Statistical data vs emotion -

[Deranged Rhino]

27 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My reading of how Sweden has its lower rates is that the population there has Ben very good at voluntarily practicing social distancing guidelines.  

 

There's that word. 

 

Different from mandate. 

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Boatdrinks said:

There is some risk. It’s definitely  not impossible ; there are documented cases. The larger point of his post is correct, though. 

We don’t really know if there is ‘some’ risk to the general population. The CDC site doesn’t define the pre-existing conditions of the under 55 deaths.  I’d virtually guarantee you that all of them had a significant health condition prior to Covid 19. I’m sticking to my position that your typical healthy under 55 year old has ZERO chance of dying from this virus. In fact, the CDC site shows ALL of the deaths from ALL causes and what you learn is that young people rarely die in 21st Century America, unless it’s from an accident or other man made cause. We live in a VERY safe time in human history.

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Lol, you made the post, back it up. Zero risk? That sounds like BS 

cdc.gov

 

was that really so hard? 

[Boatdrinks]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

We don’t really know if there is ‘some’ risk to the general population. The CDC site doesn’t define the pre-existing conditions of the under 55 deaths.  I’d virtually guarantee you that all of them had a significant health condition prior to Covid 19. I’m sticking to my position that your typical healthy under 55 year old has ZERO chance of dying from this virus. In fact, the CDC site shows ALL of the deaths from ALL causes and what you learn is that young people rarely die in 21st Century America, unless it’s from an accident or other man made cause. We live in a VERY safe time in human history.

I’d be inclined to agree with you. Especially after examining the NYC data. It’s just the usual Tibs overreacting to some minutiae or a slight overstatement to ignore / dismiss the greater point. 

[Big Gun]

8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

If he runs again, he will win in a walk.

There are people who have enjoyed being told what to do, and who to obey. The over 70 crowd (who get a government check and can afford to stay home) seem to be most impressed with the stay at home orders, and appear to be the least willing to open up.
 

I hear you but it's hard to understand peoples mindset that think he is doing a good job. Cuomo also mandated nursing homes take in covid 19 positive people, so maybe there is hope the old folks remember that and don't vote for him.

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

There's that word. 

 

Different from mandate. 

I’ll say this again, I would much rather see us all band together and help each other out by each wearing masks.  Is that clear?

 

What I also indicated is that if I were governor of my state and see that despite the social distancing people are not doing so, I would have to consider mandating it but that the legality of that would have to be addressed.  Is that also clear?

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Boatdrinks said:

I’d be inclined to agree with you. Especially after examining the NYC data. It’s just the usual Tibs overreacting to some minutiae or a slight overstatement to ignore / dismiss the greater point. 

When you visit the CDC site the figures in their table are pretty astounding. If you just look at the figures on who dies in America, it’s pretty much dominated by ‘old people’, with or without the virus.
 

600,000 out 650,000 deaths are people 60 and over. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I’ll say this again, I would much rather see us all band together and help each other out by each wearing masks.  Is that clear?

 

It is. It's also different from where you started. But I'm glad you're there. 

 

 

[Tiberius]

6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

We don’t really know if there is ‘some’ risk to the general population. The CDC site doesn’t define the pre-existing conditions of the under 55 deaths.  I’d virtually guarantee you that all of them had a significant health condition prior to Covid 19. I’m sticking to my position that your typical healthy under 55 year old has ZERO chance of dying from this virus. In fact, the CDC site shows ALL of the deaths from ALL causes and what you learn is that young people rarely die in 21st Century America, unless it’s from an accident or other man made cause. We live in a VERY safe time in human history.

cdc.gov

 

was that really so hard? 

This? 

Where do it zero bro? 

Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Children — United States, February 12–April 2, 2020

Weekly / April 10, 2020 / 69(14);422–426

 

On April 6, 2020, this report was posted online as an MMWR Early Release.

CDC COVID-19 Response Team (View author affiliations)

View suggested citation

Summary

What is already known about this topic?

Data from China suggest that pediatric coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases might be less severe than cases in adults and that children (persons aged <18 years) might experience different symptoms than adults.

What is added by this report?

In this preliminary description of pediatric U.S. COVID-19 cases, relatively few children with COVID-19 are hospitalized, and fewer children than adults experience fever, cough, or shortness of breath. Severe outcomes have been reported in children, including three deaths.

What are the implications for public health practice?

Pediatric COVID-19 patients might not have fever or cough. Social distancing and everyday preventive behaviors remain important for all age groups because patients with less serious illness and those without symptoms likely play an important role in disease transmission.

[Buffalo_Gal]

5 minutes ago, pop gun said:

I hear you but it's hard to understand peoples mindset that think he is doing a good job. Cuomo also mandated nursing homes take in covid 19 positive people, so maybe there is hope the old folks remember that and don't vote for him.

That is a tough one. If you live in a nursing home, and are recovered enough from COVID-19 to not be in the hospital, where exactly should you go? Many nursing homes are rehab centers, too.

(And I ask this as someone whose father is in a NYS nursing home, and who has had several staff cases in the home where he resides.)
 

[SoCal Deek]

Tibs?

Don’t be an ASS!

The CDC has a comprehensive table showing the deaths by age since the pandemic started and running through last week. You obviously have a tough time with math and data. 

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Tibs?

Don’t be an ASS!

The CDC has a comprehensive table showing the deaths by age since the pandemic started and running through last week. You obviously have a tough time with math and data. 

One of the things that should also be studied is the ongoing morbidity effect of the virus in younger individuals.  While surviving will there be higher incidence of fibrotic lung disease for example.  There is a suggestion that the incidence of clotting disorders in younger patients is higher and data on that should be gathered.  

5 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

That is a tough one. If you live in a nursing home, and are recovered enough from COVID-19 to not be in the hospital, where exactly should you go? Many nursing homes are rehab centers, too.

(And I ask this as someone whose father is in a NYS nursing home, and who has had several staff cases in the home where he resides.)
 

Good question.

[Cinga]

On 4/16/2020 at 10:05 AM, mead107 said:

Before c19 150-200 people died in NYC everyday 

are those now be counted as C19 deaths? 

 

I've seen this posted before, where do these numbers come from? In a city of 8 million, stats of 80 average age would give you almost twice that a day.

[Orlando Buffalo]

6 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Tibs?

Don’t be an ASS!

 

I am sorry but you will have better luck not paying taxes than getting tibs to stop.

[Boatdrinks]

7 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

I’ll say this again, I would much rather see us all band together and help each other out by each wearing masks.  Is that clear?

 

What I also indicated is that if I were governor of my state and see that despite the social distancing people are not doing so, I would have to consider mandating it but that the legality of that would have to be addressed.  Is that also clear?

It’s really simple. Just assume that everyone around you ( even those you know personally) are infected and contagious. If that makes you want to wear a mask as a measure of protection, go ahead and wear one. Not really a problem. Mandating the wearing of face covering in America - that’s a problem. 

[mead107]

1 hour ago, Cinga said:

I've seen this posted before, where do these numbers come from? In a city of 8 million, stats of 80 average age would give you almost twice that a day.

404 is average per day for ny state. (2008-2017) 
it is their  stats from health site for ny state. 

 

 

[Magox]

On 4/26/2020 at 8:33 AM, oldmanfan said:

Hope you’re right.   There is some progress with convalescent serum from infected individuals but also some data on reinfection.  So it’s kind of murky right now.

 

 

Regarding  our discussion:

 

 

Quote

 

Dr. Scott Gottlieb told CNBC on Monday he believes that most people who had the new coronavirus will have “some level” of immunity.

“Now how long that immunity lasts, how strong it is, we don’t know. It might not last that long in certain people. It might not be that strong so you can get reinfected but perhaps not get as sick,” he said on “Squawk Box.”

 

Gottlieb, the former commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, was responding to a warning put out last week by the World Health Organization, which later clarified its position.

The WHO on Friday advised governments against issuing so-called immunity passports to people who have antibodies for Covid-19 to travel or return to work “assuming that they are protected against re-infection.”

“There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection,” the organization wrote in a scientific brief dated April 24.

In follow-up tweets Saturday, the WHO clarified that it also expects Covid-19 antibodies will “provide some level of protection.” 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Magox said:

 

 

Regarding  our discussion:

 

 

 

Lot of stuff we just don't know for sure about yet.

[Magox]

20 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Lot of stuff we just don't know for sure about yet.

Yep, things are happening in real time and decisions that policy makers are enacting have profound impacts on people’s health and livelihoods and they should be taking in the data and making the best decisions with what is coming in.  We don’t have the luxury to wait until things are conclusive.

[Magox]

More serological antibody testing data is coming in through New York.   It's even more widespread than their initial findings according to their testing.

 

 

Quote

 

New York's second round of testing included a more-than-doubled sample size (7,500). Antibodies turned up in 14.9 percent of the samples, meaning those people had coronavirus at some point and recovered. That's a full percentage point higher than in Cuomo's first round of testing, which saw 13.9 percent of positives samples. It could mean nearly 3 million New Yorkers have been infected at one point or another; many may have never known.

Men were more likely (16.9 percent) to test positive for the antibody than women (13.1 percent). As with the initial round of testing, New York City samples had the highest positivity rate (24.7 percent), followed by Long Island (14.4 percent) and Westchester/Rockland counties (15.1 percent). The New York City number increased by more than three percentage points from the first round to the second, while Long Island's dipped by nearly three percentage points. Upstate, apart from the Hudson Valley area, sees much lower antibody numbers.

 

 

 

I've been saying it for a while now, by the time we get to the fall, New York City will be over 40%.    That along with all the measures that will be in place by then should provide a strong firewall for New York City.     Just pull out all the stops to protect the most vulnerable and get back to business.  That would be the intelligent data driven approach.

[Cinga]

21 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

That is a tough one. If you live in a nursing home, and are recovered enough from COVID-19 to not be in the hospital, where exactly should you go? Many nursing homes are rehab centers, too.

(And I ask this as someone whose father is in a NYS nursing home, and who has had several staff cases in the home where he resides.)
 

Not to sound harsh, but I would say absolutely NOT! Problem in a nursing home, and probably the main reason we have so many infected, is that most of them have a single tied together air system. So even if you only have one infected, lock them in their room, it WILL spread through the air system. Their not isolated systems like a hospital ward or even a darn hotel. 

 

We are really really screwing up in nursing homes and we don't need a Cuomo multi-million dollar study to find out how.

Edited April 27, 2020 by Cinga