instance.

[MannyIsGod]

Yep and thats why I stick with the biology for the most part. The statistics is a bitch for epidemiologists trying to put the right info into their models. And then how to weight the info... a mess, but better than nothing.

We will learn.

LOL, after that work I moved away from chemistry. It's not for me. Plus field work in that research area takes you to places with air pollution. My current work lets me go to mountains instead.

[midnightpulp]

You keep countering with California while ignoring that California has acted early enough to possibly bend their curve. Same with Washington. I'm not sure what else you think is lowering the explosiveness of growth in those communities. Are you arguing that its heat? In Santa Clara county? Cause um, the bay area isn't exactly warm. Same thing with Seattle.

THe date of introduction isn't nearly as important as the date the infection reaches a critical mass for widespread community transmission.

Italy certainly isn't a given for every place. With proper action you can avoid that. But Florida and Lousiana havne't been taking the same kind of actions as they have in California. Look, you can disagree, and that's fine, but we'll check back in a couple of weeks. Hope you're right.

I live here. No one took this seriously (in Southern California) until Newsom issued the statewide soft lockdown. My point with California is that the virus was allowed to spread freely in Los Angeles County for over-a-month (anecdote, I know about 10 casino workers who at about the same time all came down with textbook symptoms). The average is 5.2 days for symptoms to present, so it's not like we're waiting for that time bomb to go off. Based on how this virus seems to work, the time bomb should've went off before the soft lockdown. I beg the question why didn't it?

My conclusions here is that: The virus's rate of transmission is way overstated (theorized R0 of 1/2.3), warmer weather does affect transmission, and population density plays a huge role. Los Angeles County isn't actually that population dense.

Now yes, I do completely agree that the Bay Area is a different situation. They have the 2nd largest pop density in the country, they use mass transit more than most, and their climate is close to the troubling green band per the University of Maryland. My overall point is that not every region everywhere is destined to become Italy. There's some regions that fit the profile and we should worry about those, but I do not think Florida nor Texas are trending toward the Italy situation. I do not think Australia will become Italy. To reiterate, I've already stated that I'm highly concerned for densely populated, mass transit using countries and regions in that green band, so I'm not taking it lightly (fearful for the UK, right now), but I don't think we're all destined to that fate.

[pgardn]

It's completely fair not to compare it exactly to influenza. Here is a chart that might give some hope though. Of course we have no clue what happened the last 4 times a coronavirus became endemic to humans so it's all a guess. Maybe they raced through the population year round and then eventually evolved into a seasonal virus.

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/parainluenzavirus-090913100009-phpapp01/95/parainluenza-virus-3-728.jpg?cb=1252836058

Pretty cool.

But Group A strept is a bacteria, not a virus.

[MannyIsGod]

I live here. No one took this seriously (in Southern California) until Newsom issued the statewide soft lockdown. My point with California is that the virus was allowed to spread freely in Los Angeles County for over-a-month (anecdote, I know about 10 casino workers who at about the same time all came down with textbook symptoms). The average is 5.2 days for symptoms to present, so it's not like we're waiting for that time bomb to go off. Based on how this virus seems to work, the time bomb should've went off before the soft lockdown. I beg the question why didn't it?

My conclusions here is that: The virus's rate of transmission is way overstated (theorized R0 of 1/2.3), warmer weather does affect transmission, and population density plays a huge role. Los Angeles County isn't actually that population dense.

Now yes, I do completely agree that the Bay Area is a different situation. They have the 2nd largest pop density in the country, they use mass transit more than most, and their climate is close to the troubling green band per the University of Maryland. My overall point is that not every region everywhere is destined to become Italy. There's some regions that fit the profile and we should worry about those, but I do not think Florida nor Texas are trending toward the Italy situation. I do not think Australia will become Italy. To reiterate, I've already stated that I'm highly concerned for densely populated, mass transit using countries and regions in that green band, so I'm not taking it lightly (fearful for the UK, right now), but I don't think we're all destined to that fate.

Bro and you're accusing ME of guessing?


We'll revisit this in a couple of weeks.

[slick'81]

Soo when are we actually gonna start testing people on a large scale again ?

[Thread]

Tired: Dr. Fauci
Wired: Dr. Oz

Dr. Fauci is a Never Trumper, a Deep State agent. Why, oh, why does the old man keep hiring these fucks who mean him absolutely no good?

[midnightpulp]

I'm not sure why you think this helps your case? This means that there are more hidden cases in Lousiana and the true number is higher. Why would you think that is a good thing? But even if Florida is half as many cases as Louisiana right now with exponential growth and doubling times measured in days, that doesn't mean much. They're a few days behind. That's it.

My point is that LA might be a unique situation with an anomalous amount of cases per population for yet unknown reasons. California, Florida, and Texas are seeing similar rates of infection, but LA's rate is much higher. LA is the outlier, not the rule.

I don't like the appeal to exponential growth here because if Florida tests 5 times the amount of people tomorrow as they have so far, and if results in a cases doubling result, what actually exponentially grew was the testing not the relative number of cases. Case rate actually declined, i.e. if I run a thousand tests today and it reveals 100 positives and then run five thousand tests tomorrow and it reveals a 200 positives, case number grew 3 times, but case rate dropped from 1/10 to 1/25. This is what these "scary" graphs aren't considering.

[Thread]

Soo when are we actually gonna start testing people on a large scale again ?

When they're properly screened by medical personnel.

They're inundated with smart asses who've been cruising the countryside the last fortnight and now want to get right, set their minds at ease:::"I'll never do it again. But, let me test so I can find peace, please? Then I'll stay home & behave myself. I just need a negative."

[spurraider21]

I live here. No one took this seriously (in Southern California) until Newsom issued the statewide soft lockdown.
thats wildly anecdotal :lol

the office im working at (i've been working remotely since july) closed and had everybody work from home well before newsom's policy

[midnightpulp]

Bro and you're accusing ME of guessing?


We'll revisit this in a couple of weeks.

I'm working off trends per how the virus is spreading in different climates and population densities. You seem to think everywhere will become Italy. I just don't see that. I get you want to err on the side of caution, and we should probably guard against becoming Italy, because what do we have to lose at this point? But we should believe nor fear we'll become Italy.

[Nathan89]

.

[Thread]

thats wildly anecdotal :lol

the office im working at (i've been working remotely since july) closed and had everybody work from home well before newsom's policy

You're fortunate, 21. A lot of companies claimed to permit their employees to work from home, but, a good portion never actually did that. Instead sent their employees to the Unemployment Office.

Another portion started to let their employees work from home, but, quickly realized they were losing their ass near as bad as if they just sent them to the Unemployment Office to begin with...& sent them to the Unemployment Office.

[Trainwreck2100]

My point is that LA might be a unique situation with an anomalous amount of cases per population for yet unknown reasons. California, Florida, and Texas are seeing similar rates of infection, but LA's rate is much higher. LA is the outlier, not the rule.

I don't like the appeal to exponential growth here because if Florida tests 5 times the amount of people tomorrow as they have so far, and if results in a cases doubling result, what actually exponentially grew was the testing not the relative number of cases. Case rate actually declined, i.e. if I run a thousand tests today and it reveals 100 positives and then run five thousand tests tomorrow and it reveals a 200 positives, case number grew 3 times, but case rate dropped from 1/10 to 1/25. This is what these "scary" graphs aren't considering.

this shit blew up around mardi gras, that's why louisiana is fucked

[vy65]

My masters work was all about atmospheric chemistry.

I remember this - and you're a great resource. I don't think anyone here is a virologist, epidemiologist, or anything of the like -- so it's more or less retards trying to jerk themselves off.

That said, I understand your point about 38C/95RH not existing on earth. However, let's take Houston as an example. Houston averages highs of 80F from April to October. The average high in June, July, and August is above 90. Living here for almost 10 years, I know those numbers routinely pop up above 100 in those months. The average humidity is about 75%.

This was the study's conclusion:


In this study, we showed that high temperature at high relative humidity has a synergistic effect on inactivation of SARS CoV viability while lower temperatures and low humidity support prolonged survival of virus on contaminated surfaces. The environmental conditions of countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand are thus not conducive to the prolonged survival of the virus. In countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong where there is a intensive use of air-conditioning, transmission largely occurred in well-air-conditioned environments such as hospitals or hotels. Further, a separate study has shown that during the epidemic, the risk of increased daily incidence of SARS was 18.18-fold higher in days with a lower air temperature than in days with a higher temperature in Hong Kong [24] and other regions [15–17]. Taken together, these observations may explain why some Asian countries in tropical area (with high temperature at high relative humidity) such as Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand did not have nosocomial outbreaks of SARS (Tables 1 and 2(a)–2(c)). It may also explain why Singapore, which is also in tropical area (Table 2(d)), had most of its SARS outbreaks in hospitals (air-conditioned environment). Interestingly, during the outbreak of SARS in Guangzhou, clinicians kept the windows of patient rooms open and well ventilated and these may well have reduced virus survival and this reduced nosocomial transmission. SARS CoV can retain its infectivity up to 2 weeks at low temperature and low humidity environment, which might facilitate the virus transmission in community as in Hong Kong which locates in subtropical area (Table 2(e)). Other environmental factors including wind velocity, daily sunlight, and air pressure, had shown to be associated with SARS epidemic, should also be considered [16, 17]. The dynamics of SARS epidemic involves multiple factors including physical property of virus, outdoor and indoor environments, hygiene, space, and genetic predispositions [10, 15–17, 24, 25]. Understanding the stability of viruses in different temperature and humidity conditions is important in understanding transmission of novel infectious agent including that of the recent influenza Apandemic H1N12009.

Again, you're the expert on this so if you say those conditions aren't found, I'm going to believe you. However, the conclusion drawn is that those conditions (heat + humidity) do affect virus transmission as compared to cooler and dryer conditions. That's why the article concludes that Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand are less prone. So, my question to you is, why is Houston any different? Do you think that you need weather conditions at the experiment's level to slow viral spread - or - that the hotter and more humid you are, the harder it will be for the virus to survive?

[vy65]

Sample sizes of thousands of people is plenty to do statistical analysis on and make statements about with a relatively good range of uncertainties. Its why public polling works with only hundreds to thousands of respondents, for instance.

True, but that wasn't my point though. You'd agree that a sample size of 8,603 is going to be less accurate, on average, than a sample size of 33,933, right?

[midnightpulp]

thats wildly anecdotal :lol

the office im working at (i've been working remotely since july) closed and had everybody work from home well before newsom's policy

Casinos would be the perfect spreading environments. They were ALL open until March 14, with I think San Manual being the first to close. Morongo just closed on the 17th or 18th. Where's the "explosion?" Why didn't the "explosion" happen when the virus was freely spreading after those Jan. 26th confirmed cases in Los Angeles county?

Up until March 11th, Casinos were basically just sanitizing the machines as their precaution:

https://www.pe.com/2020/03/11/how-southern-california-casinos-are-responding-to-coronavirus/

Symptoms start showing on average about 5.2 days after infection. Why isn't a New York type rush happening on the area's hospitals? Casinos turn over hundreds of thousands of people every week.

[SnakeBoy]

this shit blew up around mardi gras, that's why louisiana is fucked

Oh shit that was Feb 25th, I didn't think about that. Fits well with incubation period.

[Splits]

I'm working off trends per how the virus is spreading in different climates and population densities. You seem to think everywhere will become Italy. I just don't see that. I get you want to err on the side of caution, and we should probably guard against becoming Italy, because what do we have to lose at this point? But we should believe nor fear we'll become Italy.

If you ignore the rest of the US, NY/NJ alone is going to be worse than Italy.

[vy65]

And re: exponential growth:


Exponential growth would require that the rate of infection keep growing and an accelerating pace. Stagnant or linear growth is not exponential. Decreased, however slight, growth is not exponential either.

13.62586605
15.58901683
12.4303233
15.86046512
15.15261628
14.78106808
16.96837514
14.9765325
14.1947323
12.37206308
12.5306874
12.33622332
10.01669865
10.73189941
10.4535129
11.62511652
12.60346932
12.95446425
14.15036987

These are the percentages of positive tests for the US from March 4 to the 22nd. These reflect the increases in testing. By way of example, there were approximately 866 tests with either a positive or negative result (103 remained pending) on March 4. That number rose to 7,031 tests with results (563 pending) on March 11. On March 18, the numbers were 73,956 tests with a positive or negative result (2,538 remained pending). And on March 22, there were 225,351 tests with results (2,842 remained pending). As many have said, the numbers were expected to rise with more testing.

The numbers show a consistent range of positive results of about 12%. The percentage of positive results has, so far, peaked at about 16% on the 10th, dropped down to 10.5% on the 18th, and has ticked up to 14% on the 22nd. What these numbers show is the percentage of positive results hovering in the 10-16% range. What they do not show is exponential growth -- and that's telling as the number of tests ramped up from about 900 on the 4th to over 225,000 on the 22nd.

[pgardn]

Dr. Fauci is a Never Trumper, a Deep State agent. Why, oh, why does the old man keep hiring these fucks who mean him absolutely no good?

Its tough to find science guys and tell em forget about the science.
But orange guy will find a gadfly.

[midnightpulp]

If you ignore the rest of the US, NY/NJ alone is going to be worse than Italy.

New York is actually doing a phenomenal job. .8 percent mortality rate vs. Italy's near 10 percent.

[midnightpulp]

Exponential growth would require that the rate of infection keep growing and an accelerating pace. Stagnant or linear growth is not exponential. Decreased, however slight, growth is not exponential either.


Yep, and the rate isn't growing. Case number is because testing is growing.

[vy65]

Updated numbers:

March 23: 15.08%
March 24: 15.02%

[Thread]

Its tough to find science guys and tell em forget about the science.
But orange guy will find a gadfly.

The woman, Dr. Brix is serviceable. She's a Never Trumper, but, is mature & keen enough to "just let it go" & drink from the silver cup as long as she can & they'll let her.

[MannyIsGod]

I remember this - and you're a great resource. I don't think anyone here is a virologist, epidemiologist, or anything of the like -- so it's more or less retards trying to jerk themselves off.

That said, I understand your point about 38C/95RH not existing on earth. However, let's take Houston as an example. Houston averages highs of 80F from April to October. The average high in June, July, and August is above 90. Living here for almost 10 years, I know those numbers routinely pop up above 100 in those months. The average humidity is about 75%.

This was the study's conclusion:



Again, you're the expert on this so if you say those conditions aren't found, I'm going to believe you. However, the conclusion drawn is that those conditions (heat + humidity) do affect virus transmission as compared to cooler and dryer conditions. That's why the article concludes that Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand are less prone. So, my question to you is, why is Houston any different? Do you think that you need weather conditions at the experiment's level to slow viral spread - or - that the hotter and more humid you are, the harder it will be for the virus to survive?

In other words why isn't Houston currently Italy? So without even considering possible temperature interactions, Because the time of introduction of a sufficient number of infections to promote fast community spread wasn't until later. In the early days of exponential spread, minor events have a huge impact. For me in chemistry, it was mostly luck. The doubling time of particle growth will be a distribution. In other words, you have an average value but this is affected by random events in both directions.

I assume (this is not close to my work even though there are math parallels) that in epidemiology this happens in much the same way. For instance, lets say you get two visitors from Wuhan, and one goes to Seattle and one goes to Boston. The one from Seattle doesn't have much personal contact with anyone else, and just goes about their business They manage to spread the infection but at a slow rate. Well the that branch of the tree is growing at the regular rate. But the dude who goes to Boston goes to a convention and actually has close contact with a lot of people. Oh and this dude is the kind of personalty that likes to get really close when they talk to people or whatever. Well, his branch EXPLODES.

Early on, this is a big event, right? One place grows way faster than another based on randomness. But overall, the math is the same and because its exponential growth even if you have far less numbers, its still more important to look at doubling times and whether or not there's community spread. So my main point is this: You cannot take sollace that there are limited numbers in Houston (for example) because there's enough for it to be spreading in the community there which means that its going to spread and its going to do so fairly rapidly. Even with the measures we have in place now. They aren't very rigid yet, so its still going to spread and the numbers will grow quite dramatically.

So back to the weather. its already been rather warm in SE Texas, Lousiana, and Florida. All of these places have community spread and it doesn't seem to be very slow. Its growing at an exponential rate in every single one of these locations. The flue is already in decline in these locations due to the weather but COVID19 is doing the exact opposite and it's doing it incredibly fast. Yes, the numbers are low, but relatively low numbers mean little compared to the exponential rate that its growing at.

Its not about the current numbers, its about the growth rate.

[spurraider21]

i hope mid and co are right tbh... if we can get out of this economic stall relatively quickly, better chance of a recovery without seeing massive unemployment as a result. unemployment hurts everybody (less consumer purchasing power means providers of goods/services scale back as well)

[MannyIsGod]

Testing percentages are a really bad way to extrapolate the growth curve which is why no one is using that. What epidemiologist have you seen look at testing percentages to make a point about the rate of growth? In a limited testing environment there is enormous selection bias built in. For instance here in Brazos county, the only people getting tested as of yesterday were those who were symptomatic, and traveled or had contact with someone who had tested positive. I assume its pretty similar in Houston.

Now if you did random testing among the population, then that metric would have more value. There have been calls to do this in places and I believe California actually did this (and the numbers they got were why Newsom reacted with lockdowns). But just looking at percentages when you're selecting a subset of the population doesn't tell you anything about the growth in the population at large.

[MannyIsGod]

One way you can get a better handle on the total rate for a population is through working back based on the number of hospitalizations. If you expected X% of infections to result in a hospitalization at Y time, then you can look at backwards and figure it out. Its pretty simple algebra at that point, but you're making rate assumptions so the math is fuzzy. I saw a guy who did this for NYC this past weekend and I'll see if I can dig up the medium post.

[spurraider21]

looking at testing for that purpose only makes sense if the people tested are a random, representative sample of the larger population, which isn't the case. you cant be extrapolating like that

[midnightpulp]

In other words why isn't Houston currently Italy? So without even considering possible temperature interactions, Because the time of introduction of a sufficient number of infections to promote fast community spread wasn't until later. In the early days of exponential spread, minor events have a huge impact. For me in chemistry, it was mostly luck. The doubling time of particle growth will be a distribution. In other words, you have an average value but this is affected by random events in both directions.

I assume (this is not close to my work even though there are math parallels) that in epidemiology this happens in much the same way. For instance, lets say you get two visitors from Wuhan, and one goes to Seattle and one goes to Boston. The one from Seattle doesn't have much personal contact with anyone else, and just goes about their business They manage to spread the infection but at a slow rate. Well the that branch of the tree is growing at the regular rate. But the dude who goes to Boston goes to a convention and actually has close contact with a lot of people. Oh and this dude is the kind of personalty that likes to get really close when they talk to people or whatever. Well, his branch EXPLODES.

Early on, this is a big event, right? One place grows way faster than another based on randomness. But overall, the math is the same and because its exponential growth even if you have far less numbers, its still more important to look at doubling times and whether or not there's community spread. So my main point is this: You cannot take sollace that there are limited numbers in Houston (for example) because there's enough for it to be spreading in the community there which means that its going to spread and its going to do so fairly rapidly. Even with the measures we have in place now. They aren't very rigid yet, so its still going to spread and the numbers will grow quite dramatically.

So back to the weather. its already been rather warm in SE Texas, Lousiana, and Florida. All of these places have community spread and it doesn't seem to be very slow. Its growing at an exponential rate in every single one of these locations. The flue is already in decline in these locations due to the weather but COVID19 is doing the exact opposite and it's doing it incredibly fast. Yes, the numbers are low, but relatively low numbers mean little compared to the exponential rate that its growing at.

Its not about the current numbers, its about the growth rate.

But you should know that different environments can promote or retard growth rate. Community spread will happen much faster in environments favorable to it. Houston's population density is pretty low vs. other American cities with more than 500K people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density

Then there's the mass transit variable (how much does Houston use it? Do they even have a system)? The weather variable (which I feel you think is still totally inconclusive, but I think it does matter), social behavior variable, etc, etc.

[midnightpulp]

looking at testing for that purpose only makes sense if the people tested are a random, representative sample of the larger population, which isn't the case. you cant be extrapolating like that

California's policy is to only test people with obvious symptoms. They're even advising people who might have symptoms, but aren't severe (we still have no clue how many people who have this only have very mild symptoms) enough to warrant a hospital visit to stay home. So basically, California is just testing obvious cases. I'm sure many flu or severe cold sufferers are getting tested with negative results.

So my point here is that even with this targeted testing, the majority of people with Covid like symptoms don't have the virus. But let's just hope those with mild symptoms stay put.

[MannyIsGod]

Yep, and the rate isn't growing. Case number is because testing is growing.

Well yeah the case number is growing because of more testing but why on earth do you think its not growing exponentially? Nothing in the data agrees with you. Put the data on a log plot and its clear as day that its damn close to a straight line. If it wasn't, even with more testing coming online, it wouldn't show that growth.

This is just 100% wrong.

[MannyIsGod]

But you should know that different environments can promote or retard growth rate. Community spread will happen much faster in environments favorable to it. Houston's population density is pretty low vs. other American cities with more than 500K people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population_density

Then there's the mass transit variable (how much does Houston use it? Do they even have a system)? The weather variable (which I feel you think is still totally inconclusive, but I think it does matter), social behavior variable, etc, etc.

And yet, they still have exponential growth which is the issue. I guess this concept really is just hard for people to grasp.

[MannyIsGod]

Does anyone here who's not really worried about all these possible hotspots wonder why every epidemiologist who's out there is terrified of the growth rates of this virus? Like honestly, why are the all freaked out over this if something like the heat is just going to kill it? Or why are they asking for even stronger measures than what is occurring right now? Why do the people most familiar with viral spread seem to have the greatest sense of fear of this thing?

As a climate scientist, I 100% feel for them because I'm used to people who aren't experts thinking big problems are NBD.

[vy65]

In other words why isn't Houston currently Italy? So without even considering possible temperature interactions, Because the time of introduction of a sufficient number of infections to promote fast community spread wasn't until later. In the early days of exponential spread, minor events have a huge impact. For me in chemistry, it was mostly luck. The doubling time of particle growth will be a distribution. In other words, you have an average value but this is affected by random events in both directions.

I assume (this is not close to my work even though there are math parallels) that in epidemiology this happens in much the same way. For instance, lets say you get two visitors from Wuhan, and one goes to Seattle and one goes to Boston. The one from Seattle doesn't have much personal contact with anyone else, and just goes about their business They manage to spread the infection but at a slow rate. Well the that branch of the tree is growing at the regular rate. But the dude who goes to Boston goes to a convention and actually has close contact with a lot of people. Oh and this dude is the kind of personalty that likes to get really close when they talk to people or whatever. Well, his branch EXPLODES.

Early on, this is a big event, right? One place grows way faster than another based on randomness. But overall, the math is the same and because its exponential growth even if you have far less numbers, its still more important to look at doubling times and whether or not there's community spread. So my main point is this: You cannot take sollace that there are limited numbers in Houston (for example) because there's enough for it to be spreading in the community there which means that its going to spread and its going to do so fairly rapidly. Even with the measures we have in place now. They aren't very rigid yet, so its still going to spread and the numbers will grow quite dramatically.

Agreed 100%. I think what you're saying is that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work. You have to look at the facts and circumstances, to borrow a phrase lawyers throw around. And, as you rightly point out, those facts and circumstances include the amount of personal exposure had between the two patient zeros you laid out.

But those facts and circumstances include, well, other facts and circumstances. People like me and mid have been arguing for a more holistic assessment of each state, city, community, etc... That approach would take into account factors such as population density, climate, public transit, etc... The point being that you cannot look at what's happening in Italy and say "just wait until that happens in X or Y location."

By way of pure anecdote, they shut down the Houston rodeo -- an event with hundreds of thousands of people exposed to each other -- because they found out that someone who had attended the cookoff -- an event with approximately 74,000 people out at the football stadium's parking lot -- had coronavirus (https://www.click2houston.com/rodeo/2020/03/11/houston-rodeo-canceled-amid-growing-concerns-over-coronavirus/). This happened in late February, but you haven't seen the exponential growth here that you'd normally expect.


So back to the weather. its already been rather warm in SE Texas, Lousiana, and Florida. All of these places have community spread and it doesn't seem to be very slow. Its growing at an exponential rate in every single one of these locations. The flue is already in decline in these locations due to the weather but COVID19 is doing the exact opposite and it's doing it incredibly fast. Yes, the numbers are low, but relatively low numbers mean little compared to the exponential rate that its growing at.

Its not about the current numbers, its about the growth rate.

Here too I think there are a number of factors at play. Yes, the Texas numbers are rising -- but they're far out of sync with what you see in Washington, New Jersey, and New York. Those numbers are, at least in part, attributable to the rise in testing. But, I think the overall point is that while you will still see growth - the rate at which that growth occurs will be markedly slower in places like Texas and Florida because of the facts and circumstances of those locations. What mid and I are speaking to is the rate in which growth occurs. And that rate seems to be slower in hotter and less dense locations as compared to the Pacific Northwest or NYC.

[midnightpulp]

Well yeah the case number is growing because of more testing but why on earth do you think its not growing exponentially? Nothing in the data agrees with you. Put the data on a log plot and its clear as day that its damn close to a straight line. If it wasn't, even with more testing coming online, it wouldn't show that growth.

This is just 100% wrong.

I don't see how 10 percent increases (in case rate) each day is "exponential growth?" Here's Italy's plot:

https://imgur.com/a/pyOUcOn

Last two days, their growth rate has been 8 percent over the previous number. Exponential growth is a constantly doubling, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc. Or are you defining exponential growth differently? Or are you plotting it on a longer timeline? And their growth rate day over day has declined over the past week.

[vy65]

One way you can get a better handle on the total rate for a population is through working back based on the number of hospitalizations. If you expected X% of infections to result in a hospitalization at Y time, then you can look at backwards and figure it out. Its pretty simple algebra at that point, but you're making rate assumptions so the math is fuzzy. I saw a guy who did this for NYC this past weekend and I'll see if I can dig up the medium post.

If it's what I'm thinking of, Mid posted it and Medium pulled it down ...

[hater]

the reality is New York curve is making Italys look like a flacid penis tbqh

they gotta get wrecked

[MannyIsGod]

https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en

You can switch the plots to a log. They aren't perfect straight lines, but you can fit an exponential function to those plots with a very high level of variance accounted for. That is a textbook exponential function. Anyone saying its not exponential growth is 100% wrong.

[midnightpulp]

And yet, they still have exponential growth which is the issue. I guess this concept really is just hard for people to grasp.

But an exponential doubling over a 3 month period won't be a doomsday scenario, i.e. South Korea. They're averaging a 100 new cases since they flattened, so that means they'll get case doubling from now in 90 days. Maybe this is where we're talking past each other. What timeline are you plotting for this exponential growth? Do you expect/fear consistent case and death doubling every week, month?

[MannyIsGod]

Agreed 100%. I think what you're saying is that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work. You have to look at the facts and circumstances, to borrow a phrase lawyers throw around. And, as you rightly point out, those facts and circumstances include the amount of personal exposure had between the two patient zeros you laid out.

But those facts and circumstances include, well, other facts and circumstances. People like me and mid have been arguing for a more holistic assessment of each state, city, community, etc... That approach would take into account factors such as population density, climate, public transit, etc... The point being that you cannot look at what's happening in Italy and say "just wait until that happens in X or Y location."

By way of pure anecdote, they shut down the Houston rodeo -- an event with hundreds of thousands of people exposed to each other -- because they found out that someone who had attended the cookoff -- an event with approximately 74,000 people out at the football stadium's parking lot -- had coronavirus (https://www.click2houston.com/rodeo/2020/03/11/houston-rodeo-canceled-amid-growing-concerns-over-coronavirus/). This happened in late February, but you haven't seen the exponential growth here that you'd normally expect.



Here too I think there are a number of factors at play. Yes, the Texas numbers are rising -- but they're far out of sync with what you see in Washington, New Jersey, and New York. Those numbers are, at least in part, attributable to the rise in testing. But, I think the overall point is that while you will still see growth - the rate at which that growth occurs will be markedly slower in places like Texas and Florida because of the facts and circumstances of those locations. What mid and I are speaking to is the rate in which growth occurs. And that rate seems to be slower in hotter and less dense locations as compared to the Pacific Northwest or NYC.

They're not far out of sync though. I think this is what you're missing. You see numbers that are far lower and you think that it means there's way slower growth. I see that and I think it means that there was a later introduction. This is not to say that every place is going to be a worst case scenario. We've already put measures into place to hopefully avoid that, but honestly those measures aren't even showing up in teh data we currently see so its hard to know if we've bent the curve enough or not.

Without a doubt, actions like the rodeo action have likely helped. The question is have they helped enough? Without much of a buffer, its really hard to say. It will in some places, it will not in other places, but the fact that there are relatively large numbers prior to lock downs (and the data we currently see is reflective of the situation weeks ago, not now) all over the place does not bode well.

[hater]

But an exponential doubling over a 3 month period won't be a doomsday scenario, i.e. South Korea. They're averaging a 100 new cases since they flattened, so that means they'll get case doubling from now in 90 days. Maybe this is where we're talking past each other. What timeline are you plotting for this exponential growth? Do you expect/fear consistent case and death doubling every week, month?

South Korea flattened the curve by combination of massive testing and extreme great tracing(immediate notification/tracking/quarantining of infections. everyone would get notified).

USA has neither so there wont be any similarities to the flattening of the curves

[MannyIsGod]

But an exponential doubling over a 3 month period won't be a doomsday scenario, i.e. South Korea. They're averaging a 100 new cases since they flattened, so that means they'll get case doubling from now in 90 days. Maybe this is where we're talking past each other. What timeline are you plotting for this exponential growth? Do you expect/fear consistent case and death doubling every week, month?

Oh 100% that the goal is to slow the doubling time. But nothing we've done yet is reflected in the data for most places across the US since the lag time for the data is weeks. Plus, we're not doing what SK did. Not even close, so its really not realistic to expect results on the same magnitude they have achieved.

[hater]

Oh 100% that the goal is to slow the doubling time. But nothing we've done yet is reflected in the data for most places across the US since the lag time for the data is weeks. Plus, we're not doing what SK did. Not even close, so its really not realistic to expect results on the same magnitude they have achieved.

yup you cant compare us with SK because we are not doing anything coose to what they did

apples and oranges tbqh

[MannyIsGod]

I don't see how 10 percent increases (in case rate) each day is "exponential growth?" Here's Italy's plot:

https://imgur.com/a/pyOUcOn

Last two days, their growth rate has been 8 percent over the previous number. Exponential growth is a constantly doubling, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc. Or are you defining exponential growth differently? Or are you plotting it on a longer timeline? And their growth rate day over day has declined over the past week.

!0% growth in the number of detection per day (10, 11, 12.1, etc) is textbook exponential growth. We're growing faster than that rate right now, which just means its faster exponential growth, but even at 10% a day there is still a doubling time. That does not occur with linear growth.

[slick'81]

Exactly! How can we expect similar results when our testing is a complete joke right now? Maybe warm weather will help? Really!?

[MannyIsGod]

If it's what I'm thinking of, Mid posted it and Medium pulled it down ...

He's got two posts I have read that are sound with pretty easy math.

https://medium.com/@donnellymjd/covid-19-nyc-should-brace-for-impact-and-shut-down-now-a7c62afac81e
https://medium.com/@donnellymjd/covid-19-new-york-will-be-the-next-italy-but-doesnt-have-to-be-54a5c8137d42

[midnightpulp]

Oh 100% that the goal is to slow the doubling time. But nothing we've done yet is reflected in the data for most places across the US since the lag time for the data is weeks. Plus, we're not doing what SK did. Not even close, so its really not realistic to expect results on the same magnitude they have achieved.

My feeling here is that they're are regions that can naturally slow the doubling because of the different variables at play, and then when you add measures (stay-at-home, testing, social distancing, etc) on top of that, you won't get a runaway scenario. I don't see how anyone can disagree that population density is just naturally a big driver of growth. I won't even appeal to the climate argument.

I'm not suggesting Texas open for business because they have a thin population density, maybe a favorable climate (if the warm/humid theory holds), etc, I just have a problem extrapolating Italy's scenario to a totally different environment.

[MannyIsGod]

Assuming the goal is to simply avoid the shutdown of the healthcare system then its possible our current actions will allow for us to avoid that outcome. But none of the current data will help you know if that is the case currently. If the outcome is to be South Korea, then forget it. We're not doing what they did and we WILL have more spread than they did because of it. You can't put in a fraction of the effort and expect the same results.

[hater]

Exactly! How can we expect similar results when our testing is a complete joke right now? Maybe warm weather will help? Really!?

:lmao its crazy ppl get carried away by numbers while ignoring the physical differences :lmao

SK did great but we are not doing anything close

and Italy actually shut down earlier than we did. which means we will most likely get wrecked. onoy advantage we have is people can run away from hotspots to other states. Italiand and Spaniars are well fucked on that front

[MannyIsGod]

My feeling here is that they're are regions that can naturally slow the doubling because of the different variables at play, and then when you add measures (stay-at-home, testing, social distancing, etc) on top of that, you won't get a runaway scenario. I don't see how anyone can disagree that population density is just naturally a big driver of growth. I won't even appeal to the climate argument.

I'm not suggesting Texas open for business because they have a thin population density, maybe a favorable climate (if the warm/humid theory holds), etc, I just have a problem extrapolating Italy's scenario to a totally different environment.

Population density obviously drives easier transmission. But most people who live in Texas live in a population densities comparable to Lombardy. Its not NYC there. So if Population Density is a big variable (and it almost certainly is) then the 2nd worst outbreak on Earth (NYC should be considered the worst) occurred in a place with comparable population densities to most of the places in Texas where people live.

[hater]

Assuming the goal is to simply avoid the shutdown of the healthcare system then its possible our current actions will allow for us to avoid that outcome. But none of the current data will help you know if that is the case currently. If the outcome is to be South Korea, then forget it. We're not doing what they did and we WILL have more spread than they did because of it. You can't put in a fraction of the effort and expect the same results.

you avoid the shutdown and millions lives are lost

plain and simple. now is that better for the nation in the long run? some may say

I disagree because too many unknowns, herd immunity might work, we might get a cure, we might get a vaccine but we might not

the smartest thing we can do is gain time and we gain time by flattening the curve

[midnightpulp]

!0% growth in the number of detection per day (10, 11, 12.1, etc) is textbook exponential growth. We're growing faster than that rate right now, which just means its faster exponential growth, but even at 10% a day there is still a doubling time. That does not occur with linear growth.

But what if testing increases by 100 percent a day? It's also worth nothing that appealing to strict case number doesn't necessarily reveal the severity of the situation. If we double in cases tomorrow, but all those cases were just "mild" and can be easily treated at home, it won't be the problem as perceived. I know that's the ideal, but my point is that health and disposition of the subjects will play a factor. Italy has one of the oldest populations in the world, heavy smokers, the region that got hit is famous for its pollution, and, 99.2 percent of the +65 cases in Italy survived if they didn't have a preexisting condition. We're not exactly the healthiest country, but these are also things to consider.

[MannyIsGod]

Lets compare them.

Lombardy - 1100 per SQ mile

San Antonio - 3323 per SQ mile (Bexar county at 1500 or so)

Houston 3600, Harris County 2700

You can keep going for Texas and its going to be much of the same story.

Do you see why pointing to population density as a limiting factor in Texas isn't a good thing?

[midnightpulp]

Population density obviously drives easier transmission. But most people who live in Texas live in a population densities comparable to Lombardy. Its not NYC there. So if Population Density is a big variable (and it almost certainly is) then the 2nd worst outbreak on Earth (NYC should be considered the worst) occurred in a place with comparable population densities to most of the places in Texas where people live.

The Lombardy region is also home to a very old population who live in one of the most polluted cities in Europe. Italy also has the multigenerations under one roof tradition more than most. Italy's mortality rate from the flu is 10x higher than it is in the US. So we can't discount susceptibility.

[vy65]

Population density obviously drives easier transmission. But most people who live in Texas live in a population densities comparable to Lombardy. Its not NYC there. So if Population Density is a big variable (and it almost certainly is) then the 2nd worst outbreak on Earth (NYC should be considered the worst) occurred in a place with comparable population densities to most of the places in Texas where people live.

I'll nit with you here, but Milan's population density is 7,000 km2 while Houston is 1,650 km2. I'd compare Texas to Lombardy, but I don't think that's really fair.

[DarrinS]

!0% growth in the number of detection per day (10, 11, 12.1, etc) is textbook exponential growth. We're growing faster than that rate right now, which just means its faster exponential growth, but even at 10% a day there is still a doubling time. That does not occur with linear growth.


Aren't the numbers just reflecting the ramped up testing and identification?

[MannyIsGod]

But what if testing increases by 100 percent a day? It's also worth nothing that appealing to strict case number doesn't necessarily reveal the severity of the situation. If we double in cases tomorrow, but all those cases were just "mild" and can be easily treated at home, it won't be the problem as perceived. I know that's the ideal, but my point is that health and disposition of the subjects will play a factor. Italy has one of the oldest populations in the world, heavy smokers, the region that got hit is famous for its pollution, and, 99.2 percent of the +65 cases in Italy survived if they didn't have a preexisting condition. We're not exactly the healthiest country, but these are also things to consider.

I'm not going to make the argument the US is healthier than Italy. They on average live 4 years longer than Americans. Thats a big fucking difference. Something like 70% of American adults have a major preexisting condition.

Increasing the tests by 100% a day would mean the entire population gets tested very quickly. We're not doing that. The testing is going to reach a plateau. It doesn't mater if you test the entire population of a country every day. If you get an increase in the number of cases each day by a specific percentage that is troubling AF.

Look man, I'm not trying to be some kind of doomsday prophet banging on a bell yelling the end is nigh, but we are in a bad situation right now and the data fully supports that this is bad. Not sure what to tell you.

[TSA]

1242478351861919744

boom

After learning that the state's stockpile of medical equipment had 16,000 fewer ventilators than New Yorkers would need in a severe pandemic, Gov. Andrew Cuomo came to a fork in the road in 2015. He could have chosen to buy more ventilators. Instead, he asked his health commissioner, Howard Zucker to assemble a task force and draft rules for rationing the ventilators they already had.

That task force came up with rules that will be imposed when ventilators run short. Patients assigned a red code will have the highest access, and other patients will be assigned green, yellow or blue (the worst) depending on a "triage officer's" decision. In truth, a death officer. Let's not sugarcoat it. It won't be up to your own doctor.

Cuomo could have purchased the additional 16,000 needed ventilators for $36,000 apiece or a total of $576 million in 2015. It's a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle "Buffalo Billion" solar panel factory. When it comes to state budget priorities, spending half a percent of the budget on ventilators is a no brainer.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/03/18/new_yorks_ventilator_rationing_plan_142685.html

:lol boom

[MannyIsGod]

I'll nit with you here, but Milan's population density is 7,000 km2 while Houston is 1,650 km2. I'd compare Texas to Lombardy, but I don't think that's really fair.

Yeah but lets say best case scenario that the population density that was present in Lombardy wasn't a limiting factor. We know this because of the level of outbreak they achieved there right? So if the popoulation densities of Texas cities are higher, I'm not sure how you can make a case that our population density will save us.

[vy65]

Yeah but lets say best case scenario that the population density that was present in Lombardy wasn't a limiting factor. We know this because of the level of outbreak they achieved there right? So if the popoulation densities of Texas cities are higher, I'm not sure how you can make a case that our population density will save us.

Sorry, I don't think I'm tracking with you here. Population densities in the cities of Lombardy, i.e., Milan, are higher than those here, i.e., Houston. Higher density --> more rapid transmission and lower density --> less transmission.

[MannyIsGod]

Aren't the numbers just reflecting the ramped up testing and identification?


We're detecting more cases because we're testing more. And this obviously does have an impact on the rate - especially if you just look at a couple of days. But we know we're only seeing a fraction of the total cases, and the increases are exactly what you'd expect to see in a distribution that is growing exponentially. The question is the testing growth outpacing the spread of the virus? I guess thats possible, but we'd know really soon after the testing ramp up because you see an initial growth, then a drop. We did see that for one day last week, but afterwards its just been the same 20-30% increase each day. Each day that you get with that same rate the more confidence in it people should have.

Furthermore the rate is similar to places around the world that had more testing form the get go. So it fits what you would expect to see.

[hater]

:lmao UK and US making same mistakes

this is gonna be a bloodbath

https://twitter.com/tweetonlondon/status/1242571533014323200?s=21

[MannyIsGod]

Sorry, I don't think I'm tracking with you here. Population densities in the cities of Lombardy, i.e., Milan, are higher than those here, i.e., Houston. Higher density --> more rapid transmission and lower density --> less transmission.

Milan is only 70 sq miles and only has a about 1 million population. Its a tiny tiny fraction of Lombardy. Houston's area is much larger, I think an order of magnitude at least (600+ sq miles). If the outbreak were confined to Milan I'd agree with you, but its not. Its in the whole region.

[slick'81]

Aren't the numbers just reflecting the ramped up testing and identification?

what do you consider ramped up?

[boutons_deux]

experts say every detected person has infect 2 to 2.5 others

Trash says 37K die every year due to flu,

so let's everybody pack the churches Easter Sunday and

"resurrect" America by everybody going back to work Easter Monday

(subtext: 0Ks or 100Ks will die by coronavirus, but the economy must be back and strong so I can be reelected)

[midnightpulp]

After learning that the state's stockpile of medical equipment had 16,000 fewer ventilators than New Yorkers would need in a severe pandemic, Gov. Andrew Cuomo came to a fork in the road in 2015. He could have chosen to buy more ventilators. Instead, he asked his health commissioner, Howard Zucker to assemble a task force and draft rules for rationing the ventilators they already had.

That task force came up with rules that will be imposed when ventilators run short. Patients assigned a red code will have the highest access, and other patients will be assigned green, yellow or blue (the worst) depending on a "triage officer's" decision. In truth, a death officer. Let's not sugarcoat it. It won't be up to your own doctor.

Cuomo could have purchased the additional 16,000 needed ventilators for $36,000 apiece or a total of $576 million in 2015. It's a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle "Buffalo Billion" solar panel factory. When it comes to state budget priorities, spending half a percent of the budget on ventilators is a no brainer.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/03/18/new_yorks_ventilator_rationing_plan_142685.html

:lol boom

Don't care about the political football D vs. R crap, this event should serve as an object lesson going forward for everyone on the political spectrum. Dems need to quit throwing money at identity politics shit and certain environmental frivolities (not all of them are a waste of money) and Repubs need to stop fetishizing the military, which leads to a cool trillion every year to buy what are essentially big boy toys and fund bases in countries that don't need defense (UK, Germany, etc). The politician who gets the idea to fold pandemic response into national defense and cut funding for shit like F35s and aircraft carriers and vow to build the greatest healthcare system the world has ever seen will get my vote, D or R. The brown man with the broken AK47 just isn't worth worrying about anymore, although I understand many get their dick hard when the U.S. "shocks and awes!"

[spurraider21]

:lmao UK and US making same mistakes

this is gonna be a bloodbath
bend over, i'll show you a bloodbath

[spurraider21]

Don't care about the political football D vs. R crap, this event should serve as an object lesson going forward for everyone on the political spectrum. Dems need to quit throwing money at identity politics shit and certain environmental frivolities (not all of them are a waste of money) and Repubs need to stop fetishizing the military, which leads to a cool trillion every year to buy what are essentially big boy toys and fund bases in countries that don't need defense (UK, Germany, etc). The politician who gets the idea to fold pandemic response into national defense and cut funding for shit like F35s and aircraft carriers and vow to build the greatest healthcare system the world has ever seen will get my vote, D or R. The brown man with the broken AK47 just isn't worth worrying about anymore, although I understand many get their dick hard when the U.S. "shocks and awes!"
what does identity politics have to do with healthcare

[hater]

this is bad nigas :wow

I called it but this is bad

https://twitter.com/moray1959/status/1242575297582485504?s=21

[DarrinS]

We're detecting more cases because we're testing more. And this obviously does have an impact on the rate - especially if you just look at a couple of days. But we know we're only seeing a fraction of the total cases, and the increases are exactly what you'd expect to see in a distribution that is growing exponentially. The question is the testing growth outpacing the spread of the virus? I guess thats possible, but we'd know really soon after the testing ramp up because you see an initial growth, then a drop. We did see that for one day last week, but afterwards its just been the same 20-30% increase each day. Each day that you get with that same rate the more confidence in it people should have.

Furthermore the rate is similar to places around the world that had more testing form the get go. So it fits what you would expect to see.


I think the true growth rate is burried in the ramped up testing numbers and difficult to determine at this point.

[Mark Celibate]

I don't see how 10 percent increases (in case rate) each day is "exponential growth?" Here's Italy's plot:

https://imgur.com/a/pyOUcOn

Last two days, their growth rate has been 8 percent over the previous number. Exponential growth is a constantly doubling, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc. Or are you defining exponential growth differently? Or are you plotting it on a longer timeline? And their growth rate day over day has declined over the past week.


Not necessarily, just means that the percent increase over each interval is around the same. The math is that w/e daily percent increase that is (let's say 13%), the # of new cases each day will just keep climbing since, as the total cases increases, then 13% of that total case number also goes up. Although you probably already know that part. Technically, if it were a 10% increase each day that would be exponential growth.

However, Italy's percent increase appears to be declining based on the link you posted

[DarrinS]

what does identity politics have to do with healthcare

Exactly

[Reck]

https://twitter.com/RyanGirdusky/status/1242475134717513730?s=20

:lmao

Gotcha question....and he failed.

When you are asked a retarded question like “is the cure worse than the problem” and you don’t tell that person to fuck off with that said stupid question you’re doing a bad job.

[vy65]

Milan is only 70 sq miles and only has a about 1 million population. Its a tiny tiny fraction of Lombardy. Houston's area is much larger, I think an order of magnitude at least (600+ sq miles). If the outbreak were confined to Milan I'd agree with you, but its not. Its in the whole region.

I'm trying to find something that breaks down Lombardy's cases by city, but can't find anything. Have you?

[midnightpulp]

what does identity politics have to do with healthcare

From the Green New Deal outline:


The Green New Deal is not only a major step towards ending unemployment for good, but also a tool to fight the corporate takeover of our democracy and exploitation of the poor and people of color.

What's that even mean? And the money here is spent on a bunch of sociologists to figure out "solutions." Like, there shouldn't be tax payer funding in studying how implicit microaggressions impact the workplace or some other field. I'm a bleeding heart, but this is just :lol

https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1420168&HistoricalAwards=false

[vy65]

From the Green New Deal outline:



What's that even mean? And the money here is spent on a bunch of sociologists to figure out "solutions." Like, there shouldn't be tax payer funding in studying how implicit microaggressions impact the workplace or some other field. I'm a bleeding heart, but this is just :lol

https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1420168&HistoricalAwards=false

I'm agnostic on all this, but I think the counter is to look at what the environmental justice movement is all about.

[MannyIsGod]

I think the true growth rate is burried in the ramped up testing numbers and difficult to determine at this point.

Well if you're right we'll see a drop before long. But everyday we see growth at this rate is a bad sign.

[spurraider21]

From the Green New Deal outline:



What's that even mean? And the money here is spent on a bunch of sociologists to figure out "solutions." Like, there shouldn't be tax payer funding in studying how implicit microaggressions impact the workplace or some other field. I'm a bleeding heart, but this is just :lol

https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1420168&HistoricalAwards=false
again, what does this have to do with healthcare?

[Thread]

Gotcha question....and he failed.

When you are asked a retarded question like “is the cure worse than the problem” and you don’t tell that person to fuck off with that said stupid question you’re doing a bad job.

Biden can dish it, he just can't take it.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm trying to find something that breaks down Lombardy's cases by city, but can't find anything. Have you?

Nah, I haen't found anything that specific. Let me know if you do. If its mostly confined to Milan then I would grant your point but the fact that they've always talked about the region as opposed to the major city there kind of bodes against that.

[midnightpulp]

I'm agnostic on all this, but I think the counter is to look at what the environmental justice movement is all about.

I'm okay with studying everything and anything, but I think studying the impact of microaggressions is something that should come from a private/university grant. If someone came to me and said give me a dollar to fund something like that, I would just laugh. That 500 grand could've bought 10 ventilators for New York.

[Will Hunting]

Biden can dish it, he just can't take it.
Not sure if he can even dish it anymore. People don’t realize the old Joe Biden that was great at dishing it is gone.

[midnightpulp]

again, what does this have to do with healthcare?

Tax dollars funded that study. Those tax dollars could've been better spent on healthcare. If the NSF is going to fund frivolous junk like that, then their funding should be cut, meaning more funding for healthcare.

[vy65]

Nah, I haen't found anything that specific. Let me know if you do. If its mostly confined to Milan then I would grant your point but the fact that they've always talked about the region as opposed to the major city there kind of bodes against that.

:tu

[midnightpulp]

Well if you're right we'll see a drop before long. But everyday we see growth at this rate is a bad sign.

I guess we'll see in two weeks. I'll leave with this. Places outside New York will get hit some. Case numbers will rise. But I'm just not buying places like Texas, Florida, etc are on Italy and New York's path for all the reasons mentioned. But again, we'll see.

[MannyIsGod]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1242582356499857409

[spurraider21]

Tax dollars funded that study. Those tax dollars could've been better spent on healthcare. If the NSF is going to fund frivolous junk like that, then their funding should be cut, meaning more funding for healthcare.
that's quite the stretch... just seems like you wanted to rant about random things that bother you, which is fine. just surprised you didnt throw in safe spaces in there

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1242487504747614211?s=19

[boutons_deux]

March 25.

“The economy can recover.

Once a person is dead, that’s it,” :lol WTF

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina

told our White House correspondent Peter Nicholas, (http://links.e.theatlantic.com/ctt?kn=32&ms=MjMwNDc4NTAS1&r=NjMwMjkwNjYyOTQ2S0&b=0&j=MTcwMTM5NDI3MQS2&mt=1&rt=0)

in response to the president’s suggestion that the country reopen soon.

-- email from The Atlantic

[midnightpulp]

that's quite the stretch... just seems like you wanted to rant about random things that bother you, which is fine. just surprised you didnt throw in safe spaces in there

Why is that a stretch? 500K buys 10 ventilators. How important are those right now? :lol Trying to "Philo" about funding microaggressions. It's pseudoscience. I'm sure you know what a "microaggression" is, right? It is something implied, not concrete. And what is and isn't a microaggression is determined by individual perception. Like if you ask a tall black guy if he's good at basketball. You might be inquiring because he's tall, but he might think you're inquiring because he's black (I also find it funny that anyone would be insulted by what is essentially a complement).

[boutons_deux]

And after the World Health Organization announced (http://links.e.theatlantic.com/ctt?kn=35&ms=MjMwNDc4NTAS1&r=NjMwMjkwNjYyOTQ2S0&b=0&j=MTcwMTM5NDI3MQS2&mt=1&rt=0) that the mortality rate for the novel coronavirus is about 3.4 percent,

Trump swatted away the claim based on his “hunch” (http://links.e.theatlantic.com/ctt?kn=48&ms=MjMwNDc4NTAS1&r=NjMwMjkwNjYyOTQ2S0&b=0&j=MTcwMTM5NDI3MQS2&mt=1&rt=0):lol infallible!

that “only a fraction of 1 percent” will die from the disease.

-- email from The Atlantic

[spurraider21]

Why is that a stretch? 500K buys 10 ventilators. How important are those right now? :lol Trying to "Philo" about funding microaggressions. It's pseudoscience. I'm sure you know what a "microaggression" is, right? It is something implied, not concrete. And what is and isn't a microaggression is determined by individual perception. Like if you ask a tall black guy if he's good at basketball. You might be inquiring because he's tall, but he might think you're inquiring because he's black (I also find it funny that anyone would be insulted by what is essentially a complement).
you can see my post history mocking the concept of microaggressions. i dont care for them. i just think it was strange to bring up identity politics as it relates to this crisis

if you can claim anything is tangentially related to healthcare because they involve some kind of government funding then i think its just being disingenuous :lol

[spurraider21]

:lol you specifically said "this event" should serve as a lesson for it

[midnightpulp]

you can see my post history mocking the concept of microaggressions. i dont care for them. i just think it was strange to bring up identity politics as it relates to this crisis

Point was that we should cut any frivolous government funding, and I think most defense spending is frivolous. A base in Germany doesn't help Americans here, for instance. Some might argue that having 800 bases around the world will hasten our response against a threat, but I'm not necessarily concerned with goat herders and their 1970s Soviet hand me downs.

[midnightpulp]

:lol you specifically said "this event" should serve as a lesson for it

It should serve as a lesson to spend our tax dollars wisely. F35s and funding microaggressions aren't a wise use of our money.

[spurraider21]

It should serve as a lesson to spend our tax dollars wisely. F35s and funding microaggressions aren't a wise use of our money.
i think the scale of microaggression studies as it relates to the budget isnt really worth bringing up unless you felt like a need to rant at "both sides" to maintain an appearance of impartiality

its like when republicans defend tax cuts by saying we should defund tiny things like NPR or the national endowment for the arts

[vy65]

nvm

[vy65]

nvm

[midnightpulp]

i think the scale of microaggression studies as it relates to the budget isnt really worth bringing up unless you felt like a need to rant at "both sides" to maintain an appearance of impartiality

its like when republicans defend tax cuts by saying we should defund tiny things like NPR

I also brought up spending on green solutions. Yes, curbing emissions is important, but what's more likely to harm us in the next 10 years? Climate change or another pandemic? Don't think this is the last one. Now I'm not saying cut all green spending, but it shouldn't take overall priority as an existential threat. I don't want to even think about MERS2 pandemic. Or a Bird Flu pandemic. The world's top virologists have been warning governments for years (Larry Brilliant, etc).

[hater]

:lmao Orangegutan is still comparing seasonal flu to Coronavirus :lmao

:lmao fucking chimp

[baseline bum]

I just don't understand how Japan isn't getting raped by this.

[SnakeBoy]

“The toxic ingredient they consumed was not the medication form of chloroquine, used to treat malaria in humans. Instead, it was an ingredient listed on a parasite treatment for fish.”

So much misinformation by the press. Chloroquine phosphate used to treat protozoan infections in fish is the same chloroquine phosphate used to treat humans. There is no tropical fish pharmaceutical company making special chloroquine phosphate for fish, no money in it.

Human dose is one 500mg tablet which contains 300mg of chloroquine base, the other 200 milligrams are compounds used to hold the tablet together.

This lady said she and her husband took a teaspoon of pure chloroquine phosphate powder each. That's about 4.9 grams.

2 grams of chloroquine phosphate taken at once may be fatal. Over 5 grams taken at one time is always fatal without treatment.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1678465/?page=1

This is my post from page 24 almost a month ago...


Dude on ebay has been selling chloroquine powder for fish treatment. He's keeps selling out
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Chloroquine-Phosphate-Treats-marine-ich-velvet-brook-AQUARIUM-USE-ONLY/254458306205?hash=item3b3ee59e9d:m:mi7PuGoNVdf_TOf O9flUMag

Broke preppers are gonna fuck themselves up eating that powder.

[vy65]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1242582356499857409

New York: First Case: March 1.

Tennessee:
First Case: March 5
As of March 24: 11,184 tests run total
Four days Behind New York: March 5 (Tennessee) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (Tennessee) vs. March 19 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 19: 212/million
Tennessee cases per million as of March 24: 98/million
New York has 2.16x more

Florida:
First Case: March 1
As of March 24: 15,547 tests run total
Same timeline as New York
New York cases per million as of March 24: 1,313/million
Florida cases per million as of March 24: 66/million citizens
New York has 19.0x more

Georgia:
First case: March 3
As of March 24: 5,484 tests run total
Two days Behind New York: March 3 (Georgia) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (Georgia) vs. March 22 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 22: 776/million
Georgia cases per million as of March 24: 98/million
New York has 7.9x more

South Carolina:
First case: March 6
As of March 24: 2,310 tests run total
Five days Behind New York: March 6 (South Carolina) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (South Carolina) vs. March 19 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 19: 212/million
South Carolina cases per million as of March 24: 59/million
New York has 3.6x more

[vy65]

I picked those states with the first case as close New York's as possible. Silver's comparison is not accurate nor fair.

[Blake]

Biden can dish it, he just can't take it.

Oh like Trump

[Blake]

So much misinformation by the press.

Link where you're seeing the misinformation by the press?

[Thread]

Oh like Trump

Exactly. Trump takes it & dishes it.

[monosylab1k]

Exactly. Trump takes it & dishes it.

:lmao thinking Trump takes it. You break all your rules to justify supporting this ass clown, Cubby. It’s sad.

[Nathan89]

Based on my quick trip to the grocery store:

-Hand shake greeting
-Multiple people wiping their face
-There was a line to get in the store and people didn't maintain proper spacing
-While I'm getting my bell pepper some dumbass lady comes right up next to me
-A little petri dish out-of-control child running around
-Self-checkout employee gets too close to every customer that passes
-In general people don't seem to try to give space. Like if you go down a aisle they'll make zero effort to hug the other side. They are just fine going down the middle.

So countries that have citizens that aren't absolute morons are going to see better results than America. Japan probably falls in that category.

[slick'81]

:lmao Orangegutan is still comparing seasonal flu to Coronavirus :lmao

:lmao fucking chimp


The dmb ass said the flu will kill 50k, and its only at 23k, and the flu season is basically almost over

[SnakeBoy]

Link where you're seeing the misinformation by the press?

Pick any media account of the story. All I have read are all calling it a fish tank cleaner and claiming it's a different chemical. It is not. It's used to treat protozoan infections in aquarium fish. Malaria is a protozoan. It's the same shit.

They overdosed themselves.

[Thread]

:lmao thinking Trump takes it. You break all your rules to justify supporting this ass clown, Cubby. It’s sad.

He does take it. Then he takes vengeance, aka dishes it.

[slick'81]

Based on my quick trip to the grocery store:

-Hand shake greeting
-Multiple people wiping their face
-There was a line to get in the store and people didn't maintain proper spacing
-While I'm getting my bell pepper some dumbass lady comes right up next to me
-A little petri dish out-of-control child running around
-Self-checkout employee gets too close to every customer that passes
-In general people don't seem to try to give space. Like if you go down a aisle they'll make zero effort to hug the other side. They are just fine going down the middle.

So countries that have citizens that aren't absolute morons are going to see better results than America. Japan probably falls in that category.


Up until just a few days ago people were still piling into dunkin doughnuts in sa, and lining up to stuff their fat faces with doughnuts and ice cream. Yeah social distancing is working

[midnightpulp]

New York: First Case: March 1.

Tennessee:
First Case: March 5
As of March 24: 11,184 tests run total
Four days Behind New York: March 5 (Tennessee) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (Tennessee) vs. March 19 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 19: 212/million
Tennessee cases per million as of March 24: 98/million
New York has 2.16x more

Florida:
First Case: March 1
As of March 24: 15,547 tests run total
Same timeline as New York
New York cases per million as of March 24: 1,313/million
Florida cases per million as of March 24: 66/million citizens
New York has 19.0x more

Georgia:
First case: March 3
As of March 24: 5,484 tests run total
Two days Behind New York: March 3 (Georgia) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (Georgia) vs. March 22 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 22: 776/million
Georgia cases per million as of March 24: 98/million
New York has 7.9x more

South Carolina:
First case: March 6
As of March 24: 2,310 tests run total
Five days Behind New York: March 6 (South Carolina) vs. March 1 (New York)
Compare March 24 (South Carolina) vs. March 19 (New York).
New York cases per million as of March 19: 212/million
South Carolina cases per million as of March 24: 59/million
New York has 3.6x more

Yeah, it's more poor extrapolation on the part of the doomsday dayers. Manny's response to this has been that we don't know what each state's patient zero did when they first got infected. It New York's patient zero went to a crowded night club after he got off the plane vs. Florida's patient zero who went home, New York's progression would take off much quicker, despite it being the same date.

But I think it has to do with relative population densities, weather, and the mass transit factor than anything else, i.e. New York's patient zero took the subway home, infects 10 more who take the subway the next day, and these 10 infect 10 different cashiers, bartenders, waiters etc. Florida's patient zero drives home. That difference between just taking the subway home vs. driving home after getting off the plane from Wuhan is big.

Florida was still doing their spring break thing, though. That was a week ago. Haven't seen any explosion yet.

[hater]

US death rate rising now at 1.4%

looking like young Italy tbqh

not good

[ElNono]

After learning that the state's stockpile of medical equipment had 16,000 fewer ventilators than New Yorkers would need in a severe pandemic, Gov. Andrew Cuomo came to a fork in the road in 2015. He could have chosen to buy more ventilators. Instead, he asked his health commissioner, Howard Zucker to assemble a task force and draft rules for rationing the ventilators they already had.

That task force came up with rules that will be imposed when ventilators run short. Patients assigned a red code will have the highest access, and other patients will be assigned green, yellow or blue (the worst) depending on a "triage officer's" decision. In truth, a death officer. Let's not sugarcoat it. It won't be up to your own doctor.

Cuomo could have purchased the additional 16,000 needed ventilators for $36,000 apiece or a total of $576 million in 2015. It's a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle "Buffalo Billion" solar panel factory. When it comes to state budget priorities, spending half a percent of the budget on ventilators is a no brainer.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/03/18/new_yorks_ventilator_rationing_plan_142685.html

:lol boom

:lol why not link to the actual original, unedited article:

https://nypost.com/2020/03/19/we-didnt-have-to-have-ventilator-shortage-leaders-chose-not-to-prep-for-pandemic/

which also concedes that...

To be fair, governments everywhere stockpiled too little. Washington didn’t do much better: The federal Strategic National Stockpile is undersupplied to meet the coronavirus emergency.

[vy65]

Yeah, it's more poor extrapolation on the part of the doomsday dayers. Manny's response to this has been that we don't know what each state's patient zero did when they first got infected. It New York's patient zero went to a crowded night club after he got off the plane vs. Florida's patient zero who went home, New York's progression would take off much quicker, despite it being the same date.

But I think it has to do with relative population densities, weather, and the mass transit factor than anything else, i.e. New York's patient zero took the subway home, infects 10 more who take the subway the next day, and these 10 infect 10 different cashiers, bartenders, waiters etc. Florida's patient zero drives home. That difference between just taking the subway home vs. driving home after getting off the plane from Wuhan is big.

Florida was still doing their spring break thing, though. That was a week ago. Haven't seen any explosion yet.

Texas:
First Case: March 4
As of March 24: 11,167 tests run total
Three days behind New York: March 4 (Texas) vs. March (1) New York)
Compare March 24 (Texas) vs. March 21 (New York)
New York cases per million as of March 21:
Texas cases per million as of March 24: 15/million
New York cases per million as of March 21: 529/million
New York has 35.3x more cases than Texas


Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo said it is believed that the Montgomery County coronavirus patient, identified only as a man in his 40s who lives in Montgomery County, attended the barbecue cookoff at the Rodeo on Friday, Feb. 28. She said epidemiologists are working to retrace the patient’s steps and determine whether the patient had symptoms when attending the event.

According to the rodeo attendance numbers, there were 73,433 people who attended the “World Championship Barb-B-Que Contest,” on Friday, Feb. 28. The total attendance numbers for that day were 77,632.

Officials said people who came into close contact with the Montgomery County patient and live in Montgomery County have been placed in a 14-day quarantine. People who live outside Montgomery County who came into contact with the patient are being forwarded to their local health departments for guidance, officials said.

https://www.click2houston.com/rodeo/2020/03/11/houston-rodeo-canceled-amid-growing-concerns-over-coronavirus/

A confirmed positive case attended the Houston Rodeo Cook Off. He was in close proximity to approximately 73,433. This is what the rodeo looks like:

https://365thingsinhouston.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/top-15-event-happenings-march-2018-696x407.jpg

This happened almost two weeks ago - March 11. We know that symptoms develop between 2 and 9 days, with an average of 5.2. That would be March 16 -- exactly a week ago.

There has not been the explosion in cases you'd expect to see in a situation where a confirmed positive case was in close proximity to over 70,000 people. Draw conclusions for yourselves ...

[ChumpDumper]

:lol why not link to the actual original, unedited article:

https://nypost.com/2020/03/19/we-didnt-have-to-have-ventilator-shortage-leaders-chose-not-to-prep-for-pandemic/

which also concedes that...

To be fair, governments everywhere stockpiled too little. Washington didn’t do much better: The federal Strategic National Stockpile is undersupplied to meet the coronavirus emergency.:lol boom

And states have to balance their budgets every year for the most part.

[ElNono]

I just don't understand how Japan isn't getting raped by this.

Olympics canceled... we'll see if the numbers skyrocket now, or they have a secret sauce...

[ElNono]

crossed 700 dead in the US... almost 54k cases. NY is roughly half of that, but it's everywhere... NJ: 17, Cali: 11, Michigan: 9, Louisiana: 11, Georgia: 12, etc

[Winehole23]

:lmao Orangegutan is still comparing seasonal flu to Coronavirus :lmao

:lmao fucking chimpBy Easter he'll be back to calling it a hoax and a coup attempt and half this board will tag along.

[midnightpulp]

Texas:
First Case: March 4
As of March 24: 11,167 tests run total
Three days behind New York: March 4 (Texas) vs. March (1) New York)
Compare March 24 (Texas) vs. March 21 (New York)
New York cases per million as of March 21:
Texas cases per million as of March 24: 15/million
New York cases per million as of March 21: 529/million
New York has 35.3x more cases than Texas



https://www.click2houston.com/rodeo/2020/03/11/houston-rodeo-canceled-amid-growing-concerns-over-coronavirus/

A confirmed positive case attended the Houston Rodeo Cook Off. He was in close proximity to approximately 73,433. This is what the rodeo looks like:

https://365thingsinhouston.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/top-15-event-happenings-march-2018-696x407.jpg

This happened almost two weeks ago - March 11. We know that symptoms develop between 2 and 9 days, with an average of 5.2. That would be March 16 -- exactly a week ago.

There has not been the explosion in cases you'd expect to see in a situation where a confirmed positive case was in close proximity to over 70,000 people. Draw conclusions for yourselves ...

Do you know how warm it was that day? That's like perfect transmission conditions, but yeah, no explosion. However, many feel where the virus has its best chance of transmissibility is in close contact situations. Not like shaking hands close contact, but being in close proximity for hours or days.


Dr. Paul Auwaerter, the Clinical Director for the Division of Infectious Diseases at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine echoes this finding,

“If you have a COVID-19 patient in your household, your risk of developing the infection is about 10%….If you were casually exposed to the virus in the workplace (e.g., you were not locked up in conference room for six hours with someone who was infected [like a hospital]), your chance of infection is about 0.5%”

[Winehole23]

He's already laid the groundwork to pin responsibilty for the recession on the cities cities and states, accuusations of disloyalty to the country aren't far off.

[midnightpulp]

crossed 700 dead in the US... almost 54k cases. NY is roughly half of that, but it's everywhere... NJ: 17, Cali: 11, Michigan: 9, Louisiana: 11, Georgia: 12, etc

I would say Germany is handling their situation very well. 159 deaths/33K cases for a .05 mortality rate (bad flu season). Our population is 4x the size. Per capita: US: 175, Germany: 159. We each reported our first case around the same time.

[spurraider21]

I would say Germany is handling their situation very well. 159 deaths/33K cases for a .05 mortality rate (bad flu season). Our population is 4x the size. Per capita: US: 175, Germany: 159. We each reported our first case around the same time.
i could very well be wrong because i'm not read up on it well, but posters here were saying germany has been somewhat monkeying around with the reported deaths... citing pneumonia as the cause of death when it started wit covid, etc

[ElNono]

I would say Germany is handling their situation very well. 159 deaths/33K cases for a .05 mortality rate (bad flu season). Our population is 4x the size. Per capita: US: 175, Germany: 159. We each reported our first case around the same time.

Not saying we're doing bad, just pointing out that while NY might be in the lead here, this thing is everywhere. Prolly gonna get worse before it gets better.

[ElNono]

And now we're up to 779 deaths just like that... shit... definitely another record day here in the US.

EDIT: gonna wait for worldometers to confirm, but shit

[ElNono]

Looks like NY is breaking at the seams... 100+ today...

[TSA]

:lol why not link to the actual original, unedited article:

https://nypost.com/2020/03/19/we-didnt-have-to-have-ventilator-shortage-leaders-chose-not-to-prep-for-pandemic/

which also concedes that...

To be fair, governments everywhere stockpiled too little. Washington didn’t do much better: The federal Strategic National Stockpile is undersupplied to meet the coronavirus emergency.

Besides this “It's a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle "Buffalo Billion" solar panel factory” what are you seeing that’s edited? The RCP article is attributed to the exact same other and includes every line the NYP article does.

Cuomo made a poor decision in 2015 and is trying to blame others. He needs to shut the fuck up. He’d been doing a good job up until this point.

[ChumpDumper]

People congregating at Zilker Park like it's a holiday. Oy.

[ElNono]

Besides this “It's a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle "Buffalo Billion" solar panel factory” what are you seeing that’s edited? The RCP article is attributed to the exact same other and includes every line the NYP article does.

Cuomo made a poor decision in 2015 and is trying to blame others. He needs to shut the fuck up. He’d been doing a good job up until this point.

What I quoted has been left out, for some reason that's apparently fairly partisan, lol

Hey look, I don't like Cuomo, stated so in another thread a few days ago, but nobody saw this thing coming in '15. And we're here now, NY clearly needs all the help they can get. Frankly, it's pretty clear the buck stops with him.

[midnightpulp]

Looks like NY is breaking at the seams... 100+ today...

I feared for them. As I've said many times, check all the boxes. The "brightside" is we're not seeing similar explosions in the other major states, which will hopefully mean other states can potentially aid New York.

[ChumpDumper]

1242611136488488962

[midnightpulp]

Looks like NY is breaking at the seams... 100+ today...

I'll give you another bright side. New York's death total didn't increase from Sunday to Monday, so that "sudden spike" was probably delayed information finally being tallied.

https://imgur.com/a/OatybgQ

This means perhaps New York saw 50 deaths Sunday and 50 deaths Monday and then they all got tallied just today. Have a hard time believing no one passed Sunday to Monday.

[ElNono]

I'll give you another bright side. New York's death total didn't increase from Sunday to Monday, so that "sudden spike" was probably delayed information finally being tallied.

https://imgur.com/a/OatybgQ

This means perhaps New York saw 50 deaths Sunday and 50 deaths Monday and then they all got tallied just today. Have a hard time believing no one passed Sunday to Monday.

We'll see tomorrow. Adding 5k cases a day would certainly spell a lot of trouble.

[TSA]

What I quoted has been left out, for some reason that's apparently fairly partisan, lol

Hey look, I don't like Cuomo, stated so in another thread a few days ago, but nobody saw this thing coming in '15. And we're here now, NY clearly needs all the help they can get. Frankly, it's pretty clear the buck stops with him.

RCP on mobile is a disaster to read so it took me a sec to see what you pointed out. Not sure why it’s missing as every other paragraph appears there and removing that one paragraph doesn’t change the gist of the article.

I just find it stupid for Cuomo to try and blame Trump when Cuomo chose not to restock his own state’s supply. The two of them seemed to be working fairly well up until this, pointing fingers now does no one any good.

[ChumpDumper]

RCP on mobile is a disaster to read so it took me a sec to see what you pointed out. Not sure why it’s missing as every other paragraph appears there and removing that one paragraph doesn’t change the gist of the article.

I just find it stupid for Cuomo to try and blame Trump when Cuomo chose not to restock his own state’s supply. The two of them seemed to be working fairly well up until this, pointing fingers now does no one any good.If someone has the ventilators now and won't let them go....

[ElNono]

RCP on mobile is a disaster to read so it took me a sec to see what you pointed out. Not sure why it’s missing as every other paragraph appears there and removing that one paragraph doesn’t change the gist of the article.

I just find it stupid for Cuomo to try and blame Trump when Cuomo chose not to restock his own state’s supply. The two of them seemed to be working fairly well up until this, pointing fingers now does no one any good.

The narrative works a lot better if we skip over the detail that even the federal government skimped on it too back in the day, and we're about to find out what other states skimped on it also. But, frankly, nobody was expecting this in '15. The last big one we had on this was a 100 years ago.

I do agree that politicizing and pointing fingers doesn't help. Not for Cuomo, not for Trump (who made a sport out of that). Cuomo and/or any other governor can only look at the federal government now, hopefully he gets the help he needs, not because of him, but because of his constituents.

[vy65]

Do you know how warm it was that day? That's like perfect transmission conditions, but yeah, no explosion. However, many feel where the virus has its best chance of transmissibility is in close contact situations. Not like shaking hands close contact, but being in close proximity for hours or days.

81/65.

https://weather.com/weather/monthly/l/Houston+TX?canonicalCityId=e7763a6187b4cb5fd0f85ad 30c23f37f320bfe7e910e6fdbe90b501f206d265c

[monosylab1k]

https://i.ibb.co/gFCjGL8/30-DDBB25-E624-45-A0-8-AE8-2-DF7809781-F0.jpg

[midnightpulp]

We'll see tomorrow. Adding 5k cases a day would certainly spell a lot of trouble.

Yes, let's hope NY is in the 50ish range. That will quell some fears it's not exponentially increasing.

[midnightpulp]

i could very well be wrong because i'm not read up on it well, but posters here were saying germany has been somewhat monkeying around with the reported deaths... citing pneumonia as the cause of death when it started wit covid, etc

Could be. The stats can be fudged innumerable ways.

[midnightpulp]

81/65.

https://weather.com/weather/monthly/l/Houston+TX?canonicalCityId=e7763a6187b4cb5fd0f85ad 30c23f37f320bfe7e910e6fdbe90b501f206d265c

Encouraging. From that report, the virus likes a specific range


In a new paper published on the open-data site SSRN, the researchers found that all cities experiencing significant outbreaks of COVID-19 have very similar winter climates with an average temperature of 41 to 52 degrees Fahrenheit, an average humidity level of 47 to 79 percent with a narrow east-west distribution along the same 30-50 N” latitude. This includes Wuhan, China, South Korea, Japan, Iran, Northern Italy, Seattle, and Northern California. It could also spell increasing trouble for the Mid-Atlantic States and -- as temperatures rise -- New England.

[DarrinS]

I don't know why people think this is any more contagious than any other coronavirus. We are just laser focused on the numbers.

[DarrinS]

They're only testing the folks most likely to have it, symptomatic etc, and only 10% are positive.

[ducks]

About 35,000 people die in car accidents every year in this country. Many more are maimed and crippled. That works out to about 100 dead per day, half of them under the age of 50. Globally, the yearly death toll is more than a million. An immense amount of pain, misery, destruction, and death is absolutely guaranteed every year that we allow cars to remain on the roads. We all know this. Yet almost no one ever suggests that all cars be banned. Indeed, rarely is it even argued that the speed limits be dramatically reduced. Even something like raising the driving age to 30 — a move that would save thousands of young lives — is not seriously suggested or considered.

[MannyIsGod]

Ya'll put way too much emphasis on your first case dates for states and not nearly enough on the size of the infected population in a given state currently. The start date isn't very accurate, and it isn't important. What is important is reaching a level where you are achieving rapid community spread and whether or not you're taking steps to limit that spread. #2 is a clear no in those states, and the numbers point to there definitely being rapid community spread occurring.

[midnightpulp]

^:lol. People aren't understand why "we're freaking out." If we had 20 hospital beds per patient (we have 2.8) and an excess of supplies to treat illnesses like these, we probably don't shut down. It's not about the virus in a vacuum, but about our inability to deal with such a crisis.

[monosylab1k]

I don't know why people think this is any more contagious than any other coronavirus. We are just laser focused on the numbers.


They're only testing the folks most likely to have it, symptomatic etc, and only 10% are positive.

Trump: No big deal!
DarrinS: No big deal!

Trump: Well actually it is a big deal!
DarrinS: OMG WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE

Trump: jk lol no biggie
DarrinS: we good everybody!

[weebo]

About 35,000 people die in car accidents every year in this country. Many more are maimed and crippled. That works out to about 100 dead per day, half of them under the age of 50. Globally, the yearly death toll is more than a million. An immense amount of pain, misery, destruction, and death is absolutely guaranteed every year that we allow cars to remain on the roads. We all know this. Yet almost no one ever suggests that all cars be banned. Indeed, rarely is it even argued that the speed limits be dramatically reduced. Even something like raising the driving age to 30 — a move that would save thousands of young lives — is not seriously suggested or considered.

Car accidents are communicable diseases now?

[DarrinS]

Ya'll put way too much emphasis on your first case dates for states and not nearly enough on the size of the infected population in a given state currently. The start date isn't very accurate, and it isn't important. What is important is reaching a level where you are achieving rapid community spread and whether or not you're taking steps to limit that spread. #2 is a clear no in those states, and the numbers point to there definitely being rapid community spread occurring.


I think !looking at Washington is a good model. They got it early, but reacted early.

[DarrinS]

Trump: No big deal!
DarrinS: No big deal!

Trump: Well actually it is a big deal!
DarrinS: OMG WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE

Trump: jk lol no biggie
DarrinS: we good everybody!

Feel free to jump off a bridge

[monosylab1k]

Feel free to jump off a bridge

Truth hurts, I know.

[midnightpulp]

Ya'll put way too much emphasis on your first case dates for states and not nearly enough on the size of the infected population in a given state currently. The start date isn't very accurate, and it isn't important. What is important is reaching a level where you are achieving rapid community spread and whether or not you're taking steps to limit that spread. #2 is a clear no in those states, and the numbers point to there definitely being rapid community spread occurring.

I don't get this logic because if Arizona tested half their population tomorrow and the positive rate was 5 percent, which is 175000 people, the plot on the graph would show a massive exponential increase, and you would say that Arizona is "more infected" than New York and has the worst curve in the world, but the key detail is that Arizona tested a massive amount of more people. New York's positive rate is like 25 percent. They are "more infected" despite way fewer cases.

What numbers do you want to see? What's the sample size of tests you require relative to population size of the state to start drawing conclusions? New York's positive results have held pretty firm at 25ish percent for the past week.

https://covidtracking.com/data/state/new-york/

Texas is at 3.5 percent positive, performing over 11,000 tests.

https://covidtracking.com/data/state/texas/

New York's rate has never been below 13 percent. Not sure how you can conclude Texas is prone to be another New York or Italy when looking at these numbers.

[DarrinS]

I'm financially set to weather this mf. I'm concerned about my fellow Americans who aren't.

I ordered some take out food and left a generous tip.

I know it's only small gesture, but the delivery guy was very thankful. We need to help each other.

[DarrinS]

In my area, people are helping out neighbors, getting drugs/groceries for elderly folks.

[Blake]

Pick any media account of the story.

So much misinformation that you can't think of one real instance.

[Blake]

He does take it. Then he takes vengeance, aka dishes it.

That's not how dishing it/taking it works

[DarrinS]

The transmission is just like any other flu, tbh.

[Blake]

1242611136488488962

SMH muh right to party

[Blake]

The transmission is just like any other flu, tbh.

DrDarrin

[TSA]

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?

Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude.

By Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya
March 24, 2020 6:21 pm ET

A line at an emergency room in Brooklyn, N.Y., March 19.
Photo: andrew kelly/Reuters
If it’s true that the novel coronavirus would kill millions without shelter-in-place orders and quarantines, then the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified. But there’s little evidence to confirm that premise—and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.

Fear of Covid-19 is based on its high estimated case fatality rate—2% to 4% of people with confirmed Covid-19 have died, according to the World Health Organization and others. So if 100 million Americans ultimately get the disease, two million to four million could die. We believe that estimate is deeply flawed. The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.

The latter rate is misleading because of selection bias in testing. The degree of bias is uncertain because available data are limited. But it could make the difference between an epidemic that kills 20,000 and one that kills two million. If the number of actual infections is much larger than the number of cases—orders of magnitude larger—then the true fatality rate is much lower as well. That’s not only plausible but likely based on what we know so far.

Population samples from China, Italy, Iceland and the U.S. provide relevant evidence. On or around Jan. 31, countries sent planes to evacuate citizens from Wuhan, China. When those planes landed, the passengers were tested for Covid-19 and quarantined. After 14 days, the percentage who tested positive was 0.9%. If this was the prevalence in the greater Wuhan area on Jan. 31, then, with a population of about 20 million, greater Wuhan had 178,000 infections, about 30-fold more than the number of reported cases. The fatality rate, then, would be at least 10-fold lower than estimates based on reported cases.

WSJ Newsletter
What's News
A digest of the day's most important news to watch, delivered to your inbox.
Next, the northeastern Italian town of Vò, near the provincial capital of Padua. On March 6, all 3,300 people of Vò were tested, and 90 were positive, a prevalence of 2.7%. Applying that prevalence to the whole province (population 955,000), which had 198 reported cases, suggests there were actually 26,000 infections at that time. That’s more than 130-fold the number of actual reported cases. Since Italy’s case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.

In Iceland, deCode Genetics is working with the government to perform widespread testing. In a sample of nearly 2,000 entirely asymptomatic people, researchers estimated disease prevalence of just over 1%. Iceland’s first case was reported on Feb. 28, weeks behind the U.S. It’s plausible that the proportion of the U.S. population that has been infected is double, triple or even 10 times as high as the estimates from Iceland. That also implies a dramatically lower fatality rate.

The best (albeit very weak) evidence in the U.S. comes from the National Basketball Association. Between March 11 and 19, a substantial number of NBA players and teams received testing. By March 19, 10 out of 450 rostered players were positive. Since not everyone was tested, that represents a lower bound on the prevalence of 2.2%. The NBA isn’t a representative population, and contact among players might have facilitated transmission. But if we extend that lower-bound assumption to cities with NBA teams (population 45 million), we get at least 990,000 infections in the U.S. The number of cases reported on March 19 in the U.S. was 13,677, more than 72-fold lower. These numbers imply a fatality rate from Covid-19 orders of magnitude smaller than it appears.

How can we reconcile these estimates with the epidemiological models? First, the test used to identify cases doesn’t catch people who were infected and recovered. Second, testing rates were woefully low for a long time and typically reserved for the severely ill. Together, these facts imply that the confirmed cases are likely orders of magnitude less than the true number of infections. Epidemiological modelers haven’t adequately adapted their estimates to account for these factors.

The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism.

This does not make Covid-19 a nonissue. The daily reports from Italy and across the U.S. show real struggles and overwhelmed health systems. But a 20,000- or 40,000-death epidemic is a far less severe problem than one that kills two million. Given the enormous consequences of decisions around Covid-19 response, getting clear data to guide decisions now is critical. We don’t know the true infection rate in the U.S. Antibody testing of representative samples to measure disease prevalence (including the recovered) is crucial. Nearly every day a new lab gets approval for antibody testing, so population testing using this technology is now feasible.

If we’re right about the limited scale of the epidemic, then measures focused on older populations and hospitals are sensible. Elective procedures will need to be rescheduled. Hospital resources will need to be reallocated to care for critically ill patients. Triage will need to improve. And policy makers will need to focus on reducing risks for older adults and people with underlying medical conditions.

A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

Dr. Bendavid and Dr. Bhattacharya are professors of medicine at Stanford. Neeraj Sood contributed to this article.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/Gdo9sg67Pp

[slick'81]

DrDarrin

Atleast he's financially set and leaving big tips tbh

[MannyIsGod]

I don't get this logic because if Arizona tested half their population tomorrow and the positive rate was 5 percent, which is 175000 people, the plot on the graph would show a massive exponential increase, and you would say that Arizona is "more infected" than New York and has the worst curve in the world, but the key detail is that Arizona tested a massive amount of more people. New York's positive rate is like 25 percent. They are "more infected" despite way fewer cases.

What numbers do you want to see? What's the sample size of tests you require relative to population size of the state to start drawing conclusions? New York's positive results have held pretty firm at 25ish percent for the past week.

https://covidtracking.com/data/state/new-york/

Texas is at 3.5 percent positive, performing over 11,000 tests.

https://covidtracking.com/data/state/texas/

New York's rate has never been below 13 percent. Not sure how you can conclude Texas is prone to be another New York or Italy when looking at these numbers.

So the point of testing is to discover the amount of true infections in an area, right? So if we could test all of AZ tomorrow, then we know the true number of infections right? But we can't do that, so we're left with partial data that is really horrible right now. In areas that are not NYC, WA, and CA, testing is still absolute shit, so we have a partial number based on the people who have been tested, right? But this number is not a good look. It's incomplete and its acquired through a biased selection.

So lets look at NYC and see where they were a week ago.

1400 cases. But we KNOW for a fact that they weren't at 1400 cases because even with a doubling time of 3 days, you don't go from 1400 to 25,000 in 7 days. So, the NYC curve isn't bad because its gone from 1400 to 25000. Its bad because its likely gone from something like 40,000 to 150,000 in that time frame. We don't have those true numbers, but based on hospitalization this is a much better guess than 1400 to 25000. We KNOW that even with severe testing, these numbers are a big time underestimation of the current infection. We just don't know what the real numbers are, but we can estimate them.

So when we see a 20% or whatever testing rate in Lousiana, for instance, that doesn't mean we're more accurately testing the population there. It means that we're more accurately applying our selection bias to only test a very likely population of possible candidates. The same goes for all of these southern states with really low testing numbers compared to the big 3 areas. What this means is that the true of the extent of the infection is not known, but we know the numbers are high enough for rapid transference throughout the population and we know that these states are taking very little action to limit said transmission.

So what works in their favor? Lower population density for sure. They're not likely to be the next NYC just because of this factor. But they also don't need to be the next NYC to be pretty fucking bad. They also have fewer resources than NYC, so they smaller metros might actually exceed their healthcare capacity faster because of this. The R0 in NYC is definitely going to be worse than in smaller cities, but its not going to stop these areas from having very serious situations in the very near future. This is why certain state governments are acting before the numbers get high in their areas.

There are already relatively high numbers of cases in these areas and our detection of them is far worse than in the major hotspots. This is a very very big problem.

People just don't get it. 3 weeks ago almost no one thought it was a big deal here. Now NYC is on the brink of collapse and people are still "Yeah BUT"ing this shit. Its amazing.

[Blake]

Atleast he's financially set and leaving big tips tbh

#allinthistogether

[MannyIsGod]

BTW, I never said Texas was going to be another Italy or NYC. Not sure why that's the goalpost here. I do think Texas will see numbers that overwhelm its healthcare system, which is frankly going to be more than bad enough.

[MannyIsGod]

1242564234304765957

So NYC still 2 weeks away from a peak after 2 weeks of WAYYYYYYYYYY more of a lockdown than any place in the south and the places in the south already have high numbers. This should definitely worry people. A lot.

EDIT: ALso the peak isn't the end. The peak just means new cases start to decrease. But there is a long time before a broken healthcare system goes back to normal and new cases STILL come in.

[midnightpulp]

So the point of testing is to discover the amount of true infections in an area, right? So if we could test all of AZ tomorrow, then we know the true number of infections right? But we can't do that, so we're left with partial data that is really horrible right now. In areas that are not NYC, WA, and CA, testing is still absolute shit, so we have a partial number based on the people who have been tested, right? But this number is not a good look. It's incomplete and its acquired through a biased selection.

Yes, I agree that the sample sizes aren't big enough to draw any conclusions from many states. I would also say that Texas (13K tested) and Florida (16k tested) have tested a decent enough amount to give us some idea of their infection rate and how it's likely to progress. I don't see them being on anywhere near the same pace as NY. Would you disagree with that?

Second bolded point. Wouldn't this biased selection work in favor for states with limited testing capabilities? I would imagine states that need to ration tests are only testing the most obvious cases, so it might be skewing their infection higher than it actually is. But more data is needed.


So lets look at NYC and see where they were a week ago.

1400 cases. But we KNOW for a fact that they weren't at 1400 cases because even with a doubling time of 3 days, you don't go from 1400 to 25,000 in 7 days. So, the NYC curve isn't bad because its gone from 1400 to 25000. Its bad because its likely gone from something like 40,000 to 150,000 in that time frame. We don't have those true numbers, but based on hospitalization this is a much better guess than 1400 to 25000. We KNOW that even with severe testing, these numbers are a big time underestimation of the current infection. We just don't know what the real numbers are, but we can estimate them.


Don't disagree with that.


So when we see a 20% or whatever testing rate in Lousiana, for instance, that doesn't mean we're more accurately testing the population there. It means that we're more accurately applying our selection bias to only test a very likely population of possible candidates. The same goes for all of these southern states with really low testing numbers compared to the big 3 areas. What this means is that the true of the extent of the infection is not known, but we know the numbers are high enough for rapid transference throughout the population and we know that these states are taking very little action to limit said transmission.

But the selection bias works both ways, as I stated above. If LA is just testing obvious cases, we still have little clue the true rate of infection.


So what works in their favor? Lower population density for sure. They're not likely to be the next NYC just because of this factor. But they also don't need to be the next NYC to be pretty fucking bad. They also have fewer resources than NYC, so they smaller metros might actually exceed their healthcare capacity faster because of this. The R0 in NYC is definitely going to be worse than in smaller cities, but its not going to stop these areas from having very serious situations in the very near future. This is why certain state governments are acting before the numbers get high in their areas.


That's been my point all along (the important population density plays can't be understated, imo), and I was more applying it to the big states, since there's many fears the other +15 million dense states will become "the next New York." Other regions in that "green band" need to be on high alert. All states should act on high alert and just assume the worst to err on the side of caution. My main contention is this idea the entirety of the US will become like New York. I think many regions will be able to flatten the curve relatively quickly due to the advantages I've talked about ad nauseum. We'll just have to wait and see. I'm waiting for those "pending tests" in CA to be logged. Give us some more insight.

[MannyIsGod]

1242656680288157696

Someone tell him that its NBD.

[Nathan89]

The transmission is just like any other flu, tbh.

The hospitalization rate is the problem.

[MannyIsGod]

Selection bias does not work both ways my dude. We don't have fewer tests than have been confirmed. We have more. Thats the only direction that number moves. Sure, in some places we have a closer idea than in others, but that doesn't change that these numbers are already very very bad.

And even if we don't have another NYC, if we have 15 more not quite NYCs that's pretty fucking bad. With each new area our ability to respond will be diminished.

[Mark Celibate]

About 35,000 people die in car accidents every year in this country. Many more are maimed and crippled. That works out to about 100 dead per day, half of them under the age of 50. Globally, the yearly death toll is more than a million. An immense amount of pain, misery, destruction, and death is absolutely guaranteed every year that we allow cars to remain on the roads. We all know this. Yet almost no one ever suggests that all cars be banned. Indeed, rarely is it even argued that the speed limits be dramatically reduced. Even something like raising the driving age to 30 — a move that would save thousands of young lives — is not seriously suggested or considered.

o.k. where was this copy and pasted from?

This is too grammatically correct to be a ducks post

[midnightpulp]

Selection bias does not work both ways my dude. We don't have fewer tests than have been confirmed. We have more. Thats the only direction that number moves. Sure, in some places we have a closer idea than in others, but that doesn't change that these numbers are already very very bad.

And even if we don't have another NYC, if we have 15 more not quite NYCs that's pretty fucking bad. With each new area our ability to respond will be diminished.

You'll get no argument from me that there's many vulnerable regions out there. I've never stated otherwise.

[Trainwreck2100]

o.k. where was this copy and pasted from?

This is too grammatically correct to be a ducks post

that's the guns argument he's just reusing it for covid

[phxspurfan]

You guys are ok in SA bc the hospitals are good. It’s large cities in crappy areas (New Orleans maybe) that will be in a world of hurt due to their ill prepared medical infrastructures

[Mark Celibate]

that's the guns argument he's just reusing it for covid

:lol oh so it's' just a copypasta he was reusing. I was wondering since when did ducks actually capitalize the first word in each sentence much less start using em dashes? :lmao

[Nathan89]

https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1242654452072546304?s=20

When you can't bend the curve enough #raisethebar. This has already been happening in other countries apparently.

[ElNono]

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?

Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude.

By Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya
March 24, 2020 6:21 pm ET

A line at an emergency room in Brooklyn, N.Y., March 19.
Photo: andrew kelly/Reuters
If it’s true that the novel coronavirus would kill millions without shelter-in-place orders and quarantines, then the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified. But there’s little evidence to confirm that premise—and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.

Fear of Covid-19 is based on its high estimated case fatality rate—2% to 4% of people with confirmed Covid-19 have died, according to the World Health Organization and others. So if 100 million Americans ultimately get the disease, two million to four million could die. We believe that estimate is deeply flawed. The true fatality rate is the portion of those infected who die, not the deaths from identified positive cases.

The latter rate is misleading because of selection bias in testing. The degree of bias is uncertain because available data are limited. But it could make the difference between an epidemic that kills 20,000 and one that kills two million. If the number of actual infections is much larger than the number of cases—orders of magnitude larger—then the true fatality rate is much lower as well. That’s not only plausible but likely based on what we know so far.

Population samples from China, Italy, Iceland and the U.S. provide relevant evidence. On or around Jan. 31, countries sent planes to evacuate citizens from Wuhan, China. When those planes landed, the passengers were tested for Covid-19 and quarantined. After 14 days, the percentage who tested positive was 0.9%. If this was the prevalence in the greater Wuhan area on Jan. 31, then, with a population of about 20 million, greater Wuhan had 178,000 infections, about 30-fold more than the number of reported cases. The fatality rate, then, would be at least 10-fold lower than estimates based on reported cases.

WSJ Newsletter
What's News
A digest of the day's most important news to watch, delivered to your inbox.
Next, the northeastern Italian town of Vò, near the provincial capital of Padua. On March 6, all 3,300 people of Vò were tested, and 90 were positive, a prevalence of 2.7%. Applying that prevalence to the whole province (population 955,000), which had 198 reported cases, suggests there were actually 26,000 infections at that time. That’s more than 130-fold the number of actual reported cases. Since Italy’s case fatality rate of 8% is estimated using the confirmed cases, the real fatality rate could in fact be closer to 0.06%.

In Iceland, deCode Genetics is working with the government to perform widespread testing. In a sample of nearly 2,000 entirely asymptomatic people, researchers estimated disease prevalence of just over 1%. Iceland’s first case was reported on Feb. 28, weeks behind the U.S. It’s plausible that the proportion of the U.S. population that has been infected is double, triple or even 10 times as high as the estimates from Iceland. That also implies a dramatically lower fatality rate.

The best (albeit very weak) evidence in the U.S. comes from the National Basketball Association. Between March 11 and 19, a substantial number of NBA players and teams received testing. By March 19, 10 out of 450 rostered players were positive. Since not everyone was tested, that represents a lower bound on the prevalence of 2.2%. The NBA isn’t a representative population, and contact among players might have facilitated transmission. But if we extend that lower-bound assumption to cities with NBA teams (population 45 million), we get at least 990,000 infections in the U.S. The number of cases reported on March 19 in the U.S. was 13,677, more than 72-fold lower. These numbers imply a fatality rate from Covid-19 orders of magnitude smaller than it appears.

How can we reconcile these estimates with the epidemiological models? First, the test used to identify cases doesn’t catch people who were infected and recovered. Second, testing rates were woefully low for a long time and typically reserved for the severely ill. Together, these facts imply that the confirmed cases are likely orders of magnitude less than the true number of infections. Epidemiological modelers haven’t adequately adapted their estimates to account for these factors.

The epidemic started in China sometime in November or December. The first confirmed U.S. cases included a person who traveled from Wuhan on Jan. 15, and it is likely that the virus entered before that: Tens of thousands of people traveled from Wuhan to the U.S. in December. Existing evidence suggests that the virus is highly transmissible and that the number of infections doubles roughly every three days. An epidemic seed on Jan. 1 implies that by March 9 about six million people in the U.S. would have been infected. As of March 23, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 499 Covid-19 deaths in the U.S. If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%. Such a low death rate would be cause for optimism.

This does not make Covid-19 a nonissue. The daily reports from Italy and across the U.S. show real struggles and overwhelmed health systems. But a 20,000- or 40,000-death epidemic is a far less severe problem than one that kills two million. Given the enormous consequences of decisions around Covid-19 response, getting clear data to guide decisions now is critical. We don’t know the true infection rate in the U.S. Antibody testing of representative samples to measure disease prevalence (including the recovered) is crucial. Nearly every day a new lab gets approval for antibody testing, so population testing using this technology is now feasible.

If we’re right about the limited scale of the epidemic, then measures focused on older populations and hospitals are sensible. Elective procedures will need to be rescheduled. Hospital resources will need to be reallocated to care for critically ill patients. Triage will need to improve. And policy makers will need to focus on reducing risks for older adults and people with underlying medical conditions.

A universal quarantine may not be worth the costs it imposes on the economy, community and individual mental and physical health. We should undertake immediate steps to evaluate the empirical basis of the current lockdowns.

Dr. Bendavid and Dr. Bhattacharya are professors of medicine at Stanford. Neeraj Sood contributed to this article.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464?redirect=amp#click=https://t.co/Gdo9sg67Pp

Most of the damage by COVID is not done by COVID, as they indicate towards the bottom. It certainly makes sense to gather more information to make informed decisions, and that, if anything, has been the biggest failure so far. Hopefully that's corrected shortly. Until then, playing it safe is the right thing to do.

[ElNono]

https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1242654452072546304?s=20

When you can't bend the curve enough #raisethebar. This has already been happening in other countries apparently.

Sometimes it's all hands on deck time

[midnightpulp]

Most of the damage by COVID is not done by COVID, as they indicate towards the bottom. It certainly makes sense to gather more information to make informed decisions, and that, if anything, has been the biggest failure so far. Hopefully that's corrected shortly. Until then, playing it safe is the right thing to do.

I totally agree with the article TSA posted. I think the fatality rate is nowhere close to the stated numbers, and is probably around the flu. But as we've discussed before, we can't handle two flus, as the New York rush illustrates. That's really the issue here. I don't think Covid is that dangerous in a vacuum. But we also can't understate how nasty the flu really is. People brush it off as the sniffles. It can be a killer. So again, two flus running at the same time is a massive problem.

[Spurs Homer]

Mardi gras in new orleans was the perfect storm for spreading the shit out of this virus

austin lucky- relatively speaking- that it canceled so by sw

[ElNono]

I totally agree with the article TSA posted. I think the fatality rate is nowhere close to the stated numbers, and is probably around the flu. But as we've discussed before, we can't handle two flus, as the New York rush illustrates. That's really the issue here. I don't think Covid is that dangerous in a vacuum. But we also can't understate how nasty the flu really is. People brush it off as the sniffles. It can be a killer. So again, two flus running at the same time is a massive problem.

Even if we were to argue that it's less severe than the flu, we have inoculants for the flu, out bodies already fought different strains over time, it's a different situation.

And really, the death rate is always calculated based on the number of actual cases. The reason to argue the death rate is orders of magnitude smaller is by advancing that the number of cases is order of magnitude higher, which nobody can ascertain without proper testing. The article isn't junk, but starts off an unverifiable premise.

So, let's get the tests going. Even better if they're anti-body tests.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1242660515928838151?s=19

[ChumpDumper]

https://twitter.com/Education4Libs/status/1242660515928838151?s=19

You gonna be in a packed church this Easter, Qhris?

[ElNono]

CARSON CITY — Gov. Steve Sisolak has signed an emergency measure to safeguard the threatened supply of two drugs being hoarded for possible use in the treatment of COVID-19.

The governor signed the emergency regulation Tuesday on the recommendation of the state Board of Pharmacy.

The drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, are used to treat malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis and are being studied by the FDA for possible use in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

In a letter to the governor, the Pharmacy Board noted that the safety and the efficacy of the drugs “have not been established” in the treatment of COVID-19 and that “an emergency exists due to the hoarding and stockpiling” of the drugs.

The governor’s order prohibits the prescribing and dispensing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for a COVID-19 diagnosis, requires the appropriate prescription coding for their “legitimate medical purposes,” and limits prescriptions to a 30-day supply.

“At this point in time, there is no known cure for COVID-19 and we must not withhold these drugs from those who need them,” the governor said in a statement. “The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to stay home for Nevada, not to stockpile these drugs.”

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/sisolak-signs-restriction-order-for-2-drugs-1990149/

---

Wonder when Qhrisbot is going to stop lying, tbh...

[dude21]

You gonna be in a packed church this Easter, Qhris?

:lol

[midnightpulp]

Even if we were to argue that it's less severe than the flu, we have inoculants for the flu, out bodies already fought different strains over time, it's a different situation.

And really, the death rate is always calculated based on the number of actual cases. The reason to argue the death rate is orders of magnitude smaller is by advancing that the number of cases is order of magnitude higher, which nobody can ascertain without proper testing. The article isn't junk, but starts off an unverifiable premise.

So, let's get the tests going. Even better if they're anti-body tests.

My intuition is that this is the case. And yes, I appreciate the fact we don't have a vaccine for it. My point is that considering the virus about as dangerous as the flu will calm people down a bit, so I hope that further testing reveals just that.

[midnightpulp]

CARSON CITY — Gov. Steve Sisolak has signed an emergency measure to safeguard the threatened supply of two drugs being hoarded for possible use in the treatment of COVID-19.

The governor signed the emergency regulation Tuesday on the recommendation of the state Board of Pharmacy.

The drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, are used to treat malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis and are being studied by the FDA for possible use in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

In a letter to the governor, the Pharmacy Board noted that the safety and the efficacy of the drugs “have not been established” in the treatment of COVID-19 and that “an emergency exists due to the hoarding and stockpiling” of the drugs.

The governor’s order prohibits the prescribing and dispensing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for a COVID-19 diagnosis, requires the appropriate prescription coding for their “legitimate medical purposes,” and limits prescriptions to a 30-day supply.

“At this point in time, there is no known cure for COVID-19 and we must not withhold these drugs from those who need them,” the governor said in a statement. “The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is to stay home for Nevada, not to stockpile these drugs.”

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-nevada/sisolak-signs-restriction-order-for-2-drugs-1990149/

---

Wonder when Qhrisbot is going to stop lying, tbh...

That EducatingLiberals guy is a fuckin' clown.

[ElNono]

My intuition is that this is the case. And yes, I appreciate the fact we don't have a vaccine for it. My point is that considering the virus about as dangerous as the flu will calm people down a bit, so I hope that further testing reveals just that.

I would think it is too, but how big or not is it, can only be answered by testing. Projecting for 6 million cases, as they argue, or 2 million cases are completely different ballparks and needs.

[Winehole23]

Next 2-3 weeks will tell on all the amateur prognosticators -- presuming the US policy of undertesting comes to an end.

[vy65]

Next 2-3 weeks will tell on all the amateur prognosticators -- presuming the US policy of undertesting comes to an end.

Off topic, but I never got your source showing Joshua Kushner was a co-founder of Gilead?

[ElNono]

Next 2-3 weeks will tell on all the amateur prognosticators -- presuming the US policy of undertesting comes to an end.

CDC is also woefully behind in stats. Thankfully there's other sources reaching out to states directly and the media has been doing a good job of keeping numbers up to date.

[Reck]

Crossed the 800 number on deaths now. Yikes

Sure, go ahead and get back to business Trump..

[Chris]

You gonna be in a packed church this Easter, Qhris?

I don't celebrate Ishtar.

[Reck]

I don't celebrate Ishtar.

So basically you're an internet tough guy. Of course we knew that already.

[slick'81]

Crossed the 800 number on deaths now. Yikes

Sure, go ahead and get back to business Trump..


But the cure is worse then the disease

[ChumpDumper]

I don't celebrate Ishtar.

Do you go to church?

[clambake]

church has nothing to do with religion anymore

[Winehole23]

church has nothing to do with religion anymorethe living saints are mostly self-appointed.

Since the time of Christ, there have been very few Christians. Piety is rare, the pose is common.

If you want to pray, go to your room and close the soor.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1242680383528787968?s=19

[Reck]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1242680383528787968?s=19

It'll be interesting to see what's in this and what was left out from the one before.

[Chris]

It'll be interesting to see what's in this and what was left out from the one before.


- $1200 checks to many Americans.
- $357B loan program to small businesses.
- $500B fund for industries, cities and states.
- Massive boost for unemployment insurance
- $130B for hospitals

[slick'81]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1242680383528787968?s=19



https://youtu.be/KtJJC0nWs9s

[ElNono]

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1242680383528787968?s=19

“After sleep-deprived nights and marathon negotiating sessions, we have a bipartisan agreement on the largest rescue package in American history,” Schumer said. “This bill is far from perfect, but we believe the language has been improved significantly to warrant its quick passage.”

Schumer

[Chris]

Pelosi/Schumer wanted:

-$300M for public broadcasting
-New tax credits for wind and solar
-Green New Deal standards on airlines
-Federal takeover of elections

Yikes.

[ElNono]

Thank you Nancy

[ElNono]

Hopefully they got mail in vote in there too, considering this pandemic.

[ElNono]

What's does the Treasury slush fund looks like? Anybody has text to the legislation yet?

[ChumpDumper]

- $1200 checks to many Americans.
- $357B loan program to small businesses.
- $500B fund for industries, cities and states.
- Massive boost for unemployment insurance
- $130B for hospitalsNever thought you were such a fan a socialism.:tu

[Chris]

Democrats wanted abortion providers like Planned Parenthood to be eligible for aid under the small business portion of the bill.

[spurraider21]

Democrats wanted abortion providers like Planned Parenthood to be eligible for aid under the small business portion of the bill.
:tu

[Chris]

:tu

no...not :tu

more like :td


Planned Parenthood launches $45M campaign to back Democrats in 2020

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/abortion/478548-planned-parenthood-launches-45m-campaign-to-support-democrats-in

[spurraider21]

Planned Parenthood launches $45M campaign to back Democrats in 2020

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/abortion/478548-planned-parenthood-launches-45m-campaign-to-support-democrats-in
:tu

[ChumpDumper]

Democrats wanted abortion providers like Planned Parenthood to be eligible for aid under the small business portion of the bill.:tu


Planned Parenthood launches $45M campaign to back Democrats in 2020

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/abortion/478548-planned-parenthood-launches-45m-campaign-to-support-democrats-in:tu:tu

[ElNono]

In the final measure, lawmakers agreed to a significant expansion of unemployment benefits that would extend unemployment insurance by 13 weeks and include a four-month enhancement of benefits, officials familiar with the unfinished agreement said. Democrats said that it would allow workers to maintain their full salaries if forced out of work as a result of the pandemic.

In the interim, lawmakers also agreed to provide $1,200 in direct payments that would apply equally to workers with incomes up to $75,000 per year before phasing out and ending altogether for those earning more than $99,000. Families would receive an additional $500 per child.

After complaints from Democrats, a $500 billion fund — $425 billion for the Federal Reserve to leverage for loans in order to help broad groups of distressed companies and $75 billion for industry-specific loans — will now have far stricter oversight, in the form of an inspector general and a 5-person panel appointed by Congress, lawmakers said. Companies that accept money must also agree to halt any stock buybacks for the length of the government assistance, plus an additional year.

Democrats also secured a provision that will block Trump family businesses — or those of other senior government officials — from receiving loan money under the programs, Mr. Schumer said in a letter to Democrats.

Both Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer, on separate calls laying out the deal for their Democratic colleagues, said they had secured $130 billion for hospitals, $55 billion more than originally agreed to, people familiar with the calls said, as well as $150 billion for state and local governments.

The agreement also includes $350 billion that would establish lending programs for small businesses, but only for those who keep their payrolls steady through the crisis. Small businesses that pledge to keep their workers would also receive cash-flow assistance structured as federally guaranteed loans. If the employer continued to pay its workers for the duration of the crisis, those loans would be forgiven.

Lawmakers in both chambers have also acknowledged that it is likely other legislative measures will be needed in the coming months to counter the consequences of the pandemic.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/us/politics/coronavirus-senate-deal.html

[Trainwreck2100]

Freedom bucks the sequel

[ElNono]

Props to Mnuchin for doing the unthinkable and negotiating back to back bipartisan deals in a matter of weeks, tbh

[Reck]

In the final measure, lawmakers agreed to a significant expansion of unemployment benefits that would extend unemployment insurance by 13 weeks and include a four-month enhancement of benefits, officials familiar with the unfinished agreement said. Democrats said that it would allow workers to maintain their full salaries if forced out of work as a result of the pandemic.

In the interim, lawmakers also agreed to provide $1,200 in direct payments that would apply equally to workers with incomes up to $75,000 per year before phasing out and ending altogether for those earning more than $99,000. Families would receive an additional $500 per child.

After complaints from Democrats, a $500 billion fund — $425 billion for the Federal Reserve to leverage for loans in order to help broad groups of distressed companies and $75 billion for industry-specific loans — will now have far stricter oversight, in the form of an inspector general and a 5-person panel appointed by Congress, lawmakers said. Companies that accept money must also agree to halt any stock buybacks for the length of the government assistance, plus an additional year.

Democrats also secured a provision that will block Trump family businesses — or those of other senior government officials — from receiving loan money under the programs, Mr. Schumer said in a letter to Democrats.

Both Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Schumer, on separate calls laying out the deal for their Democratic colleagues, said they had secured $130 billion for hospitals, $55 billion more than originally agreed to, people familiar with the calls said, as well as $150 billion for state and local governments.

The agreement also includes $350 billion that would establish lending programs for small businesses, but only for those who keep their payrolls steady through the crisis. Small businesses that pledge to keep their workers would also receive cash-flow assistance structured as federally guaranteed loans. If the employer continued to pay its workers for the duration of the crisis, those loans would be forgiven.

Lawmakers in both chambers have also acknowledged that it is likely other legislative measures will be needed in the coming months to counter the consequences of the pandemic.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/25/us/politics/coronavirus-senate-deal.html

So in other words: GOT'EM!