Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Coronavirus


How about this?  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

 

It's weekly not daily, but does show all deaths.

Compare total deaths in the first week of February with the first week of April. Despite 6000 COVID-19 deaths, the total is remarkably similar at around 56K. This would suggest COVID-19 is not consequential, and I don't believe that for one second.

 

The notes and caveats perhaps explain the problem:

 

 

NOTE: Number of deaths reported in this table are the total number of deaths received and coded as of the date of analysis and do not represent all deaths that occurred in that period.

*Data during this period are incomplete because of the lag in time between when the death occurred and when the death certificate is completed, submitted to NCHS and processed for reporting purposes. This delay can range from 1 week to 8 weeks or more, depending on the jurisdiction, age, and cause of death.

 

A lot of the data we are staking our opinions on are shaky as the sand in Haiti during an earthquake. Not that there is a solution - and we have to have opinions. It's just.... be prepared to see sudden revisions in what we thought to be trustworthy data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Compare total deaths in the first week of February with the first week of April. Despite 6000 COVID-19 deaths, the total is remarkably similar at around 56K. This would suggest COVID-19 is not consequential, and I don't believe that for one second.

 

The notes and caveats perhaps explain the problem:

 

 

 

A lot of the data we are staking our opinions on are shaky as the sand in Haiti during an earthquake. Not that there is a solution - and we have to have opinions. It's just.... be prepared to see sudden revisions in what we thought to be trustworthy data.

 

The early Antibody testing in California is interesting. even if they are not sure about the current value of Antibodies. 

 

Test Test Test

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Compare total deaths in the first week of February with the first week of April. Despite 6000 COVID-19 deaths, the total is remarkably similar at around 56K. This would suggest COVID-19 is not consequential, and I don't believe that for one second.

 

The notes and caveats perhaps explain the problem:

 

 

 

A lot of the data we are staking our opinions on are shaky as the sand in Haiti during an earthquake. Not that there is a solution - and we have to have opinions. It's just.... be prepared to see sudden revisions in what we thought to be trustworthy data.

Just a quick devil's advocate thought...

 

Would the COVID deaths be counteracted by the reduction in car accident deaths or other accidental deaths that are not occurring currently with folks staying at home? I don't know the exact numbers...I'm just curious if it's a potential balance to your curiousity about a nearly static death rate despite the addition of COVID deaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other things aside, vehicle fatalities have not dropped, but possibly increased. From an April 9th article:

 

There have been 24 fatal crashes in Minnesota since March 16, when Walz’s initial imposition on commerce took effect, through Tuesday, according to the state Office of Traffic Safety.

 

For the same time period last year, the fatal crash total was 12, with 13 in 2018 and 16 in 2017.

 

https://m.startribune.com/fatal-crashes-surge-despite-sharp-drop-in-traffic-across-minnesota/569473872/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Compare total deaths in the first week of February with the first week of April. Despite 6000 COVID-19 deaths, the total is remarkably similar at around 56K. This would suggest COVID-19 is not consequential, and I don't believe that for one second.

 

The notes and caveats perhaps explain the problem:

 

 

 

A lot of the data we are staking our opinions on are shaky as the sand in Haiti during an earthquake. Not that there is a solution - and we have to have opinions. It's just.... be prepared to see sudden revisions in what we thought to be trustworthy data.

 

For starters 15,251 Covid Deaths. 

 

News reports have it over 42k. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a quick devil's advocate thought...

 

Would the COVID deaths be counteracted by the reduction in car accident deaths or other accidental deaths that are not occurring currently with folks staying at home? I don't know the exact numbers...I'm just curious if it's a potential balance to your curiousity about a nearly static death rate despite the addition of COVID deaths.

Very fair consideration, and as Hosken's followup post indicates, the answer will at best be complicated.

 

Here's another one, for the speculation about how high the death toll would become if we relaxed current restrictions and tried to accelerate herd immunity: if hospitals reach the point of saturation and people start dying of heart attacks and strokes because they couldn't get the urgent care they needed, do we count those deaths as part of the pandemic? I'd have to think so. More reason to think that aggregate death totals are the only meaningful counts.

 

And don't get me started if the food supply-chain starts being disrupted and we have genuine food riots. Bleh, too painful to think about - I'll go back to taking the coronavirus-identified numbers at face value and stop trying to think. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a quick devil's advocate thought...

 

Would the COVID deaths be counteracted by the reduction in car accident deaths or other accidental deaths that are not occurring currently with folks staying at home? I don't know the exact numbers...I'm just curious if it's a potential balance to your curiousity about a nearly static death rate despite the addition of COVID deaths.

Or preventable deaths because people were afraid to seek medical care. There are all kinds of things to take into consideration that are difficult to account for. And the deaths that are occurring that are likely COVID deaths but unconfirmed that haven’t counted in the total. Although I think they are catching up on some of that as New York recently revised their death totals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just a quick devil's advocate thought...

 

Would the COVID deaths be counteracted by the reduction in car accident deaths or other accidental deaths that are not occurring currently with folks staying at home? I don't know the exact numbers...I'm just curious if it's a potential balance to your curiousity about a nearly static death rate despite the addition of COVID deaths.

That makes sense to me -- also fewer flu deaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Very fair consideration, and as Hosken's followup post indicates, the answer will at best be complicated.

 

Here's another one, for the speculation about how high the death toll would become if we relaxed current restrictions and tried to accelerate herd immunity: if hospitals reach the point of saturation and people start dying of heart attacks and strokes because they couldn't get the urgent care they needed, do we count those deaths as part of the pandemic? I'd have to think so. More reason to think that aggregate death totals are the only meaningful counts.

 

And don't get me started if the food supply-chain starts being disrupted and we have genuine food riots. Bleh, too painful to think about - I'll go back to taking the coronavirus-identified numbers at face value and stop trying to think. :)
 

Thinking is not easy at the moment. Too much uncertainty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very fair consideration, and as Hosken's followup post indicates, the answer will at best be complicated.

 

Here's another one, for the speculation about how high the death toll would become if we relaxed current restrictions and tried to accelerate herd immunity: if hospitals reach the point of saturation and people start dying of heart attacks and strokes because they couldn't get the urgent care they needed, do we count those deaths as part of the pandemic? I'd have to think so. More reason to think that aggregate death totals are the only meaningful counts.

 

And don't get me started if the food supply-chain starts being disrupted and we have genuine food riots. Bleh, too painful to think about - I'll go back to taking the coronavirus-identified numbers at face value and stop trying to think. :)

 

The whole Food Riot thing is like the Crude Oil Futures market. The price of oil futures for May delivery of crude oil is down because current capability to store that crude oil is full. If you could take delivery and store that oil at a buck per barrel, you’d make a bundle whenever we get back to business.

 

Canning/Freezing vegetables are typically sold on contracts. Since shipping is down and the local economy is in recession, there is short term concern over storage, so the canners might be having some of their contracted Farmers till under their crop. Maybe labor is short to harvest the early crops for all I know.

 

The “easy” solution is for the Government to buy the excess and pay the canners to process it, and for the government to store and distribute it. The DOD has stockpiled canned food since the 50s, and distributed part of that inventory to turn it (keep dates fresh) via the CSFP program for decades. You would probably change distribution to FEMA to reduce the red tape, but it’s not exactly breaking new ground.

 

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=DPAsDKAJowsC&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=department+of+defense+food+stockpile&source=bl&ots=FJS1C2OvKt&sig=ACfU3U1Fu8AFAVUGUS7lNu7Yznl58bN88g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjq18SFofroAhVLT6wKHVUDAmkQ6AEwA3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=department%20of%20defense%20food%20stockpile&f=false

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Trusting salons and customers to use medical grade masks properly to make yourself pretty is stupid.  There are other ways we can help those workers out. I'd be in favor of stimulus designed to go directly to such furloughed workers, instead of just everyone. 

 

Seriously. We can wait on the haircuts and golf.  The problem isn't just you; it's everyone else who is too stupid, lazy or sloppy to correctly keep themselves from infecting themselves and others...

 

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day right?  

 

You might be able to wait on haircuts, dining out, ect. but for millions of minimum wage earners who rely on those jobs it isn't so simple. There will always be a subset of individuals who just don't care about others, but if the threshold for return is a sudden onset of mindfulness within that group, we're never leaving our houses.  

 

I specifically addressed this misguided recommendation.  I don't trust you or your stylist to properly manage not infecting each other with whatever complicated medical equipment you can supposedly master to get a haircut. You are off in fantasyland, and should probably realize your experience is pretty limited to you and your very narrow circle, and you probably shouldn't make broad recommendations off your anecdotal and privileged experience. Seriously.

 

Is it not also a privilege to assume from a position of relative comfort, that other individuals and industries are capable of waiting?

Is our position not influenced primarily by our personal well being above all else? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe that it would be possible to get a very safe haircut if both parties had N-95 medical grade masks and used rubber gloves and alcohol. I am still waiting to hear why that does not seem viable, assuming that the experts provide clear guidelines that are followed, such as no hugging your stylist.

 

Here is an article that I think is very thought provoking --  As you can see, it suggests that we are only in the second inning. If that's true, then the pressure for people to go back to work is going to increase, and some smart people are worrying about civil unrest.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I still believe that it would be possible to get a very safe haircut if both parties had N-95 medical grade masks and used rubber gloves and alcohol. I am still waiting to hear why that does not seem viable, assuming that the experts provide clear guidelines that are followed, such as no hugging your stylist.

 

Here is an article that I think is very thought provoking --  As you can see, it suggests that we are only in the second inning. If that's true, then the pressure for people to go back to work is going to increase, and some smart people are worrying about civil unrest.

 

Hey, go for it. The investments in funeral homes and cemeteries should do well.

 

Please stay out of Minnesota.

 

Oh, the link to the thought provoking article is absent. It probably went off to the spa or the golf course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe that it would be possible to get a very safe haircut if both parties had N-95 medical grade masks and used rubber gloves and alcohol. I am still waiting to hear why that does not seem viable, assuming that the experts provide clear guidelines that are followed, such as no hugging your stylist.

 

Here is an article that I think is very thought provoking -- As you can see, it suggests that we are only in the second inning. If that's true, then the pressure for people to go back to work is going to increase, and some smart people are worrying about civil unrest.

The pressure will increase as the government forces people back to work who are in the poorest income brackets. The ones they have to and don’t want to pay unemployment to. And with no school, will the government then pay for childcare so people can work? I have a friend who runs a daycare and was asked to keep it open for kids of essential workers ... and she still waiting for support.

 

As for people and masks, I think your ‘easy’ solution is hugely idealistic. It would take presidential orders to make those masks in numbers needed. No, McConnell and the Senate Republicans won’t be shamed into bypassing him. When the Illinois governor spoke with Trump about supplies needed, n95 masks and tests, and was assured by the president they would be sent immediately, they received 300,000 surgical masks and no tests. But yes, of course we have enough of everything for everyone, the president says. Before sending anyone back to work, yes, everyone needs proper protections, but testing is key. Brian has been saying it endlessly, I have been saying it endlessly. Masks are one thing, testing, testing, TESTING is the first thing. Testing for the virus and testing for the antibodies. Testing first. Masks 2nd, and if the president orders them made for everyone, which he won’t. He won’t order the necessary needs for hospitals and health care workers, why would he order this done for everyone in the populace?

 

And again with masks, I threw your suggestion at my sister, who is a doctor. She kind of sighed, was non-committal and wasn’t convinced, at all, that that could or should be a solution to getting people back to work safely so you can get a haircut. People are still people and as much as you’d like to believe everyone will be compliant, people won’t be. They won’t get them on right, they’ll touch them, they won’t clean them or clean them properly. Yes, masks will help, but that isn’t really a practical solution. There are some individuals I would trust more than others to get it right. I, personally, would trust my hair person. She actually has an n95 mask and has had it for some time because of allergies. But I wouldn’t trust everyone who she comes in contact with. I wouldn’t trust everyone in the salon.

 

In a nutshell, I think your idea relies on way too many ifs to make it a viable solution in the short term, and by short term I mean over a month or two or even three. And because the priority, imo, needs to be testing first to see who can return to work safely and start back that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, studies are now showing that hydroxychloroquine isn’t the wonder drug it was being promoted to be ... and I have sadly learned to spell that ...

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html?fbclid=IwAR1JzZ0yUm1hWympQGVKf5dGfMelXaoJgsHB8HKeKp1oKql6vwXo0v5kiKs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe that it would be possible to get a very safe haircut if both parties had N-95 medical grade masks and used rubber gloves and alcohol. I am still waiting to hear why that does not seem viable, assuming that the experts provide clear guidelines that are followed, such as no hugging your stylist.

 

Here is an article that I think is very thought provoking -- As you can see, it suggests that we are only in the second inning. If that's true, then the pressure for people to go back to work is going to increase, and some smart people are worrying about civil unrest.

Please enlighten us how a hair stylist can practice social distancing while cutting your hair?

 

You’ve brought up this minor inconvenience a couple of times already Glunn. I’m starting to think you’re more concerned about forcing people back to work to serve YOU and YOUR convenience. Rather than being concerned about the well being of your hair stylist you’ve known for 30 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Please enlighten us how a hair stylist can practice social distancing while cutting your hair?

You’ve brought up this minor inconvenience a couple of times already Glunn. I’m starting to think you’re more concerned about forcing people back to work to serve YOU and YOUR convenience. Rather than being concerned about the well being of your hair stylist you’ve known for 30 years.

My wife is a hairstylist. She says wearing gloves isn't really practical for doing her job. You have to be able to feel much better than you would with gloves on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife is a hairstylist. She says wearing gloves isn't really practical for doing her job. You have to be able to feel much better than you would with gloves on.

Yeah, for cutters and stylists, I know of no one in all my life who has ever worn gloves, and have said this exact thing. But they may have to when they go back to work. Who knows. Colorists, however, yes, gloves, because of the chemicals, and even then have had a couple who said they didn’t like to but became a necessity for the skin on their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I haven't been around much, so sorry if it's been discussed, but I've been wondering how many unreported suicides and homicides we are going to find out have taken place; those that would have normally been realized already but due to the isolation have so far not been brought to light.

Well, if we go like Italy, there will probably be many bodies discovered in peoples' homes in the aftermath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Please enlighten us how a hair stylist can practice social distancing while cutting your hair?

You’ve brought up this minor inconvenience a couple of times already Glunn. I’m starting to think you’re more concerned about forcing people back to work to serve YOU and YOUR convenience. Rather than being concerned about the well being of your hair stylist you’ve known for 30 years.

What if his hair stylist wants to go back to work, and like needs to? What if they feel they aren't in a very high risk category for getting critically ill from the virus? What if they took as many realistic precautions as possible to try and reduce possible transmission? 

 

At some point a certain level of personal risk is going to enter into the equation, rightly or wrongly it is going to happen. Once the R0 factor of the virus gets to an acceptable level, social distancing is going to decrease and it will be up to individuals to be responsible. If getting a haircut is too risky, don't get one. If you are in a high risk group for severe complications, don't get one. Transmission of this virus is still going to occur, it's not going to zero probably anytime this year, barring some slim chance there is a seasonal effect to it. The trick is to not have it reproduce too quickly again and hopefully is stays at a slow enough rate over time. It's still going to be out there though and some people are unfortunately still going to die from it regardless. 

 

Is it time to open hair salons right now? Probably not, but when is decided on how contagious the virus remains in any given place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if his hair stylist wants to go back to work, and like needs to? What if they feel they aren't in a very high risk category for getting critically ill from the virus? What if they took as many realistic precautions as possible to try and reduce possible transmission?

 

At some point a certain level of personal risk is going to enter into the equation, rightly or wrongly it is going to happen. Once the R0 factor of the virus gets to an acceptable level, social distancing is going to decrease and it will be up to individuals to be responsible. If getting a haircut is too risky, don't get one. If you are in a high risk group for severe complications, don't get one. Transmission of this virus is still going to occur, it's not going to zero probably anytime this year, barring some slim chance there is a seasonal effect to it. The trick is to not have it reproduce too quickly again and hopefully is stays at a slow enough rate over time. It's still going to be out there though and some people are unfortunately still going to die from it regardless.

 

Is it time to open hair salons right now? Probably not, but when is decided on how contagious the virus remains in any given place.

Well North, if Glunn has known this hair dresser for 30+ years, I’m going to assume she didn’t start cutting hair in her teens. Which would put her in the high risk age demographic.

 

If hair dressers need to work for money, people like Glunn could donate his usual fee to support her during this crisis without risking her health. He could buy hair care products from her, and she can safely ship it to his house. He can buy gift cards for future hair cuts when it’s safe for his friend to return to work.

 

What do you mean by this question?

 

What if they took as many realistic precautions as possible to try and reduce possible transmission?

 

Our front line health care workers are wearing garbage bags to protect themselves right now. We’re going to give PPE in high demand to hair dressers? Really?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-restaurant-air-conditioning-gave-nine-people-covid-china-2020-4?r=US&IR=T

 

After viewing this map showing how one patron passed on the virus to others in a restaurant. My questions will be. 

 

In the Blank Circles... Was someone sitting in those spots or were they empty chairs? 

 

If there were people in those spots... I want to know how they avoided getting it. Were they tested? Asymptomatic and not tested? 

 

In other words... Why did some get it and not others? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well North, if Glunn has known this hair dresser for 30+ years, I’m going to assume she didn’t start cutting hair in her teens. Which would put her in the high risk age demographic.

If hair dressers need to work for money, people like Glunn could donate his usual fee to support her during this crisis without risking her health. He could buy hair care products from her, and she can safely ship it to his house. He can buy gift cards for future hair cuts when it’s safe for his friend to return to work.

What do you mean by this question?

What if they took as many realistic precautions as possible to try and reduce possible transmission?

Our front line health care workers are wearing garbage bags to protect themselves right now. We’re going to give PPE in high demand to hair dressers? Really?

Yes, I'm suggesting we give hairdressers PPE...….give your head a shake and try to have a rational argument. A healthy 55 year old is in a high risk category? I think you need to check some data friend. As tragic as all the deaths of younger, healthier people are, they are in the vast minority. The narrative that the virus is an equal opportunist and nobody is safe from critical care is a false one and detrimental to a more nuanced approach to moving things forward. Once testing becomes more widespread the approach has to involve more demography to inform policy. it needs to focus heavily on the most vulnerable while allowing as many people as possible to resume life in a considered way. The future is about managing infection, not eliminating it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to the hairdresser discussion. 

 

I don't have an opinion myself... but as sure as I'm standing here. We are at a crossroads and the country can't take much more. 

 

Businesses will attempt to get back to business and we will be massively dependent on each other. (Not the Businesses). 

 

The political lines have been drawn. 

 

As North implied: We will all have to come to grips with our own personal comfort level in regards to how much we individually participate in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-restaurant-air-conditioning-gave-nine-people-covid-china-2020-4?r=US&IR=T

 

After viewing this map showing how one patron passed on the virus to others in a restaurant. My questions will be. 

 

In the Blank Circles... Was someone sitting in those spots or were they empty chairs? 

 

If there were people in those spots... I want to know how they avoided getting it. Were they tested? Asymptomatic and not tested? 

 

In other words... Why did some get it and not others? 

 

Luck has played and continues to play a major role during this. How does one health worker in a hospital get infected and not others? Why weren't more people infected with this before social distancing and lockdown measures enforced?  Perhaps there are answers but my guess is they are a long way off. 

 

Once restrictions are loosened the focus has to shift away from keeping everyone from getting infected to managing the rate of infection, particularly amongst those most at risk of serious complications. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Luck has played and continues to play a major role during this. How does one health worker in a hospital get infected and not others? Why weren't more people infected with this before social distancing and lockdown measures enforced?  Perhaps there are answers but my guess is they are a long way off. 

 

Once restrictions are loosened the focus has to shift away from keeping everyone from getting infected to managing the rate of infection, particularly amongst those most at risk of serious complications. 

 

My opinion isn't worth anything. I have no experience or training in any relevant field to have a valid opinion. 

 

However... that has never stopped me.  :)

 

I believe that a (maybe significant) portion of humanity are naturally resistant. 

 

I also wonder about things like: Why didn't more NBA players catch it. The infected players played a lot of minutes while infected. 

 

I don't know... I wish I did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Please enlighten us how a hair stylist can practice social distancing while cutting your hair?

You’ve brought up this minor inconvenience a couple of times already Glunn. I’m starting to think you’re more concerned about forcing people back to work to serve YOU and YOUR convenience. Rather than being concerned about the well being of your hair stylist you’ve known for 30 years.

I have already explained what I had in mind for a safe haircut -- N-95 masks, rubber gloves, disinfectants, etc..

 

As for my convenience, you can either believe me or not when I say that I am OK with a pony tail until safe haircuts are possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

Featured Video

×
×
  • Create New...