Wading through info that conflicts... COVID related..

[PrincessMommy]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

The question is, how much COVID do you actually have going through the population? Are you in a high outbreak state? 

I live in the DMV.  We have parishioners in live in DC, Maryland, and VA. 

[alewife]

5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Whoa. Do you really have a director of health who thinks that viruses can multiply on countertops?? 

 

Unfortunately, yes.  She is in way over her head.  

[Pen]

1 hour ago, PrincessMommy said:

The mask were used to tell the story - not to aid in sound projection.  So there's the "Angry" mask or the "Sad" mask to let the audience know where the story-line was.  Plus, the mouth part was open - so the choir (which didn't sing BTW - it spoke) could talk in unison. 

I kind of wonder about the choir outbreak.  It seems like an outlier.   Have there been other choirs who had similar outbreaks? There are choirs all over the country (mine included) who were meeting up until early/mid March.  I can only speak anecdotally, but in our parish  we have a 30-40 person choir and gather 3-5 people closely around each choir stand.  We're not sitting next to each other holding our own book. And we participate in a common cup for the Eucharist - about 120-150 persons.  No one in my parish has gotten sick from Covid.  No one has even suspected Covid (except those of us who wondered, "Allergies or Covid??").    Like I said, it's anecdotal and no news organization is going to report that we didn't have covid, because it won't sell.  Fear sells.   

 

If no one in a group has CV19, no one will catch it.  If no one has it, it doesn’t matter whether you sing together or French kiss together, afaik.  You can’t catch it unless the virus is present. 

 

I think when the Washington choir got the outbreak, many other far west coast choirs where community spread was strongly suspected took note and stopped meeting and practicing .  (If they had not stopped already.)

(I was in a music group locally but stopped going in I think January. Very early, anyway. ) 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Pen

[Ausmumof3]

2 minutes ago, mms said:

I’m thinking about potential shut downs in the fall not immediately. If our state starts see sawing (even if it is necessary) now  the demonstrations in Michigan will seem mild in comparison to what our populace is likely to do.

Yeah I think that’s a real risk with areas that have locked down too hard to early.  I also think here if we get hit in winter there will not be the public appetite to do this again without a serious problem.  

[Pen]

2 minutes ago, mms said:

What I am seeing here is that many people who went in to this crisis with full cooperation and good will are now falling prey to the narrative that this was all overblown and that the shut downs were over reactions. These are otherwise reasonable thoughtful people.

 

Unfortunately that was predictable from the start.  If it got slowed down quite a few people would believe that meant it wasn’t a problem.  I think the average intelligence is average. Half of people are below that.  And a number of people above lack good science education—including most journalists who mostly weren’t stem oriented .  One cannot use mob mentality to guide policy. 

[alewife]

6 minutes ago, mms said:

What I am seeing here is that many people who went in to this crisis with full cooperation and good will are now falling prey to the narrative that this was all overblown and that the shut downs were over reactions. These are otherwise reasonable thoughtful people.

I also think there in another category who went into the crisis with full cooperation and good will with the understanding that the measures were put in place to flatten the curve so the hospitals were not overwhelmed.  Once hospitals began furloughing nurses and cutting salaries due to empty hospital beds - evidence that the shut-down succeeded, there was frustration when things didn't begin to open back up because it appeared that the objective they had agreed with had changed.

[Pen]

8 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

I can absolutely see why, because we wound up shutting many things down with insufficient information. The lack of information from February meant that some states shut down way too late (NY and some of the Northeast, who were taken totally unawares by the fact that the virus "snuck in" from Europe), and some states shut down without need (much of the middle of the country), when they could have probably done containment instead. 

When you go in blind, though, you have very limited options. 

 

Wisconsin and Illinois had early known cases. It may have been that they and other middle of country areas would have been more like NY and NJ had that been ignored.  

[alewife]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

The problem is that the "flatten the curve" graphic makes no sense in states which have less than a percent infected, which is probably quite a lot of states. You're simply not in a situation of exponential growth that needs to be curtailed. Rather, you're in a situation where you need to be doing containment. The fact that the hospitals weren't overwhelmed yet tells you precisely nothing about whether they will be in the future. What will help with that is instituting measures now. 

The problem, though, is that flattening the curve was the reason given for the measures.  

[alewife]

9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

Well, I know. And for all we knew, the virus was all over and it was a reasonable approach. As it turns out, it wasn't. 

The curve did get flattened in places with serious outbreaks. It wasn't all a myth. 

I haven't seen anyone state that it was a myth.  But, in many places, the hospitals are far from being overwhelmed, and the shelter in place no longer seems necessary.

[Pen]

10 minutes ago, alewife said:

I also think there in another category who went into the crisis with full cooperation and good will with the understanding that the measures were put in place to flatten the curve so the hospitals were not overwhelmed.  Once hospitals began furloughing nurses and cutting salaries due to empty hospital beds - evidence that the shut-down succeeded, there was frustration when things didn't begin to open back up because it appeared that the objective they had agreed with had changed.

 

Yes. I think that is true.  

And at the same time, I also think that a lot of the unhappiness is being fomented.   Some accidentally,  some very much deliberately. 

Michigan has more cases and deaths per population than any of the 3 far west states that first realized there was a problem, including  415 deaths per 1M population compared to California’s 58 deaths per population.    It is  just a bit behind the North East / New England states and Louisiana for large number of cases and deaths per population.   And yet it Michigan is in the news for protests like operation gridlock and people shooting a guard trying to uphold the mask wearing rule.

 I don’t believe that is due to furloughed hospital staff.  

Even if so, That is certainly not a good way to deal with a grievance about furloughed hospital staff.  

 

The places that are actually keeping low numbers of cases are opening up from what I have seen.  A lot started opening in California already.  Washington state is moving into its opening. 

The middle of country states that aren’t having troubles seem to be in opening process or never closed in first place. 

[Pen]

4 minutes ago, mms said:

In our area several rural hospitals have closed permanently and even the city hospitals were never even close to full capacity. It was clear weeks ago that the curve had been flattened, that there was indeed enough ppe and that we would not follow in New York’s footsteps. At the very least elective medical procedures should have been allowed much sooner. Three weeks ago people did not want “full opening of everything right now” and would have cooperated with a slow opening, now they look at the surrounding states that had more cases than us with less restrictions and a prudential, slow, reopening is very unpopular.

 

What is now keeping your rural area from reopening? 

And how many cases of CV19 do you know your area has?

And can any of your rural hospitals get federal or state help to stay open? 

[Joker]

11 minutes ago, alewife said:

I haven't seen anyone state that it was a myth.  But, in many places, the hospitals are far from being overwhelmed, and the shelter in place no longer seems necessary.

Our state never was over whelmed but they definitely don’t have enough PPE which people have seemed to stop caring about I guess.
 

I know the head of a local ER hasn’t been able to be in the same house with her kids since this started due to her youngest being high risk and the lack of adequate protection for her at work. Now our state is opening back up but still not enough PPE. I fear we’re going to lose a lot of good medical professionals because we’re not doing near enough to protect them and I don’t think they’ll put up with it for too much longer. 

[Pen]

8 minutes ago, mms said:

The governor has put us on a phased plan per cdc guidelines that started with elective procedures opening up last week. I don’t think he is doing it wrong per se but that phase should have started three weeks ago from the numbers I’ve seen. At the very least there should have been allowances for differences between rural and urban, there were several counties with no cases at all but same restrictions and this has just about destroyed their already weak economies.

Amongst people I talk to (all social classes and levels of education) the feelings now are that it is too late for phased opening just do it like Georgia. That sort of mindset makes me worry about what will happen the next time we face similar issues.

 

No idea about aid.

 

You may have said already, but if you don’t mind saying, what state are you?

Some states are allowing individual areas or cities or counties to open at different speeds. Have you called or written your elected officials offices and health authority representatives and asked for that? 

 

This article is about Hawaii, which has a lot of controversy about opening right now:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/20/hawaii-coronavirus-covid-19-tourists

[Matryoshka]

5 minutes ago, mms said:

Not when the center of the outbreak of your state is hundreds of miles away from the areas that have no cases. State parks are still closed for camping, hotels are closed through lack of business, I doubt there would have ever been a great influx from the big city. Our governor did crack down on the New Yorkers who were trying to temporarily settle here though 😉

Hundreds of miles can mean nothing.  Or this never would have spread at all.  People move, people visit friends/relatives, go to parks or hiking or fishing or other recreation.  People out in the rural areas go to more populated areas to work and come back home at night.  This is why 'stay at home' works  - much, much more effective in these low-case areas would be rigorous testing and contact tracing, but most states don't have adequate measures for either of those in place, so they had to go with the blunt instrument.  When all you've got is a hammer...

The western, more rural area of our state was looking pretty darn good compared to the eastern populated area.  But one of the worst outbreaks we have was in a nursing facility out there - who knows how it got in.  Hundreds infected, 71 dead so far.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Matryoshka

[wathe]

3 hours ago, brehon said:

 

Same here, wathe. Except on my end I have two N95s — without being fit tested...ever — that I have to alternate using each shift. One obviously doesn’t fit me. I had to use that one last shift when I intubated someone. I’ll use it again in two shifts. I’m assured that even though I had to perform an AGP, the mask will be fine because there weren’t any obvious contaminants on it. Meanwhile, it’ll sit in a brown paper sack inside a cardboard box which I labeled Schrödinger.

My boss finally consented to having us fit tested after our DICO pointed out that maybe he should rethink the liability involved if one of the medics suffers a horrible morbidity or even death due to this virus.

The fit testing will happen in two weeks. 

Oy, that's definitely worse.   We've been fit-testing like mad (as we run out of n95 models and the hospital scrounges up new kinds).  We've also been fit tested for cartridge respirators (the rubbery kind).  But can't actually have them, because apparently the shipment is stuck in the USA at the border (I'm in Canada).

[Pen]

24 minutes ago, mms said:

I don’t like my location posted I’m in fly over country 🙂

yeah, not allowing county by county is part of the problem. Many elected officials do support localized opening, but the governor  has been unwilling to work with elected officials and has been doing everything by executive order. There are several law suits against him now because of this. Localities have been free to be more stringent than state requirements but not the other way around.

 

I would keep calling and writing your Governor’s office.  (I have done a lot of that with mine!) 

It is more likely to be helpful than writing posts here.

Your arguments sound reasonable.

 

(I don’t know about the issue of big city people headed your way...based on Hawaii article, it seems that people are already traveling a fair bit even during SIP type rules.) 

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Pen

[Matryoshka]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

And all the Northeastern states are setting up contact tracing as we speak. Everyone's hiring thousands of people. Frankly, all the states should be doing that yesterday. Scratch yesterday -- the states with smaller issues should have done it 2 months ago. 

Yes, my state is among the first to implement contact tracing - but we're already hard-hit. The cat is long since out of the bag.  Contact tracing is most effective before the outbreak is widespread - the states with low numbers should be just as invested in this, so they don't repeat what's happening here in the Northeast.  I am still getting the feeling that many of the low-number states think since they're more rural, or far away, or it hasn't gotten there yet means it won't ever, even if they open up, so doing all this work to prep hospitals and get more tests and ppe and tracing programs is more 'nice to have'.  I know far from everyone in those places think like that - but a very vocal minority seems to be drowning out other voices...

[alewife]

2 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

And all the Northeastern states are setting up contact tracing as we speak. Everyone's hiring thousands of people. Frankly, all the states should be doing that yesterday. Scratch yesterday -- the states with smaller issues should have done it 2 months ago. 

Is everyone in your state able to get tested?  

My state still doesn't  have enough tests to test everyone who presents with symptoms to determine if they have the virus, let alone test to try to determine how many asymptotic people are in the population.  I have been trying to get my kids tested for antibodies because I think both of them had this while living on campus in February, but am unable to do so.   I feel that my state is a long way from being able to set up contact tracing when they are unable to determine who is carrying the virus and who has recovered from the virus.

[ElizabethB]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

That's totally unacceptable and I'm sorry :-(. 

However, back to the topic of being treated as unreasonable -- I'm still not exactly hearing a plan for opening up the economy in a safe way here. What is the alternative to what most boardies are getting behind? 

Idaho is opening slowly in phases and hired 17 temporary contact tracers.  They were able to trace all contacts without those 17 for all but the highest week of infection, when they had to contact trace only health care workers, nursing homes, other high risk cases.  The state had a robust contact tracing team before but now has one that is prepared for a few more cases.  They also have a program called "crush the curve," put together by a group of local individuals and businesses, where they are doing testing of people with low level symptoms and people in health care positions to augment normal testing.  The group is also doing antibody testing.  

Utah has a similar testing program called test Utah, is opening in phases, and has hired 100 more contact tracers, their original contact tracing team was smaller than Idaho's for their population size. 

Both states seem to have reasonable plans. 

[Pen]

Just now, square_25 said:

Yep. It's a good story. I read it to my homeschool math classes before the shut down, and now I wish the moms had listened to it, too ;-). 

New York seemed totally fine in February. No issues at all, just going about their day, no hospital problems! And chances are, we already had thousands of cases just walking around. We just had no idea. 

Everything is fine until it's not. You don't want to be in a situation where it's suddenly not. 

 

Yes.

 

and there’s the math issue that lots of people don’t get, 

where a medical facility that is still almost half empty and thus looks fine, no problem, can be just one doubling away from completely full in an exponential growth pandemic .  Or only 1/4 occupancy can be just two doublings away from full.  ... and next doubling after that is a severe crisis. 

 

 I am not familiar with the chessboard and grains of rice story mentioned by @Danae, but expect it probably illustrates the doubling phenomenon. 

[alewife]

5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

New York seemed totally fine in February. No issues at all, just going about their day, no hospital problems! And chances are, we already had thousands of cases just walking around. We just had no idea. 

Everything is fine until it's not. You don't want to be in a situation where it's suddenly not. 

Exactly.  The fact that my state has no idea what numbers would necessitate tightening things back up is frightening.  

[Pen]

2 minutes ago, mms said:

A good quarter of our state’s hospitals were in dire financial need before any of this started. Maternity wards had been shut down so locals had to travel, but at least there were somewhat local ERs and other medical services. When the shut down on elective procedures happened several just shut down because they couldn’t keep afloat. Theoretically they might reopen but it is unclear if they will actually be able to do so. After the @Pen mentioned the aid I looked it up and there is aid going to our rural hospitals now and I hope it’s enough, but only time will tell.

 

I hope so.  

Our rural area lost its rural medical a long time ago, but with modern transport it is not terribly far by time to a hospital if helicopter or speeding ambulance is used.    But that’s only sensible in major emergency. 

Having some telemedicine open up now because of CV19 has been a nice sense of back up (we haven’t actually tried it) and I hope that that will continue past CV19.   I think it would help more people to not feel they have to move urban or suburban as they age or have young children. 

[Matryoshka]

7 minutes ago, Pen said:

 I am not familiar with the chessboard and grains of rice story mentioned by @Danae, but expect it probably illustrates the doubling phenomenon. 

I'm not sure if this is the same book Danae mentions, but the one I think of is One Grain of Rice, by Demi.  It shows the doubling well: 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Matryoshka

[katilac]

27 minutes ago, mms said:

 The specific comment was about people from city going to rural areas to go eat in a restaurant.

I absolutely think that people in my metro area would drive vast distances to rural areas to eat in a restaurant. At this point, they would drive to Hell and back again for some decent Chinese food. 

[Pen]

6 minutes ago, mms said:

Well, if these rural areas had decent options maybe? But, McDonald’s? I mean seriously, there are areas of the state that don’t even have a Walmart.

 

That’s probably another thing that has to be carefully considered place by place.  Some rural areas only have Dairy Queen and McDonald’s.  

In other areas, rural locations may have fancy vineyard restaurants, or lobster houses... depending on exactly where... 

 

(ETA, from you describe it sounds like your area is ready.  Imo try: Call, write, start a petition approach...   things that demonstrate the ability of the people of your area to be very careful in requesting the opening. No in person demonstrating...) 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Pen

[Pen]

37 minutes ago, ElizabethB said:

Idaho is opening slowly in phases and hired 17 temporary contact tracers.  They were able to trace all contacts without those 17 for all but the highest week of infection, when they had to contact trace only health care workers, nursing homes, other high risk cases.  The state had a robust contact tracing team before but now has one that is prepared for a few more cases.  They also have a program called "crush the curve," put together by a group of local individuals and businesses, where they are doing testing of people with low level symptoms and people in health care positions to augment normal testing.  The group is also doing antibody testing.  

Utah has a similar testing program called test Utah, is opening in phases, and has hired 100 more contact tracers, their original contact tracing team was smaller than Idaho's for their population size. 

Both states seem to have reasonable plans. 

 

What would most concern me in Idaho is ski areas if there is still snow. 

Otherwise from what I have seen, Idaho and Montana both look like they are moving along well for opening. 

I have less sense of Utah readiness. 

[Joker]

Yeah, in my state the restrictions to some counties opening aren’t really going to do much. Restaurants in my county can open with 50% capacity (might still be 25% but the ones open look crowded) but the hardest hit county is still technically closed - but the county line is close enough for me to walk past it. I have no doubt those in the hard hit county are coming here to eat and shop. Our mall also opened yesterday (that is literally on county line road) and there was a line of people waiting to get in. We’re just going to continue to stay home and see what happens. 
 

ETA: I just now did read an article that most of the people who went to the mall left with nothing because most stores refused to open yet. So, at least there’s that and maybe it will keep people from congregating there for now.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Joker

[Pen]

4 minutes ago, mms said:

Well, so the state just south of us is completely open. You say people from NYC will drive to Albany. People here are so stir crazy they’ll drive down to next state over and eat at restaurant. Judge halted our travel ban so they can do that. People would be far more likely to comply with governor’s request to not cross state lines if the neighborhood joint was allowed to stay open to family groups with distancing between tables. Will it prevent spread, no, but it will be slower spread than people bringing in cases from across the border.

 

Yes.  I think I get what you are saying.  I have family in a closed state contiguous to Georgia (which imo is too soon open) , so Georgia becomes a place to go and possibly bring back virus from. 

[ElizabethB]

8 minutes ago, Pen said:

 

What would most concern me in Idaho is ski areas if there is still snow. 

Otherwise from what I have seen, Idaho and Montana both look like they are moving along well for opening. 

I have less sense of Utah readiness. 

There is still a bit of snow.  I'm pretty sure all the ski areas are closed, I know at least 2 of the 3 biggest ski resorts are closed.  The ski season is not as long in Idaho as in Colorado, it would be closing time soon anyway.

[PrincessMommy]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

I would say that in early to mid March, there wasn't a serious COVID problem where you were. 

Thank you - but that wasn't my point and didn't answer my question... which I was why I debated even giving you that information.    🙄

 

2 hours ago, alewife said:

I also think there in another category who went into the crisis with full cooperation and good will with the understanding that the measures were put in place to flatten the curve so the hospitals were not overwhelmed.  Once hospitals began furloughing nurses and cutting salaries due to empty hospital beds - evidence that the shut-down succeeded, there was frustration when things didn't begin to open back up because it appeared that the objective they had agreed with had changed.

Yes, it was always driven home that our goal was to flattening the curve.  For someone to suggest it was an oversimplification is frustrating and insulting to the American public. The target seems to be moving.. but personally, I don't see that idea coming from officials so much but from the media.  I'm constantly seeing information on social media about a 2nd wave as though people are surprised by this news.  Well, of course, there will be a 2nd wave.  Why is that surprising?  It was never the stated goal to eliminate the virus before we could lift quarantine.  The expectation was to not overwhelm hospitals with a major tsunami but to have it come in smaller, manageable spurts.  

 

[SKL]

4 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

The mask were used to tell the story - not to aid in sound projection.  So there's the "Angry" mask or the "Sad" mask to let the audience know where the story-line was.  Plus, the mouth part was open - so the choir (which didn't sing BTW - it spoke) could talk in unison. 

I kind of wonder about the choir outbreak.  It seems like an outlier.   Have there been other choirs who had similar outbreaks? There are choirs all over the country (mine included) who were meeting up until early/mid March.  I can only speak anecdotally, but in our parish  we have a 30-40 person choir and gather 3-5 people closely around each choir stand.  We're not sitting next to each other holding our own book. And we participate in a common cup for the Eucharist - about 120-150 persons.  No one in my parish has gotten sick from Covid.  No one has even suspected Covid (except those of us who wondered, "Allergies or Covid??").    Like I said, it's anecdotal and no news organization is going to report that we didn't have covid, because it won't sell.  Fear sells.   

I agree about it being an oulier, and maybe there was more to the story, I don't know.  Most everyone I know sings reguarly in groups, including one housemate who is in an international choir performance group that recently all traveled for a practice / performance weekend.  AFAIK nobody got sick.  I would also think that people who sing a lot tend to have healthy lungs.

[SKL]

3 hours ago, mms said:

What I am seeing here is that many people who went in to this crisis with full cooperation and good will are now falling prey to the narrative that this was all overblown and that the shut downs were over reactions. These are otherwise reasonable thoughtful people.

That tends to happen when reasonable people are told wildly inaccurate information that is then used to control them.

[PrincessMommy]

2 hours ago, mms said:

@Pen Personally, I think island nations and Hawaii should have gone for elimination and not flattening the curve.

That's an interesting idea!  How do you think that would that work in the long-run, especially for those dependent on tourism? 

[SKL]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

I agree that the original decisions were probably not consistent with virus spread, but you know what they say about hindsight. 

It's 2020!

(I've been dying to say that.)

[SKL]

31 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

What is the wildly inaccurate information that is being used to control people? 😕 There is a lot of uncertainty. I haven't seen outright lies, though. 

I did not say it was a lie.  But stating that our state likely had 100,000 cases (20% of which were expected to be hospitalized) on the day they found the 4th case / 1st non-imported case was irresponsible, then and now.  They used that number to create panic that our healthcare system was going to be totally overwhelmed and people would be dying in alleys and buried in mass graves.  People did panic, and some probably caught the virus at the grocery store that night.  Even if they didn't, it was bad for their health to freak out like that.  People hoarded supplies that should have been left for medical services (not to mention toilet paper!).  People hunkered down and postponed needed health services and hospitals closed.  Two months later, the total cumulative number hospitalized in our state has been less than 4,000.

Edited May 5, 2020 by SKL

[Matryoshka]

9 minutes ago, mms said:

Well, it would hurt tourism for sure, but with proper quarantine measures trade can continue.  And then they can depend on having a healthy populace and work force no matter what is happening in the rest of the world. I mean, quarantine of people coming into your country is not a novel idea. I have no evidence for this but not needing to shut down one’s economy in the future would surely be a boon even if tourism is down. I suspect (and this really is just a wild guess, open to correction here) it is not tourism though that is driving policy but political correctness and not wanting to be perceived as racist because of migrant workers not being able to come in. Though again, with quarantine this should not be an issue either.  But, I have not looked closely at this issue at all, just my unqualified opinion 🙂

Tourism with quarantine?  Who has enough time off from work to quarantine in a hotel or other quarantine facility for 2 weeks before they can actually start vacationing - or even if they do (say, Europeans), who wants to spend 2 weeks of their vacation locked up?  And why wouldn't you just go travel somewhere you didn't have to do that (even if it's more local)?  That seems a lousy kind of vacation.  I'd rather sit on a local beach for 2 weeks, or go hiking instead, than go sit in a hotel room watching TV for 2 weeks before I got to even get the beach in, say, Hawaii.  Certainly won't work for the cruise lines - can't quarantine everyone for two weeks per port.  Those would be some loooong cruises!  And we've all seen what happens when it gets back on the boats...

[SKL]

As long as there is a plan for thoughtfully, partially re-closing things when/if the cases (# ill at one time) go back up past a certain point, many states should feel ready to open most things with reasonable precautions.  Are states making and communicating clear plans for potential partial re-closing, or is that gonna be another surprise to folks when it happens??

[ktgrok]

6 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

I think this refers more to people who technically can go to work, but are afraid to. If I were living with an elderly relative, I would think twice about working in a restaurant in a state which doesn't have robust testing right now, but if the state had reopened, I'd be pretty much out of luck -- my unemployment would be my own fault. 

Yup. My friend is in this situation right now. She works in a restaurant, one that does not care about safety regarding this pandemic - owners are frequently socializing despite stay in place, etc. She does not feel they will do a good job of following safety procedures. She specifically asked about what kinds of policies would be in place at opening and was blown off. She has been asked to come back to work as soon as they open (one of the three counties still closed in our state). She has a child with a diagnosed immune deficiency. She cannot in good conscience return to work in that situation, with numbers in the state still high, especially in her area, plus lots of people that travel there from New York and New Jersey. But once they offer her work, and she says no, not yet, she can't get unemployment anymore. 

5 hours ago, Bootsie said:

This would depend upon how the unemployment situation was classified in the first place.  If my employer laid-off or terminated workers (rather than furloughed me), I could remain unemployed even though the restaurant opened back up.  I have no idea how many people have been furloughed rather than laid-off in the US.  Personally, everyone I know who has been impacted has been laid-off rather than furloughed.  

Even with government lock-downs, we have people who leave with an elderly relative who are going to work.  Given that few employers are going to reopen and have as many employees as before, I have a difficult time believing that there would be so may people who have employers who furloughed them, the employer calls them back to work, and the employee is in a situation like living with an elderly relative that makes the risk of returning to work extremely high to base policy decisions off of those cases.  As we have seen, the federal govt has already stepped in and expanded unemployment benefits beyond what is usually allowed.  Measures could be taken to protect those who are in situations where their employers call them back and they are unable to return.

Everyone I know impacted is furloughed, not fired. 

4 hours ago, square_25 said:

But I think there's a genuine issue here, which is that lots of interior states pursued strategies that were probably not optimal, had they had full information and sufficient testing. 

right, but you work with what you have. 

40 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

Thank you - but that wasn't my point and didn't answer my question... which I was why I debated even giving you that information.    🙄

 

Yes, it was always driven home that our goal was to flattening the curve.  For someone to suggest it was an oversimplification is frustrating and insulting to the American public. The target seems to be moving.. but personally, I don't see that idea coming from officials so much but from the media.  I'm constantly seeing information on social media about a 2nd wave as though people are surprised by this news.  Well, of course, there will be a 2nd wave.  Why is that surprising?  It was never the stated goal to eliminate the virus before we could lift quarantine.  The expectation was to not overwhelm hospitals with a major tsunami but to have it come in smaller, manageable spurts.  

 

The stuff I'm seeing is concern the second wave will be worse than the first. 

[Matryoshka]

5 minutes ago, mms said:

I said it would definitely hurt tourism but trade with quarantine could continue.

Sure, trade is going on right now, even with all the lockdowns.

[SKL]

25 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

Right. We had extremely limited information and we turned out to be wrong about some of the projections. 

And in the same way, we thought we had very few cases in NY in February, and we were wrong about that, too. And frankly, underestimating didn't go better than overestimating. You don't want to make policy decisions without information and sometimes you have to, but it sucks. 

OK but 100,000 cases?  20,000 hospitalizations ready to happen immediately?  That is roughly 2,000 hospitalized per million population, all at the same time, one week into the model.  Really?  That happened nowhere in the world ever.  Also it implied that was just the beginning and it would get exponentially worse from there.  Basically in the words of one elderly lady at the grocery store that day, "we're all gonna die."  Someone was not thinking very deeply.

Edited May 5, 2020 by SKL

[ktgrok]

16 minutes ago, mms said:

he got elected by a very narrow margin and the legislature is dominated by the opposing party. There is some evidence that he is using this as an opportunity to bypass the legislature on some things that in normal times would not go through in this state or would at least be controversial all by executive order. But, this is getting too political so I won’t go into detail and just leave it at that. I honestly hope that’s not the case, I’ve been mostly happy with him and I hope he continues to focus on the here and now of public health rather than on setting himself up for future political ambitions.

But are any actually doing that - pushing through things via executive order that are pet projects and have nothing to do with the pandemic?

[SKL]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

It's possible that they simply panicked and judged badly :-(. 

The problem was that we didn't really know where we were in the outbreak. Extrapolating from the deaths and the NY IFR, it's not at all unlikely that NY has 21,000 cases at the beginning of March. And I mean, before we found a single case. 

Perhaps, if the hospitalization & death rates are lower than some thought, which is probably the case.  It was never the infection rate that concerned me, but the rate of hospitalizations / deaths.

Thing is, there was enough info by March 11 to realize 100,000 on day zero (presumably to spread exponentially from there) was not a rational prediction for an "expert" to make or for a governor to not question.

[EmseB]

3 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

I'm not arguing with you :-). I agree that in places that weren't hard-hit, the shelter in place is probably not necessary at the moment. However, it also means they haven't gotten through an appreciable fraction of their outbreak, if it didn't happen to them. So I hope they come out of it with a plan... 

What is the plan, though, for keeping schools and businesses closed until there is no risk of spikes in cases? I mean, a spike in cases isn't a failure of policy or planning in my mind. I think specific policies can be failures (like forcing rehab and nursing homes to take discharged covid patients, for example), but I don't think seeing a spike somewhere means that reopening some things was a bad call. But given the disparate nature of the country I think things have to be handled as locally as possible with really good coordination with state officials.

[Bootsie]

1 hour ago, Ktgrok said:

Everyone I know impacted is furloughed, not fired. 

I have search and cannot find any statistics on the number of workers who have been fired versus furloughed.  Any data on this would be probably collected at the state level.  Furloughs tend to happen when  particular company, industry, or portion of the country has economic disruptions.  So, it isn't something that I can find has really been looked at on a national level.   Even the Bureau of Labor Statistics thinks that a large number of people were mislabeled in March as "employed but absent from work" rather than "unemployed on temporary layoff" so not only is their data "old" in COVID time, but it is not very useful in determining the percentage of those out of work who have been furloughed.

[alewife]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

As long as there is a plan for thoughtfully, partially re-closing things when/if the cases (# ill at one time) go back up past a certain point, many states should feel ready to open most things with reasonable precautions.  Are states making and communicating clear plans for potential partial re-closing, or is that gonna be another surprise to folks when it happens??

I think it is going to be a surprise for our state because there doesn't appear to be a plan for a partial reclose.  

[alewife]

41 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Just for some context, mind telling me what state this prediction was for? I think that would be an overestimate for even NY, so it's obviously off. 

It came from the same individual who thinks a virus can multiply on a countertop - Ohio.

[EmseB]

29 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I think the plan for keeping schools and businesses closed is to keep them closed? I'm not sure what you mean. That's a plan. It's a plan with some serious drawbacks (it's AWFUL for the economy), but it's a plan. 

Or is your question what the plan should be to reopen? I'm not following, sorry. I can tell you what I think a reasonable plan is. 

Yeah, I agree, they shouldn't have made nursing homes take back COVID patients. That was stupid. 

I'm saying that the mantra from a certain viewpoint seems to be that any governor or local official needs to have a plan in place to prevent spikes in cases or outbreaks if they reopen anything at all. I personally don't think that's possible. I think there needs to be a plan for when outbreaks happen in any given locale.

The same question about planning is not being asked, that I can see, for the fallout for keeping schools and businesses closed. There isn't the same amount of scrutiny that I've seen except that maybe the federal government should be printing more money to help those losing jobs. I don't know, maybe it's just not a well publicized as the "if you want to reopen you deserve what's coming" sentiment. 

[Storygirl]

23 minutes ago, alewife said:

It came from the same individual who thinks a virus can multiply on a countertop - Ohio.

I heard her say the countertop thing. She was talking about the need to clean frequently, because cleaners are not 100% effective and won't get rid of all of it the first time you clean. She said to read the back of the cleaning bottle to see the effectiveness of what you are using.  So it's best to clean frequently to get rid of the entirety of the virus on the countertop, if the cleaner only gets rid of 94% (or whatever).

Do you have a quote to show that she said viruses can multiply on counters?

Edited May 5, 2020 by Storygirl

[alewife]

12 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I'm saying that the mantra from a certain viewpoint seems to be that any governor or local official needs to have a plan in place to prevent spikes in cases or outbreaks if they reopen anything at all. I personally don't think that's possible. I think there needs to be a plan for when outbreaks happen in any given locale.

The same question about planning is not being asked, that I can see, for the fallout for keeping schools and businesses closed. There isn't the same amount of scrutiny that I've seen except that maybe the federal government should be printing more money to help those losing jobs. I don't know, maybe it's just not a well publicized as the "if you want to reopen you deserve what's coming" sentiment. 

When states open back up there are going to be spikes.  I don't think it is possible to prevent spikes from happening.  What I would like to see is a plan that acknowledges that we need to ensure that the spike in cases does not cause the hospital systems to be overloaded.  

[alewife]

8 minutes ago, Storygirl said:

I heard her say the countertop thing. She was talking about the need to clean frequently, because cleaners are not 100% effective and won't get rid of all of it the first time you clean. She said to read the back of the cleaning bottle to see the effectiveness of what you are using.  So it's best to clean frequently to get rid of the entirety of the virus on the countertop, if the cleaner only gets rid of 94% (or whatever).

Do you have a quote to show that she said viruses can multiply on counters?

Look on twitter.  The actual clip is all over the place.  She said when you clean you don't get rid of it all.  And what remains multiplies.  

ETA:  Here is a clip that I just googled.  I was watching the press conference that day.  The reporter asked her about cleaning surfaces to kill Covid.  

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by alewife