- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Daily COVID Updated as of 11/2/20 8:00 PM
Posted on 7/30/20 at 8:19 am to DougsMugs
Posted on 7/30/20 at 8:19 am to DougsMugs
quote:
I still don't believe the low numbers coming out of New York. It is about as trust worthy as numbers from communist china.
If you assume a herd immunity of much less than 70% (as some theory's out there state) and also assume that the actual infected number is 8-10X above actual positive tests then they may be at or near herd immunity.
That's all conjecture and wishful thinking on my part but hey, I'm looking for something positive.
Louisiana is hitting the same percentages...gonna watch that and see what happens. I just wish we could get some consistent freaking information.
0
Posted on 7/30/20 at 8:31 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
Isn’t .55 pretty bad?
It's not great, but considering this is a novel disease without a vaccine or any pre-existing immunity.
The only "positive" (and this is relative, of course), is that it skews to the elderly in impact and spares the young.
The IFR for under 60 is going to be much, much closer to a very bad flu strain - probably closer to 0.08 to 0.15 or something like that.
I mean, I don't want to lose anyone, but a pandemic with this novel set of complications could be a lot worse.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 8:38 am to DMAN1968
quote:
Florida and Arizona are getting close to the same case/per1m pop numbers as New York and New Jersey. It will be interesting to see if the deaths and new cases follow them in a similar manner.
The states with bad outbreaks now should end up considerably better off then the earlier states because there's a considerable difference in the age and risk distribution of cases now. When the disease was spreading wildly in February and early March in NY, no one knew it was there and so older and sicker people were getting exposed as frequently as low-risk young/healthy ones. That's not the case anymore. Now, older and sicker people are confining themselves to home, distancing, and masking at much higher rates than younger people, so the sun belt outbreaks have less severe sequelae. The other big factor is that medical management is getting wiser to the disease than it was 4 months ago and that makes a difference in outcomes too.
This post was edited on 7/30/20 at 8:39 am
Posted on 7/30/20 at 10:33 am to TigerDoc
The population of the US in 1918 was also 103 million, less than 1/3rd of today's population. Meaning with today's population numbers, the US death count for Spanish Flu would be almost 2 million people, per your numbers.
Comparisons, fine, but make sure they're apples to apples.
Comparisons, fine, but make sure they're apples to apples.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 10:35 am to TigerDoc
quote:
The states with bad outbreaks now should end up considerably better off then the earlier states because there's a considerable difference in the age and risk distribution of cases now. When the disease was spreading wildly in February and early March in NY, no one knew it was there and so older and sicker people were getting exposed as frequently as low-risk young/healthy ones. That's not the case anymore. Now, older and sicker people are confining themselves to home, distancing, and masking at much higher rates than younger people, so the sun belt outbreaks have less severe sequelae. The other big factor is that medical management is getting wiser to the disease than it was 4 months ago and that makes a difference in outcomes too.
By the time Covid19 hit NY, the demographics of risk were well known for anyone paying attention. The cruise ship Diamond Princess offered an ideal petri dish very early on and the first 19 US deaths were in a Washington state nursing home.
Cuomo and his camp weren't paying attention so they put coronavirus patients into nursing homes while trying to quarantine everyone else where possible. How dumb is that?
Posted on 7/30/20 at 10:40 am to AUMIS01
No objections. Spanish flu was by far more terrifying because there was no intensive medical care and it was highly deadly to people across the life span in a way this isn't. My great-grandparents were a doctor and nurse in their early thirties and healthy who both contracted it working in the same hospital (or perhaps from each other). She died and he didn't. Spanish flu was like that. It cut down people in the healthy prime of life more than this disease does.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 10:43 am to Auburn1968
No arguments there. He definitely made a lot of dumb mistakes. I think a political lesson to learn from the approval numbers of various leaders (governors, POTUS, foreign governments) is that publics reward the leaders who get the pandemic under control and punish the ones who don't.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 11:17 am to TigerDoc
quote:
is that publics reward the leaders who get the pandemic under control and punish the ones who don't.
Cuomo got the pandemic under control?
Posted on 7/30/20 at 11:24 am to GoCrazyAuburn
Killing all the old people off early is how you control it.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 11:24 am to GoCrazyAuburn
By American standards. 
Seriously, though, 798 cases/19 deaths yesterday vs. Florida with 9446/216. When DeSantis gets this under control his numbers will come up.
Seriously, though, 798 cases/19 deaths yesterday vs. Florida with 9446/216. When DeSantis gets this under control his numbers will come up.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 11:55 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Spanish flu was by far more terrifying because there was no intensive medical care and it was highly deadly to people across the life span in a way this isn't.
This isn't fully accurate. Obviously, we were only a little ahead of the Renaissance, medically, with only a rudimentary understanding of microbial-based illnesses, relative to today. "Spanish flu" (which was actually H1N1) wasn't particularly deadly to older folks, which is counterintuitive for respiratory illnesses, and much deadlier than expected to the young, particularly young, otherwise healthy adults (seasonal flu, for example, hits both ends of the bell curve of age).
3 things largely contributed to Spanish Flu's disparate impact on young, otherwise healthy adults.
1. A pandemic in the late 1870s/early 1880s is believed to imparted some measure of immunity to folks in early middle age and older by the time of Spanish Flu,
2. As with COVID19, H1N1's expression in 1917/1918 is associated with a "cytokine storm" and during that pandemic (unlike COVID19 which is presumed to be the opposite), a healthy immune system seems to have been a liability, rather than an asset, and
3. World War I - in addition to blocking information flow because of security, young men were mobilized all over the world and being moved to other locations, all over the world - likely the most significant deployment/movement of human beings up to that point (and only exceeded by WWII). And to make matters worse, in a traditional pandemic, the most ill tend to stay in one place and the weaker strains get spread by preference. That flipped in 1917/1918 because military authorities needed to get the most ill away from mobilization sites and the front lines, which reversed the normal preference and spread the most potent/most virulent strains (and, again, among primarily young, healthy, military age males).
Posted on 7/30/20 at 12:00 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Seriously, though, 798 cases/19 deaths yesterday vs. Florida with 9446/216.
You're pretending the Florida numbers are even in the same area code as reality.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 12:00 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
By American standards.
Seriously, though, 798 cases/19 deaths yesterday vs. Florida with 9446/216. When DeSantis gets this under control his numbers will come up.
Then we should have been doing what most of us said all along, keep everything open and let it run its course. Get it done hard and fast.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 12:13 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Seriously, though, 798 cases/19 deaths yesterday vs. Florida with 9446/216. When DeSantis gets this under control his numbers will come up.
How do we know New York hasn't hit herd immunity?
Posted on 7/30/20 at 12:41 pm to DMAN1968
quote:
How do we know New York hasn't hit herd immunity?
It seems like it may be in some neighborhoods, but the latest CDC study was antibody prevalence of 23% in NYC as a whole and it has to be less than that for the state since there hasn't been a bad outbreak upstate. That 23% in NYC probably has a marginal effect on slowing transmission, but I don't have a better explanation for why they don't have an ongoing exponential spread, (especially upstate) except to assume they're doing good mitigation.
This post was edited on 7/30/20 at 12:51 pm
Posted on 7/30/20 at 1:00 pm to TigerDoc
Chromedome, just did my quickie Louisiana numbers...death rate continues to decline, but for the first time in a week or so, I've seen a percentage decline in new cases reported...
Posted on 7/30/20 at 1:01 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
but the latest CDC study was antibody prevalence of 23% in NYC as a whole.
I'm not really believing that...nor am I believing that New York finally got it's act together and got a grip on this.
This post was edited on 7/30/20 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 7/30/20 at 1:05 pm to DMAN1968
"as much as" means it could be lower and NY has been a massively tested area, so there should be a smaller difference between tested cases and untested cases than for the country as a whole, but if one doesn't believe the antibody tests then you just have to speculate.
This post was edited on 7/30/20 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 7/30/20 at 1:10 pm to TigerDoc
I just believe that if antibody testing was truly accurate and conclusive we would be seeing a much larger roll out and drive to get more done.
If the above were true then New York state would already be at 23%...the whole state.
quote:
CDC officials believe national infection levels are as much as 10 times higher than those revealed through testing.
If the above were true then New York state would already be at 23%...the whole state.
Posted on 7/30/20 at 1:18 pm to DMAN1968
But even at 23%, there should still be exponential spread of this virus unless people are affirmatively doing something to reduce its spread. In Spain, they got down a couple hundred cases a month and medical populists started saying they were at herd and now they're back up to almost 3000 cases a day. It's like a forest fire and until the fuel is exhausted you have to starve it of oxygen (human proximity) until it's burned through the forest. If you increase the proximity, the burn will reaccelerate.
This post was edited on 7/30/20 at 1:19 pm
Page 277 of 331
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News