Are you personally worried about getting the Coronavirus?

[tksirius]

 

[tksirius]

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

If he tells me this inappropriate I will gladly apologize. Not my intention to preach politics, but holding people responsible for their actions is well beyond politics. Sorry you do not know the difference.

Curious What actions you talking about? And before you respond let’s remember this is a virus that has NO vaccine and little to no treatment options when it arrived. We are also a global operating world, with people traveling in and out of all countries on a day by day basis.

 

[CP87]

thats fucked up. Grow those numbers. We gotta pump those numbers up!

I don't think it is a nefarious thing, just a reflection of the ambiguity in determining cause-of-death in any circumstance, compounded by the current need for rapid feedback on how COVID-19 is progressing. The CDC reference guide for reporting COVID-19 death can be found here. From the conclusion of the guide:

An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19 infection, which depends in part on proper death certification, is critical to ongoing public health surveillance and response. When a death is due to COVID–19, it is likely the UCOD [underlying cause of death] and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVID–19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.
​

We all probably have decisions we need to make in our own jobs that involve ambiguity. Think about some such decision, and then imagine you have to make it much faster than usual without the time to gather your usual information. And perhaps you need to do it at a time when there are more pressing matters (e.g. saving the lives of others) that you also need to attend to. You would probably use some heuristics as short cuts to make those decisions that you wouldn't lean on under normal circumstances.

 

[CP87]

On Sunday evening 4/5/2020 I checked the IA Dept of Public Health website. I have read where the Iowa Governor is getting criticism for not declaring a stay-in-place directive. The DMR indicates they are using a 12 point criteria for determining actions. According to the IDPH there have been 10,841 tested of which 9973 were negative and 868 positive. There are 91 hospitalized, 72 that have been discharge after hospitalization, 542 listed as recovered, and 22 deceased. I'll leave it up to you to do your own analysis. I did find it interesting that more women have tested positive than men.

I will add to this. The Chris Murray (U of Washington researcher who created one of the first models on COVID-19 spread in the US) model shows Iowa with peak resource use (beds, ICU beds, ventilators) on April 26. At that time, the model projects Iowa will need 726 beds (the state has 4,297 available), 150 ICU beds (246 available), and 127 invasive ventilators (no data on how many available).

Peak deaths on this day projected to be 17 (range 1 - 95).

Iowa seems to be handling this fairly well, and I am perfectly fine with the Governor trusting her citizens to follow recommendations without a mandate. The mandate would be nearly unenforceable anyway, and the feedbak she has gotten from law enforcement is they have no desire to arrest people for such violations.

 

[CP87]

Also in regard to the model I mentioned above, the overall US projections are starting to look less scary. They are projecting a peak for April 15 (I am sure that is being driven by NYC at this point), and they are still projecting a substantial resource shortage by that time. But using their SIR model (Susceptible-Infected-Recovered/Removed) that assume immunity once recovered, they project only 82,000 deaths by August 4 (range about 50,000 - 140,000), which is akin to a really bad flu season (the worst in recent hisotry was '17-'18, with an estimated 61,000 deaths).

If other major metros had gotten slammed like NYC (which accounts for about a 1/3 of all US deaths), it could have been much worse. Obviously not out of the woods yet (Detroit currently getting hit hard), but if it can be kept from spreading like wild-fire in those big cities, it doesn't appear that we will see an Italy-redux.

The one thing this country has going for it (okay, we have lots of things, but this is the one thing I will emphasize now), we do new technology and we do biomedical research better than anyone else in the world. We were not prepared for this particular crisis, but we will get through it, and we are going to be much stronger on the other side.

 

[uihawk82]

I don't think it is a nefarious thing, just a reflection of the ambiguity in determining cause-of-death in any circumstance, compounded by the current need for rapid feedback on how COVID-19 is progressing. The CDC reference guide for reporting COVID-19 death can be found here. From the conclusion of the guide:

An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19 infection, which depends in part on proper death certification, is critical to ongoing public health surveillance and response. When a death is due to COVID–19, it is likely the UCOD [underlying cause of death] and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVID–19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.
​

We all probably have decisions we need to make in our own jobs that involve ambiguity. Think about some such decision, and then imagine you have to make it much faster than usual without the time to gather your usual information. And perhaps you need to do it at a time when there are more pressing matters (e.g. saving the lives of others) that you also need to attend to. You would probably use some heuristics as short cuts to make those decisions that you wouldn't lean on under normal circumstances.

Great points above and the people who are quibbling about the death counts amaze me to a degree. These people forget the medical doctors use differential diagnosis techniques along with testing and other diagnostic tools to make determinations. For instance:

Taking xrays shows the damage to the lungs. This damage along with all the other symptoms can highly ID covid 19 since one of the deadly things about covid 19 I have read from experts is that it attacks the whole lung. It has been published that most all viruses attack either the lower or upper respiratory tract and lungs.

And there is testing. And there are flu tests that can be used to rule out the flu which is the only other logical alternative right now given the symptoms.

Soon, as others as mentioned by others, the authorities at WHO etc will take averages for deaths over the same time frames from the last 10 years from all regions of the countries, they will use statistical analysis techniques to compare death numbers from this current time period to find an accurate number within a fairly high confidence level.

 

[uihawk82]

Curious What actions you talking about? And before you respond let’s remember this is a virus that has NO vaccine and little to no treatment options when it arrived. We are also a global operating world, with people traveling in and out of all countries on a day by day basis.

Are people still traveling all over the globe and in and out of countries? I wonder.

 

[uihawk82]

I will add to this. The Chris Murray (U of Washington researcher who created one of the first models on COVID-19 spread in the US) model shows Iowa with peak resource use (beds, ICU beds, ventilators) on April 26. At that time, the model projects Iowa will need 726 beds (the state has 4,297 available), 150 ICU beds (246 available), and 127 invasive ventilators (no data on how many available).

Peak deaths on this day projected to be 17 (range 1 - 95).

Iowa seems to be handling this fairly well, and I am perfectly fine with the Governor trusting her citizens to follow recommendations without a mandate. The mandate would be nearly unenforceable anyway, and the feedbak she has gotten from law enforcement is they have no desire to arrest people for such violations.

The Iowa Dept of Public Health and an Iowa Medical group have called for the governor to shut things down. These 12 points are some arbitrary number made up by WHOM?

Anyway a ONE week tight shutdown in Iowa could really help to 'catchup' as some have called for Trump to call a national 1 week shut down at the least because they see that as being very helpful.

 

[PCHawk]

I don't think it is a nefarious thing, just a reflection of the ambiguity in determining cause-of-death in any circumstance, compounded by the current need for rapid feedback on how COVID-19 is progressing. The CDC reference guide for reporting COVID-19 death can be found here. From the conclusion of the guide:

An accurate count of the number of deaths due to COVID–19 infection, which depends in part on proper death certification, is critical to ongoing public health surveillance and response. When a death is due to COVID–19, it is likely the UCOD [underlying cause of death] and thus, it should be reported on the lowest line used in Part I of the death certificate. Ideally, testing for COVID–19 should be conducted, but it is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate without this confirmation if the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty.
​

We all probably have decisions we need to make in our own jobs that involve ambiguity. Think about some such decision, and then imagine you have to make it much faster than usual without the time to gather your usual information. And perhaps you need to do it at a time when there are more pressing matters (e.g. saving the lives of others) that you also need to attend to. You would probably use some heuristics as short cuts to make those decisions that you wouldn't lean on under normal circumstances.

That's a good, thought out response. TK should be here any second to make a long, thought out rebuttal to it.

 

[PCHawk]

The Iowa Dept of Public Health and an Iowa Medical group have called for the governor to shut things down. These 12 points are some arbitrary number made up by WHOM?

Anyway a ONE week tight shutdown in Iowa could really help to 'catchup' as some have called for Trump to call a national 1 week shut down at the least because they see that as being very helpful.

I think there are two reasons to shut down. One is to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. The other is because of pressure to do it. The only reason to shut down now is because of pressure to do it. Flattening the curve to try to keep it under the health care line is already going to take too long. If we flatten it to keep it way under the line, it will take even longer.

 

[PCHawk]

I just looked to see how many thousand people died in the UA so far. Its 69. I'd say we're in a pretty good position....

 

[SteveGarvey1]

New Jersey's governor has threatened, when this is over, to ban residents from states that didn't issue the order from entering his state.

What's interesting is that Iowa plays at Rutgers next year in basketball. Presumably wiser heads will have prevailed by then.

So Rutgers will forfeit then. Sweet, we'll take the W.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Whether tests are positive or negative it is still a data point and data that adds up.

I would love to take a test tomorrow to see if I have had it. I have not had any big time symptoms but over the last few weeks I have felt tired, slight stuffy head and scratchy throat, no fever I do not think. But I am pretty much staying home except for a few trips to store and pharmacy and to get home improvement stuff.

If I tested positive and been around my wife all this time maybe she has had it. If we both test positive and have some good immunity we can run errands for others etc etc.

We have to ask the question "I wonder how many people in NYC and NY state have it". To me that is a huge question as far as how to plan. Well only one way to find out the answer.

One issue is they've rushed these tests out so one has to wonder how bad the false negative rate is. If it's fairly significant then we are vastly under reporting. I do get your point about people who've had it helping. That is beneficial. As to testing everyone and everything just to know at this point, I don't see a huge benefit. It's one thing to know the numbers, but if it doesn't end up helping in the end, is it really worth it?

One negative aspect of testing everyone is that resources are used for majority who will come back negative. Masks for evaluation, gloves. Again, Iowa alone is only about 8% coming back positive. Look at the resources used that need to be used for Pt's that will be coming in and hospitalized this week. I know that has been a concern.

Again, I do agree with the benefit of knowing if had it though.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

New Jersey's governor has threatened, when this is over, to ban residents from states that didn't issue the order from entering his state.

What's interesting is that Iowa plays at Rutgers next year in basketball. Presumably wiser heads will have prevailed by then.

Oh great, .........and I just recently got this itch to go to NEW JERSEY !!

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Why is the US recovery rate so low? Is it merely because we are only in this a few weeks. Washing and California have been battling this for some time now, though. Latest numbers show ..................

United States
337,309 Confirmed cases
17,528 Recoveries
9,643 Deaths

Just curious your thoughts on this. Shouldn't the recovery rate be higher. Maybe we are still relatively early in this and this number most likely will increase over time as we get to the peak and after. Seems like should be higher, though. I suppose recoveries could be under reported as well. Not sure how that reporting works.

 

[GoHawks12345]

More stories of failure regarding production and distribution of PPE.

 

[uihawk82]

Information is coming out that Fed contracts for making, ordering masks were not done, in place, started, completed until mid-March. That is terrible news for healthcare workers. It is terrible to know the Fed was so late to act.

Let's get it together please. Please put aside your insistence like you are an expert Navarro and others. Please listen to experts who will also have to re-calibrate their thoughts with new evidence.

 

[RobHowe]

 

[GoHawks12345]

And the story that broke over the weekend that PPE equipment out of the strategic national supply was being provided to commercial instead of public entities.

Forcing the public entities (states and hospitals) to pay large markups on the equipment.