Covid-19 News

Quote from Shane D.

All other "advanced" countries have tackled the pandemic better than the US. The blue state of New York however, is an exception.

I do not think anyone says New York did a good job initially. On the contrary, they did a terrible job! The record is clear. Quote:

"As ProPublica reported, following Cuomo’s order, “Covid-19 tore through New York state’s nursing facilities, killing more than 6,000 people — about 6 percent of its more than 100,000 nursing home residents.” In Florida, which prohibited such transfers, the virus has so far killed only 1.6 percent of nursing home residents.

Given how Cuomo’s errors contributed to New York’s catastrophe, it’s hard to say how much credit he deserves for eventually rising to the occasion. Still, by the time New York’s cases got to where Arizona’s are now, he at least understood that the state faced calamity and imposed the lockdown that helped bring it back from the abyss."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…us-coronavirus-trump.html

https://www.propublica.org/art…en-he-risked-adding-to-it

Quote from Shane D.

US deaths down 70% over a 7 day average. New cases are rising, but mostly asymptomatic, or mildly so. With deaths declining, it looks to be a good trend. Some doctors report the virus is losing it's punch, and the data so far supports that.

It is a good trend, but I do not think it means the virus is losing its punch. The average age of patients in the U.S. has dropped significantly in recent weeks, so much of the improved survival rate is probably caused by the fact that young people are less likely to die from the disease. Many young people are becoming infected because they are going back to work, so you can't blame them. The young people I personally know who got infected had to work. They did not do anything risky. They recovered, and they are fine, thank goodness.

Some young people in Atlanta are are going to restaurants and not wearing masks. You can blame them.

The improved survival rate might be improving because treatment is more effective. Let's hope so!

In most states, the improved survival rate is not because increased testing is revealing more benign cases. The number of cases discovered per test has not declined, which rules that out, I think.

Quote from Shane D.

Maybe so, but whatever the reason for the rise in cases, the main thing is that we are developing immunity without getting very sick. Eventually, we will achieve herd immunity, and if this trend continues we will have gotten there much less painfully than originally anticipated.

Yes, but the fraction developing antiboddys is dissapointingly low all over the world. We guess that's because we have a defence from other covid related sicknesses, but it is a guess. There is no science facts which is annoying. Can very well be the warm weather as well that helps reducing R and make it less potent. I do cross my thumbs that it's not the weather as autumn and winter will be dirty else.

Quote from Shane D.

Maybe so, but whatever the reason for the rise in cases, the main thing is that we are developing immunity without getting very sick.

Because young people are getting sick, as I said. The average age of the patient has fallen.

Quote from Shane D.

Eventually, we will achieve herd immunity, and if this trend continues we will have gotten there much less painfully than originally anticipated.

Let us hope we do not achieve herd immunity, because it will mean ~3.9 million people die. That has not changed. The present lower death rate does not mean it would be less painful than originally anticipated. It just means old people got sick first, then more young people got sick. To achieve herd immunity, many old people will once again get sick. That cannot be prevented. There is no way to protect old people from an epidemic that reaches 60% of the population. Overall, 2% of 60% of the population must die to achieve herd immunity. That's 3.9 million people. Plus many millions of other people with severe life-long health problems, especially young people who are prone to strokes and amputations. Herd immunity would be by far the worst catastrophe in U.S. history.

Let us hope a vaccine becomes available long before the first flattening of the curve from herd immunity. Even that cannot happen before ~1 million people die.

If you think it unlikely that ~1 million people will die, you are not looking at the numbers. We are 1/4th of the way to the first million deaths, after 3 months. * The death rate has fallen but it is rising again. If it keeps rising, and there is no vaccine for one year, that will be about ~1 million dead. Unless, of course, state and Federal governments take steps to prevent it. Most of them have taken no steps so far. That is why infections are rising, and why the U.S. has a thousand times more cases than the countries in Asia, even though they have 4 times more people (including China).

* OOPS! Should be 1/8th.

Quote from Shane D.

US deaths down 70% over a 7 day average. New cases are rising, but mostly asymptomatic, or mildly so. With deaths declining, it looks to be a good trend. Some doctors report the virus is losing it's punch, and the data so far supports that.

The virus is highly transmissible R >> 100 as it was a part of the US/Chinese joint mass extinction defense program. Very, very luckily most of us had basic corona immunity that works with 0..99%. So what we did see is probably only the people with less than 70% protection.

We should assume that the virus already found the most vulnerable ones and only a tiny fraction has been missed so far.

The only exception is strong exposure. If the initial dose is high like in close working/sleeping situation along other infected ones, then even 90% immunity will not protect you.

We here see, since one month, no real (ICU) CoV-19 cases anymore. Almost nobody is wearing a mask. The Gym rooms are filled for one hour with dozens of people that could potentially spread it all in the room.

But other, e.g. rural, places with less contact among people will show lower immunity!

Quote from Alan Smith

Let's not have any more politics. I know that it is difficult to avoid, but please make an effort, since political discussion on internet forums, no matter how well-intended will usually degenerate into a cat-fight.

Indeed, as politics has become the main influence of most world views, whether one admits it or not! So it is hard to keep politics separate!

Indeed, I believe some here probably think (but will not admit) that the elite should run the country and that to vote, one should have a certain education level (only from approved institutions of course), pass an approved aptitude test and belong to a certain party. After all ,certain areas of the country and certain groups consist of lower intelligence beings that need looked after because they are not smart enough to know what is good for them!

hmm.. reminds me of something from the not too distant past!

Quote from Bob#2

Indeed, as politics has become the main influence of most world views, whether one admits it or not! So it is hard to keep politics separate!

Indeed, I believe some here probably think (but will not admit) that the elite should run the country and that to vote, one should have a certain education level (only from approved institutions of course), pass an approved aptitude test and belong to a certain party. After all ,certain areas of the country and certain groups consist of lower intelligence beings that need looked after because they are not smart enough to know what is good for them!

hmm.. reminds me of something from the not too distant past!

I think it is the other way round. Politics now has become so partisan that people form camps based on the other feelings about the world and argue about politics in a tribal way.

Politics cannot be a primary thing, it is a means to an end informed by morality, ones views about human nature and society. There are definite character-based differences there (and nothing wrong with that). The problem is when those understandable differences get imposed on a binary and tribal "we are right they are wrong" political divide.

And, what I dislike about current leadership in many Western countries, is that (based on a genuine popular frustration at lack of needed action, and society no longer making things better for children than parents) we have elected people with strong partisan views who see the otehr side as the enemy. Two-party political systems just encourage this. It has now gone too far, making a proper synthesis and debate very difficult.

In the US I would naturally side more with the democrats over most issues, but I can appreciate the views of the "old" republicans (while disagreeing). I can also appreciate the views of those who feel politics is corrupt and nothing changes. What I can absolutely not appreciate is people who wage war in a partisan manner branding "the other side" as evil because arguing things (properly) they do not agree. That is now both sides. So, for example, anyone who votes with or against the president always, on partisan lines, is not a proper part of the political system. Even Trump is not always wrong in terms of policy decisions, I view his process (how he justifies and promotes his actions) as morally culpable. But some of his actions are (my judgement again) correct.

Quote from Bob#2

Indeed, I believe some here probably think (but will not admit) that the elite should run the country and that to vote, one should have a certain education level (only from approved institutions of course), pass an approved aptitude test . . .

I don't know who you think believes that. It sounds batty to me.

I don't think much of aptitude tests. You can improve your score on them with practice. If you never took anything like an aptitude test, you will likely get a bad score no matter how smart you are.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I think it is the other way round. Politics now has become so partisan that people form camps based on the other feelings about the world and argue about politics in a tribal way.

Politics cannot be a primary thing, it is a means to an end informed by morality, ones views about human nature and society. There are definite character-based differences there (and nothing wrong with that). The problem is when those understandable differences get imposed on a binary and tribal "we are right they are wrong" political divide.

And, what I dislike about current leadership in many Western countries, is that (based on a genuine popular frustration at lack of needed action, and society no longer making things better for children than parents) we have elected people with strong partisan views who see the otehr side as the enemy. Two-party political systems just encourage this. It has now gone too far, making a proper synthesis and debate very difficult.

In the US I would naturally side more with the democrats over most issues, but I can appreciate the views of the "old" republicans (while disagreeing). I can also appreciate the views of those who feel politics is corrupt and nothing changes. What I can absolutely not appreciate is people who wage war in a partisan manner branding "the other side" as evil because arguing things (properly) they do not agree. That is now both sides. So, for example, anyone who votes with or against the president always, on partisan lines, is not a proper part of the political system. Even Trump is not always wrong in terms of policy decisions, I view his process (how he justifies and promotes his actions) as morally culpable. But some of his actions are (my judgement again) correct.

Display More

Well said.

True, some people develop their views on subjects based upon what their affiliated party platform is. But not all people do. Many pick their "party" by what matches their core values/beliefs the most.

I used to think that a big problem with the US is that we effectively have only a two party system. That we need more choices. While there are a couple of out laying parties, they themselves seem to be pretty narrow focused, but regardless, if one is not Dem or Rep,, one has little chance of winning a seat. Mainly because of the huge political machines behind those two parties. I know that very many, and I for one, feel voting for a third party candidate is pretty useless, even if there was a candidate running that I could vote for! (Which most often there does not seem to be)

It is very sad that it seems many people have to vote for "the lesser of to evils"!

But now that I look at other governments that have several political parties, I am unconvinced they are any better. They seem to fight and bicker just as much!

The U.S. House is holding hearings on the coronavirus. Here are some comments by Fauci, transcribed at CNN. You can see the video there, which includes more comments.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/l…7c6088ba4ccfe9c6783b0d628

“You have a very large country, very heterogeneous, major differences — for example, between the New York metropolitan area and Casper, Wyoming,” but it’s clear, Fauci said, “we've been hit badly.”

Fauci described the rise in cases in some parts of the country as "a disturbing surge of infections."

"Right now, for example, the New York metropolitan area, which has been hit extraordinarily hard, has done very well in bringing the cases down and using the guidelines that we have very carefully put together in a step-wise fashion to try and carefully reopen their city and their state. However, in other areas of the country we're now seeing a disturbing surge of infections that looks like it's a combination, but one of the things is an increase in community spread, and that's something that I'm really quite concerned about that and you know that this has been something that's been in the press over the past couple of days," Fauci said.

Fauci gave his advice on addressing these increase in cases.

"The way you address that — and I've said this over and over again — is you have to have the manpower, the system, the testing to identify, isolate and contact trace in an effective way so that when you see those increases, you can understand where they are coming from, and you can do something about them," Fauci said.

Fauci added, "right now the next couple of weeks are going to be critical in our ability to address those surgings that we're seeing in Florida, in Texas and in Arizona." . . .

Sourced elsewhere:

Fauci also said he is "cautiously optimistic" that a vaccine will be ready by early next year.

The situation in Georgia is going from bad to worse:

https://www.ajc.com/news/coron…d/jvoLBozRtBSVSNQDDAuZxH/

Quote from JedRothwell

The situation in Georgia is going from bad to worse:

https://www.ajc.com/news/coron…d/jvoLBozRtBSVSNQDDAuZxH/

I usually look at trends in hospitalization, the trend in the data here does not look good and calls for action.

Quote from stefan

I usually look at trends in hospitalization, the trend in the data here does not look good and calls for action.

Yes. The trend in hospitalization in Georgia is ominous. The Healthdata projections show the state will run out of ICU beds by the last week in July:

https://covid19.healthdata.org…states-of-america/georgia

This projection is widely considered credible, by the White House staff and others.

The governor and other officials have not called for action. They have not said anything for a few weeks that I am aware of. Fauci and other Federal officials testifying today called for action, in the testimony I quoted above. I have not seen any indication the Federal government intends to take any of the steps they recommend.

In the graph labeled "Daily infections and testing" on this page, you see that the number of tests in Georgia has declined from the peak of 17,800 per day on May 21, down to around 6,000 today. It seems tests are hard to get. The hospital wants me to get tested, but they want me to drive an hour to the middle of nowhere to get one. They have no openings available in Atlanta. I think the lack of testing is why the "Estimated infections" is much higher than "Confirmed infections."

Texas and Florida, the two hotspots, have more testing and more ICU beds available than Georgia. Florida will not run out of ICU beds until September 1. So, if you live in Florida and you are going to get seriously ill enough to be hospitalized, as 20% of patients do, now is the time to get sick.

https://covid19.healthdata.org…d-states-of-america/texas

https://covid19.healthdata.org…states-of-america/florida

Quote from JedRothwell

Yes. The trend in hospitalization in Georgia is ominous. The Healthdata projections show the state will run out of ICU beds by the last week in July:

https://covid19.healthdata.org…states-of-america/georgia

It looks like there is a coming ICU bed shortage in several States including my own. That should be a wake-up call for everyone. We could be looking at 35k new cases today.

The Recovery study did produce some useful results.

Not definitive, but it seems that HCQ absorption can vary significantly.

Conjecture: Those selected were already severely impaired by Covid, or perhaps by an excessive dose.

Already ill hospitalized patients may have very different, lower HCQ uptake --

"Hydroxychloroquine serum concentrations in non-critical care patients infected with SARS-CoV-2"

https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…06.23.20137992v1.full.pdf

Evidence from Toronto nursing home on efficacy of ivermectin --

"COVID19 Ivermectin-Saved lives in Toronto Nursing Home. Pandemic Protection-Turning Point?"

The corona viruses typically get milder in summer and to me at least in sweden people and news and experts starts to downplay the issue and claim no such thing for covid-19. So I checked icu jospitalisatikns and compared to weather data. We have had nice weather sinse shortly before june started and before that a cold may. And low and behold the trend down started almost mathematically 10 days after the nice weather started e.g. the delay from infection to icu. So the southern states should have dropping cases as surely its hotter there than in sweden. Its not decreasing in some states and thats worrying. Also this means that sweden and other countries will be supprised when the temperature starts to drop again.

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

Evidence from Toronto nursing home on efficacy of ivermectin --

The US citizens won't get it. Ivermectin is banned for humans by the FRJB mafia... You first have to elect independent deputies as the the today ones already for 30 years now refuse to ban antibiotics for raising cattle/hens & eggs...

Money is more important than your live! Ask your Senator or Congress man!

Illinois to move to Phase 4 opening this Friday.

https://www.bing.com/search?FO…V02&q=illinois+phase+plan

Illinois reported 1,000 new cases today.

Phase 4 will allow for the reopening of business such as health and fitness, movies and theater, museums and zoos, as well as indoor dining at restaurants.

It will also allow for expanded gathering sizes, increasing the limit from 10 to 50 people or fewer. This expanded gathering limit extends to key activities like meetings, events, and funerals.

And what I find most surprising is that this goes for the entire state. Our county has 73 cases and had no new cases reported for almost 2 weeks. The Chicago area has 97,000 of the states 138,224 cases and the vast majority of the 1,000 new cases. Yet no difference in the plan to reopen Chicago from our county.

This makes no sense.

It appears logical to open up counties such as ours, but Chicago will surely have a major increase. But then the governor knows he did not stand a chance with trying to keep Chicago "locked down" and the rest of the state "more open", But then, I doubt health is the main motivator, or the riots and looting would have been buffered more.