Coronavirus General Discussion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by pmward » Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:37 pm

pugchief wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:12 pm
I attribute the declining numbers to the fact that it took hold here first, just like in NYC, and is now burning out, while areas like AZ, FL, TX, etc that didn't get hit hard early are now having their turn. And even in those states, hospitalizations are declining.
Not in AZ they aren't. Hospitalizations have been sky rocketing, as has new cases, new deaths, and the rate of positive tests. The only thing going down, ironically, is the number of tests issued per day. There's a reason the very right wing governor put us back on partial lockdown yesterday. The hospital situation here is starting to get really dire. I have a couple friends that are nurses and the things they are sharing on social media about how bad things are in the hospital system here right now are also proof that things are not good under the covers.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:45 pm

I find it amusing that people keep lamenting that mask-wearing has "become so politicized".

How can it be otherwise? There is no hard science with which to prove or disprove that mask-wearing makes a difference in slowing down the spread of Cooties-19. It's basically all guesswork, hunches, speculation, and anecdotal observations.

In the absence of hard science, we have no choice but to fall back on things like personal risk assessment, our level of trust (or lack thereof) in government officials and the media, and the importance of freedom -- things that are clearly shaped by our political views.
Joe is just Biden his time now.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3535
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by pugchief » Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:53 pm

pmward wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:37 pm
pugchief wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:12 pm
I attribute the declining numbers to the fact that it took hold here first, just like in NYC, and is now burning out, while areas like AZ, FL, TX, etc that didn't get hit hard early are now having their turn. And even in those states, hospitalizations are declining.
Not in AZ they aren't. Hospitalizations have been sky rocketing, as has new cases, new deaths, and the rate of positive tests. The only thing going down, ironically, is the number of tests issued per day. There's a reason the very right wing governor put us back on partial lockdown yesterday. The hospital situation here is starting to get really dire. I have a couple friends that are nurses and the things they are sharing on social media about how bad things are in the hospital system here right now are also proof that things are not good under the covers.
Maybe not hospitalizations, but certainly deaths, which is more relevant:
Media Ignores Deaths Dropping By 90%, New Coronavirus Death Low Since April 21
by Clay Travis via Outkick the Coverage
So I wake up this morning and I know I shouldn’t be surprised by this, but stop me if you’ve heard this before, the mainstream media is completely ignoring that deaths have set yet another new coronavirus low.

Yesterday 273 people died in this country with the coronavirus, which is down over 90% from the high set back in late April.

Sunday coronavirus positivity: deaths hit a new low, down to 273. Lowest coronavirus deaths since March 25th per linked data, down nearly 10% from last Sunday. https://t.co/Mb4uw9QkyR

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) June 28, 2020

It isn’t just a new trend here either, we have set new lows for deaths for nine straight weeks now.

Nine. Straight. Weeks.

That seems like a pretty big story that should be leading newscasts and websites everywhere.

Yet what percentage of people do you think know that coronavirus deaths have declined for nine straight weeks and that only 273 people died of the coronavirus on Sunday?

10%?

Lower?

Why is that? It’s because the media is obsessed with fear porn, not giving you the actual news.
Read the whole thing here: https://outkick.com/media-ignores-death ... -april-21/
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by pmward » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:26 pm

Worth a read. A historical account of the flu pandemic in 1918-1919 San Francisco, including the same drama we are going through today with the mask and no mask argument.

https://www.influenzaarchive.org/cities ... cisco.html#
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by sophie » Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm

pmward wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:37 pm
pugchief wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:12 pm
I attribute the declining numbers to the fact that it took hold here first, just like in NYC, and is now burning out, while areas like AZ, FL, TX, etc that didn't get hit hard early are now having their turn. And even in those states, hospitalizations are declining.
Not in AZ they aren't. Hospitalizations have been sky rocketing, as has new cases, new deaths, and the rate of positive tests. \
Pmward, you're reading too many mainstream media articles. Arizona's hospitalizations peaked over 2 weeks ago. WSJ reported they've been heading down. I can't find the article, but here's the webpage showing daily hospitalizations - which is the best measure since case #s are strongly dependent on test availability:

https://www.azdhs.gov/preparedness/epid ... /index.php
AZ daily hosp.png
AZ daily hosp.png (60.37 KiB) Viewed 277 times

There was a "surge" yes, but...I'm not impressed. Compare this to what we had here in NYC (and note the y axis in this figure compared to the last one).

NYC hosp.png
NYC hosp.png (50.76 KiB) Viewed 277 times

There's a little land called "actual numbers" that you really should visit one of these days. Alas, members of the media don't seem to be familiar with the place.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by pmward » Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:14 pm

sophie wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
pmward wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:37 pm
pugchief wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:12 pm
I attribute the declining numbers to the fact that it took hold here first, just like in NYC, and is now burning out, while areas like AZ, FL, TX, etc that didn't get hit hard early are now having their turn. And even in those states, hospitalizations are declining.
Not in AZ they aren't. Hospitalizations have been sky rocketing, as has new cases, new deaths, and the rate of positive tests. \
Pmward, you're reading too many mainstream media articles. Arizona's hospitalizations peaked over 2 weeks ago. WSJ reported they've been heading down. I can't find the article, but here's the webpage showing daily hospitalizations - which is the best measure since case #s are strongly dependent on test availability:

https://www.azdhs.gov/preparedness/epid ... /index.php

AZ daily hosp.png


There was a "surge" yes, but...I'm not impressed. Compare this to what we had here in NYC (and note the y axis in this figure compared to the last one).


NYC hosp.png


There's a little land called "actual numbers" that you really should visit one of these days. Alas, members of the media don't seem to be familiar with the place.


Nice job trying to cherry pick data. But no. We have less than 200 ICU beds available now, and that's after they activated overflow plans over the last week.


Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 3.13.22 PM.png
Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 3.13.22 PM.png (167.48 KiB) Viewed 260 times
User avatar
Smith1776
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1385
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:01 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Smith1776 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:02 pm

sophie wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm

There's a little land called "actual numbers" that you really should visit one of these days.
LOLOLOL. ;D
PP: 20% KILO.B | 5% SBT.B | 60% VCIP | 15% VVL/VMO/VVO/VLQ
VP: 100% XGD
Liquidity: 90 Days of Expenses Bank Cash
Physical Bullion: 5% of Net Worth Gold & Silver
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:45 pm

pmward wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:14 pm
Nice job trying to cherry pick data. But no. We have less than 200 ICU beds available now, and that's after they activated overflow plans over the last week.

Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 3.13.22 PM.png
For proper context, do we know what that same graph looked like this time last year, and the year before that? I.e., how do we know whether that ICU capacity graph is typical, somewhat atypical, or extremely atypical?

For what it's worth, I saw a recent email thread (forwarded to me by my retired physician dad) about ICU capacity in which a PACU nurse pointed out that her medical center runs its ICUs at full or near-full capacity "virtually all the time." It backs up the ER and bleeds into the PACU, which then has to hold surgical patients for many hours, sometimes entire nights and days, awaiting ICU beds. She said she's been told many hospitals do the same thing. Just something to consider.
Joe is just Biden his time now.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:59 pm

This one's for you, Pug! It's an article written by a dental researcher back in 2016 that argues that face masks are essentially worthless for the purpose of protecting dental personnel from airborne pathogens:

Why Face Masks Don’t Work: A Revealing Review
Conclusions
The primary reason for mandating the wearing of face masks is to protect dental personnel from airborne pathogens. This review has established that face masks are incapable of providing such a level of protection. Unless the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, national and provincial dental associations and regulatory agencies publically admit this fact, they will be guilty of perpetuating a myth which will be a disservice to the dental profession and its patients. It would be beneficial if, as a consequence of the review, all present infection control recommendations were subjected to the same rigorous testing as any new clinical intervention. Professional associations and governing bodies must ensure the clinical efficacy of quality improvement procedures prior to them being mandated. It is heartening to know that such a trend is gaining a momentum which might reveal the inadequacies of other long held dental infection control assumptions. Surely, the hallmark of a mature profession is one which permits new evidence to trump established beliefs. In 1910, Dr. C. Chapin, a public health pioneer, summarized this idea by stating, “We should not be ashamed to change our methods; rather, we should be ashamed not to do so.” Until this occurs, as this review has revealed, dentists have nothing to fear by unmasking.
Joe is just Biden his time now.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3535
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by pugchief » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:05 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:59 pm
This one's for you, Pug! It's an article written by a dental researcher back in 2016 that argues that face masks are essentially worthless for the purpose of protecting dental personnel from airborne pathogens:

Why Face Masks Don’t Work: A Revealing Review
Conclusions
The primary reason for mandating the wearing of face masks is to protect dental personnel from airborne pathogens. This review has established that face masks are incapable of providing such a level of protection. Unless the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, national and provincial dental associations and regulatory agencies publically admit this fact, they will be guilty of perpetuating a myth which will be a disservice to the dental profession and its patients. It would be beneficial if, as a consequence of the review, all present infection control recommendations were subjected to the same rigorous testing as any new clinical intervention. Professional associations and governing bodies must ensure the clinical efficacy of quality improvement procedures prior to them being mandated. It is heartening to know that such a trend is gaining a momentum which might reveal the inadequacies of other long held dental infection control assumptions. Surely, the hallmark of a mature profession is one which permits new evidence to trump established beliefs. In 1910, Dr. C. Chapin, a public health pioneer, summarized this idea by stating, “We should not be ashamed to change our methods; rather, we should be ashamed not to do so.” Until this occurs, as this review has revealed, dentists have nothing to fear by unmasking.
Nice. Please forward this to all of the governors who are mandating face masks. Maybe they will see the errors of their ways.
User avatar
Hal
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:50 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Hal » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:35 pm

$11,000 fines now.....

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... -live-news

Reminds me of a visiting Police Chief from a nearby country who suggested shooting people who exceeded the speed limit to keep the road deaths down :o
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by sophie » Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:59 am

Tortoise wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:45 pm
pmward wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:14 pm
Nice job trying to cherry pick data. But no. We have less than 200 ICU beds available now, and that's after they activated overflow plans over the last week.

Screen Shot 2020-06-30 at 3.13.22 PM.png
For proper context, do we know what that same graph looked like this time last year, and the year before that? I.e., how do we know whether that ICU capacity graph is typical, somewhat atypical, or extremely atypical?

For what it's worth, I saw a recent email thread (forwarded to me by my retired physician dad) about ICU capacity in which a PACU nurse pointed out that her medical center runs its ICUs at full or near-full capacity "virtually all the time." It backs up the ER and bleeds into the PACU, which then has to hold surgical patients for many hours, sometimes entire nights and days, awaiting ICU beds. She said she's been told many hospitals do the same thing. Just something to consider.
Hospitals don't like empty beds. They like money, and you don't get that from having empty beds. They always try to operate as close to full capacity as possible - mine is almost always above 95%, and if it drops lower we start getting nastygrams about how we have become too lazy and need to find reasons to admit people. Think I posted about this before.

The 60-70% capacity numbers at the start of pp4me's pmward's graph is due to cancelling elective procedures. That led to some seriously hurting hospitals who ended up having to furlough or lay off people as a result. The capacity at the end of pp4me's graph is still probably below normal for these hospitals.

pp4me pmward if you are going to call the daily hospitalization numbers (i.e. what is widely agreed on as the most reliable statistic for the purpose of guiding policy) "cherry-picking" then I just don't know what to say. Hopefully we who are devotees of reality and hard data can help calm some of your media-induced panic. Here's something for you to consider: if there are 200 ICU beds available but no more than 20 new COVID hospitalizations a day of which ICU beds would be needed by maybe a third of those (i.e. where AZ is at right now), it'll take 20 days to fill up the ICUs. The average length of stay in an ICU is shorter than that. Therefore it's quite unlikely the state will hit its ICU capacity.
Last edited by sophie on Wed Jul 01, 2020 10:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply