Amazing turnaround for Brazil -- Zero new recorded Deaths https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/07/brazil-stops-publishing-death-toll-coronavirus-305236
Feel free to show me what you are talking about. I get the daily data from covidtracking.com. Their data set is pretty large. I've also gone straight to the data from the states with the largest infections. I've looked at data sets from all over the world. I've studied the CDC data. I've gone to as many direct sources of data as I can. I've showed you guys where I'm getting this data. I honestly don't know what you are referring to. I need some kind of example. I'm more than happy to be criticized, but give me a little help here because this seems to be a very strange and incorrect criticism to me. Also, the data is what it is. It's not like I wanted the data to show that at risk groups that exist. I don't want black and Hispanic people to be suffering in greater amounts. The reality is that it is occurring for multiple reasons. If we don't pay attention to the positives and negatives of reality then we are doing a disservice to ourselves. I don't want half of our deaths to be coming from nursing homes, but it's just a matter of fact. What is there to dispute? Am I skewing something there? Remember, as I explained before, when this thread first started my stance was completely different than what it is now. It's not because I've wanted to see a different reality. It's because I've spent time trying to carefully consider all aspects of what I have seen. That consideration has pushed me into the opinion I have now. If things continue to develop that show me something else then perhaps I will change my opinion in the future. I chose my words carefully when I said "Certainly something to keep an eye on with the positive tests, but I don't see much reason to panic yet." on the last page. Maybe you missed it, but the yet implies that things could start becoming a problem. Last, I've backed away from posting more positive things since the crowd here seems be attached to the negative which is frustrating. One example of this was when I saw that there is a decent indication that kids infected with covid pose a VERY minor risk to adults and that they aren't major sources of spread. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01354-0 Spoiler Transmission risk Even less well understood is whether infected children spread the virus in a similar way to adults. A study3 of a cluster of cases in the French Alps describes one nine-year-old who attended three schools and a skiing class while showing symptoms of COVID-19, but did not infect a single person. “It would be almost unheard of for an adult to be exposed to that many people and not infect anyone else,” says Munro. Kirsty Short, a virologist at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, led an as-yet unpublished meta-analysis of several household studies, including some from countries that had not closed schools at the time, such as Singapore. She found that children are rarely the first person to bring the infection into a home; they had the first identified case in only roughly 8% of households. By comparison, children had the first identified case during outbreaks of H5N1 avian influenza in some 50% of households, the study reports. “The household studies are reassuring because even if there are a lot of infected children, they are not going home and infecting others,” says Munro. But Wong argues that such research is biased, because the households weren’t randomly selected but picked because there was already a known infected adult there. So it is also very difficult to establish who introduced the virus, he says. School and day-care closures could also explain why children aren’t often the main source of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Other respiratory viruses can transmit from adults to children and back, so “I don't believe this virus is an exception”, he says. In fact, two preprints have reported that children with COVID-19 symptoms can have similar levels of viral RNA to adults. “Based on these results, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation. Children may be as infectious as adults,” note the authors of one of the studies, led by Christian Drosten, a virologist at the Charité hospital in Berlin. However, it is not yet clear whether high levels of viral RNA are an indicator of how infectious a person is, notes Harish Nair, an epidemiologist at the University of Edinburgh, UK. Few studies exist of transmission from schools to the broader community, but an Australian report from an ongoing investigation suggests that it’s limited, and much lower than with other respiratory viruses, such as influenza. Among more than 850 people who had been in contact with 9 students and 9 staff members confirmed to have COVID-19 in primary and high schools in the state of New South Wales, only two cases of COVID-19 were recorded among those contacts, both in children. On the basis of the evidence, Munro says children should be allowed back to school. “Children have the least to gain from lockdowns, and they have a lot to lose,” such as missing out on education and not getting added social support such as free school meals, he says. Schools reopening does not mean a return to normal, says Short. There will be lots of restrictions and changes, such as moving desks apart in classrooms and closing playgrounds, to reduce transmission risk, she says. Studies of transmission in schools as they reopen will also be important, says Wong. Researchers in the Netherlands plan to closely monitor this as schools open gradually over the coming weeks. Originally, I thought kids were a major source of spread. New information was presented and it lead me to change my point of view. This came from one of my friends who has kids and he has been doing research trying to understand what risk his kids might pose to his in laws. I read thru it and it seemed to be decent information. Does it mean there is no risk with kids? No, but there are things indicating that they don't transmit the virus as effectively. When I share this does this make you think I'm trying to minimize the risk? Or is it simply that the risk isn't as great as I first thought?
Please keep posting positive stuff, robbie Dont succumb to the unnecessary and feed trolls who get off on that negativity cough @deb4rockets
I'm not a troll, but maybe you are. My concerns are valid as a Substitute teacher who is exposed to hundreds of adults (staff, therapists, teachers, administrators, and other school personnel) and thousands of kids, working in over 25 schools as my job. I take assignments based on my specialty, and that requires me to take jobs all across the district. It's easier not to worry if you don't walk in my shoes, but my worries dont make me a troll.
I'm enjoying the weekend and don't wish to get into an internet debate or derail this thread. As you may have noticed, I've 'liked' several of your posts in this thread and don't have a problem with positive news or info that can benefit the community. There does, however, seem to be two camps here: one that believes the virus is a giant nothingburger, and another that believes this virus poses a threat of some sort. Some in the nothingburger camp are pure idiots. And some in the threat camp, including me, probably take our fear and precautions too far. The nothingburger types are relatively easy to spot. The bulk of them share nothing but news downplaying the risks of the virus. They constantly readjust the goalposts with their, "see only 20,000 have died... well, now only 35,000 have died... okay, make that 60,000 have died" type posts. And, let's just be honest and get to the point, there's no getting through to them. Now you have taken the time to track the data, which I do truly commend. We can debate the accuracy of the data, but there's no harm in trying. I would do the same if I could find it for my immediate area. What gives me pause, and makes me want to lump you into the nothingburger camp, is that you've expressed a desire to post "positive things" for weeks now. You basically just said above that you find negative news frustrating. Now this doesn't make you an idiot in my book (you are in fact a bright guy, IMO), but this bias makes it impossible, at least in my view, to trust your reports and conclusions. I don't say this to be a jerk or to try and argue. I don't believe I'm an authority on many things, least of all this virus, and I'm sorry if we got off on the wrong foot. It's certainly okay to question what we're hearing from the media, whether it be positive or negative. And if I'm an idiot in your view for taking things too cautiously, that's okay too. If it's any consolation I pretty much stopped posting in this thread because I thought people wanted just positive news. Maybe we're all just sick of the virus. At any rate, we should probably agree to disagree and get back to enjoying our weekends.
New Zealand eliminates Covid-19 today with zero active cases remaining, no new reported cases in over 17 days. First country with over 1k official cases to recover. They had 22 deaths out of a population of 5 million, a rate of roughly 4 deaths per million people. Over half of their deaths, 12 cases, came from a single nursing home. They got their first case February 28, enacted a very strict quarantine that entailed a complete lockdown within days of their first local community transfer case, and now 3 months and 1 week later they get to enjoy a Covid-19 free country, for hopefully a good while.
The jobs report was quite a surprise adding 2.5 million workers -- it would be a shame if the data had been somehow manipulated or miscalculated presenting a false sense of progress when in reality the situation is much more precarious.
When PPP got approved (and before it changed) every "small business" had to hire back workers or risk losing money. So it's not too surprising.
The world's going nuts. Everything I read in the D&D lately drives me mad. Something hit my house a few minutes ago that I'm probably not going to like. And I found out earlier today that a relative of mine is having some weird gastrointestinal pain and nausea. So forgive me if it's the last nice thing I write for a while. lol
For those in Harris ... from a few days ago. there is probably surge capacity https://www.click2houston.com/healt...tinues-capacity-could-be-exceeded-in-2-weeks/ HOUSTON – Data collected from the various hospital systems in the Texas Medical Center shows an uptick in the number of Intensive Care admissions of coronavirus patients. This uptick triggered a warning from the medial center that if the current rate of admissions continues, then normal ICU bed capacity could be exceeded in two weeks’ time. “We’ve seen a pretty steady increase in both admissions and ICU admissions over the past week or so,” said Dr. James McDeavitt, Senior Vice President and Dean of Clinical Affairs for the Baylor College of Medicine. “A day in itself is not alarming. The disturbing thing is it seems to be a little bit more every day. It’s been a very consistent increase.”
The difference between asymptomatic (the 20% that never develop symptoms) and pre-symptomatic (the 80% that started asymptomatic but develop symptoms later) are important. What exactly is WHO saying? Would be good for them to show the data. If indeed it is very rare to spread while not showing symptoms for both group (100% of those infected) that’s huge and great news as it would be much easier to manage. CDC earlier data is it could be a major driver and that’s what prompted their mask wearing for all recommendation.
I'm pretty sure you are splitting hairs. Obviously there is a difference in the terms, but as it is a mainstream news report I took it to mean that it is very rare to spread the virus when not exhibiting symptoms (even if infected). Logically this would make sense, bc typically when people are "pre-symptomatic" their viral load has not yet increased to the point of causing noticeable bodily harm. From the article: "To be sure, asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread of the virus appears to still be happening, Van Kerkhove said but remains rare."
I’m not splitting hair. It’s a big difference. Those that never show symptoms may be due to a lower dose of viral infection and they may shed less of the virus which reduces chance of infecting others. The reason I bring this point up is because it’s goes against multiple studies that said the opposite - that it’s likely a big driver of the spread. Either all of those previous data and studies in multiple countries were wrong, or WHO misspoke, or they now have a much larger dataset that change the picture. Remember this started from a live conversation and not some published report from who. You would think something this significant would be backed up by actual published data and studies. So, WHO need to clarify and show the data they have. It’s a huge difference for policy makers. So far, in follow up questions, WHO didn’t reverse their recommendation for masking (which they didn’t initially recommend but did later after all of those data and study that show significant spread while showing no symptom).
I think you are splitting hairs in the context of your original question and the article. She clearly lumps both pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic into the same group (as in she was referring to both). Whether that information is accurate is a different question, but it's not a question of whether she was also talking about pre-symptomatic cases.
that's fair, but my intention was simply, is this really the case and why aren't they publishing data (yet)... it's a big deal to policy maker and they need to have good data. I'm sure the CDC is even thinking - what.. give me the data. WHO doesn't exactly have a steller performance, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. Just show the data.
