Jump to content

Menu

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


Recommended Posts

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).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is from their own article: "There is some evidence that surgical masks can be effective at reducing overall particle emission from patients who have multidrug-resistant tuberculosis,36 cysti

This.  So much this. I admit to feeling a little ragey inside when I see Joe Public in a badly-fitting or improperly worn n95.  Because I have to wear a surgical mask at the hospital for emergenc

I wanted to highlight all of what you said LOL.. But yes... so much.  It's not just masks it's all of it.  Pick a topic related to Covid and you'll find very polemic ideas. I also don't understan

Posted Images

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 by Pen
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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: 

image.png.9512de2c6eb0a5d7720952b2ead10de3.png

Edited by Matryoshka
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Pen
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Joker
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.)

  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by SKL
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
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...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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??

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by SKL
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Storygirl
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by alewife
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, alewife said:

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.  

I'm not on twitter, and I can't find the clip. But I heard what she said, live, so I don't need to see it again. I think that latching onto an off-hand statement about cleaning is not a reason to disparage her, and I'm sorry to see that that is happening on social media.

Edited by Storygirl
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Storygirl said:

I'm not on twitter, and I can't find the clip. But I heard what she said, live, so I don't need to see it again. I think that latching onto an off-hand statement about cleaning is not a reason to disparage her, and I'm sorry to see that that is happening on social media.

I don't think that is an off-hand comment.  This shows to me a fundamental lack of knowledge.  The person guiding public policy should know that a virus cannot multiply on a surface.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

Well, it was just posted upthread, and there's really no way to interpret "a few are going to get away, they are going to start to multiply" in a reasonable way. 

Okay, I watched it again. She did say multiply, so that was a mistake.

But I don't think it disqualifies her from being trustworthy as our public health director. She has been on camera for hours and hours and hours over the past couple of months. I'm willing to give her a little grace. She's human.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours 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’ve been trying to get my head around how this happens but then I realised that maybe your hospitals are all privately funded?  Here most of the hospitals in rural areas are public.  I don’t think they could afford to run as a commercial entity.  They still do sometimes get closed down but it’s a public health decision as to where the money is best spent.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SKL said:

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.

They were certainly wrong, and I wouldn't argue with irresponsible, either. But how do you think that was used to control people? Quarantines of any kind control your movements, for sure, but why would they specifically want to do that? In other words, conspiracy or just incompetence? I vote incompetence, with some delusions of grandeur thrown in for flavor. 

4 hours ago, mms said:

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

Hawaii is extremely dependent on tourism, though. 

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

Well, it was just posted upthread, and there's really no way to interpret "a few are going to get away, they are going to start to multiply" in a reasonable way. 

"A few are going to get away" has me picturing the virus creeping across the prison yard, with a final mad dash past the guard tower and over the wall . . . 

I would give a regular elected official more leeway with this kind of error, but this is her wheelhouse. Like, you had one job, Dr. Amy! And she repeated it. In the next video, she reverses logarithmic and exponential. And repeats it. I get that people make mistakes and verbal typos, but these are pretty big mistakes that she doesn't seem to catch or correct. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Danae said:


30 million is about 9% of the US population. During World War Two 11% of the US population served in the military and we found a way to pay them.

The economic impact is going to be devastating. That’s not because of the lockdown, it’s because of the virus. There is no choice we can make that is going to save the economy as we knew it. Lifting restrictions is not going to save small business, it’s not going to save tourist locations, it’s not going to save theaters and sports organizations.  All it’s going to do is make it harder for people who are out of work to receive help and impossible for people losing their businesses to collect insurance. 
 

Oh my goodness. This is so perfectly stated! Requesting permission to quote you if it comes up. 

This is exactly what I have been trying to say but not succeeding. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Quill said:

Oh my goodness. This is so perfectly stated! Requesting permission to quote you if it comes up. 

This is exactly what I have been trying to say but not succeeding. 

I don't think it's totally accurate, though. Or at least not a complete picture. It is pithy, but not that simple, IMO. Because any governing authority who used that phrase to justify a continued stricter lockdown in a state with low numbers and furloughed health workers would scare me for not understanding the nuance of running some systems and supply chains into the ground.

Sure it's the virus, but we are thinking, reasoning humans who have to make more nuanced decisions than a virus.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://apple.news/A3pfvOzeqTTGE_pf47oJLBg
 

I posted this in the giant thread but it’s somewhat relevant here as well.  From ABC (Aus) news

“Australians may remain hesitant to venture out of their homes or gather in large groups even if the nation's various coronavirus restrictions are eased or lifted, a study has found, leading to fresh concerns for key sectors.

Key points:

Less than half of people surveyed would be comfortable going to a bar or restaurant immediately after restrictions are lifted

Bar owners fear the costs of reopening will not be covered unless their venues hit capacity quickly

About 40 per cent of those surveyed believed it would be more than 12 months before things were more or less back to normal

A new survey of 2,225 people by Vox Pop Labs in collaboration with the ABC has found that only about 1 in 8 Australians would attend a large event even if they could, fewer than 1 in 5 would get on a plane, and only 40 per cent would go to a bar or restaurant”

and

“Liam Matthews owns several bars and a music venue in Melbourne. All are closed except one that's doing little more than serving takeaway coffee.

Ramping back up will be expensive, and disastrous if the customers don't come or there's another shutdown.

He say restocking alcohol in the bars alone would cost $100,000 and to recoup that outlay the business would have to be able to operate at full capacity immediately.

"Just jumping in and saying 'OK, next week or in two weeks' time you can open', we would have to get the bars up and running, completely restock them," he says.

The hospitality industry is pushing for venues to be able to reopen with tables 1.5 metres apart and with tracking of patrons, but Mr Matthews is well aware that reopening poses huge risks.

He says if there was a second wave of the virus that shut his business again, it would be for good.

"I think that if we opened up and everything started looking OK but then we were told to shut down again, I think for my actual company that would be when we would look at winding up."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the above info is most strongly relevant to tourism and hospitality sectors. The impact on them is likely to be hardest and most long lasting.  Even just the border closures will make it hard if all other restrictions were lifted and the virus was eradicated from Australia.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, alewife said:

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

ok, my google skills are failing me, I can't find anything about her saying it can multiply on a countertop. Link?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Storygirl said:

Okay, I watched it again. She did say multiply, so that was a mistake.

But I don't think it disqualifies her from being trustworthy as our public health director. She has been on camera for hours and hours and hours over the past couple of months. I'm willing to give her a little grace. She's human.

 

I sure do hope she is just making errors.  Not unwittingly revealing something else that’s atypical about SARS2.  😶

 

I started 🤔 thinking, what if SARS2 is atypical in ability to survive, or what if, unlike in  a Laboratory setting a typical house environment, dirty kitchen say, acts like a virus transport medium ... long enough for the virus to get to some host cells where it *can* multiply...   ????

 

so I checked what types of things can work to store virus, and some in more ordinary home versions might well be on a kitchen counter, on dirty plates, etc...  broth, sucrose, sorbitol, bentonite (or similar clay soil compound)...  the following is from a 20th century discussion of virus transport media — I’ll try to add a citation.  

It didn’t copy well.  Sorry. A lot of the discussion had to do with avoiding contamination with other microbes, so antibiotics for example, — not so much a problem with the virus becoming inactivated too soon.    Looks like most virus studied was going strong at 21 days if it had something helpful to survive on... a little sucrose or sorbitol, or soy or meat broth or bentonite clay...   none was dealing with a coronavirus ...  🤷‍♀️    

And then what?  Suppose the virus hung around on an unnoticed dirty dish, or drip somewhere...  Might it survive in a mouse, cat, human who comes along in that 21 days?   Especially now putting this together with the findings that it replicates well in intestinal tract (I posted on long thread, iirc). 

Ick. 🤮 I think I had Better go do some cleaning. 😁

 

Quote:

Broth-basedmedia.Viraltransportmediacomposedpri-
marilyofbacteriologicalbroth(nutrient,trypticsoy, tryp- tosephosphate,andvealinfusionbroths)withsomearrayof additives, such as additional protein, salt, phenol red indi- cator,orantibiotics,havebeenusedbymanylaboratories (6,8,42,45,57,69).Recommendationsfortheirusehave beenbasedsomewhaton tradition.
The number of virus isolates obtained from specimens transportedintrypticsoy brothas comparedwithCVTM was determined(57).

 

...

From3to21dayselapsedfromthetimeofcollectiontothe timeofprocessingforisolation.Theviralisolatesobtainedin these specimens consisted of adenoviruses, coxsackievirus A21,influenzaviruses,parainfluenzaviruses,andpoliovi- ruses. Because the specimens held in the two transport mediawere collectedindifferentways (swabsandgargled media)andtheholdingtemperatures were different,direct comparisonsoftheeffectivenessofthetwo transport media couldnotbemade.Nevertheless,theauthorsreportedthat approximately twice the number of virus isolates were detectedinthebrothtransportas fromtheCVTM.
tropositive and electronegative proteins. The essential ingre- dientinbentonitetransportmediumisbentoniteitself,either uncoated or coated with serum proteins (10).

 

Coxsackie- virusesA9andB5,Echovirus11,adenovirus5,influenza virus A2, parainfluenza viruses, rubella viruses, and HSV maintained their I lnfectivity

withoutlossoftiterinbentonite transportmediumfor3to21days,dependingonthevirus type.

 

...
Buffered sorbitol and sucrose-based solutions. Sorbitol is a cryoprotectant and thus has been used both for the storage ofviruses and as an additive intransport media (3...

. Positive cultures
were obtainedwhenspecimenson swabswere placedin
tryptic soy broth and then held at 40C before and during
transport (6, 78). Nutrient broth (8), calf infusion broth (12,
39), brain heart infusion broth (78), and tryptose-phosphate
brothwithbovineserum albumin(79)were alsoused suc-
cessfully. ...

” 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

ok, my google skills are failing me, I can't find anything about her saying it can multiply on a countertop. Link?

I posted a video on page 6 of this thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

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..

It seems like a lot of people mistakenly assumed that as soon as there were empty hospital beds, the goal was met, and since there are now empty beds and states have not reopened, they were lied to, or the target was moved or whatever. But the goal is and always has been to avoid overwhelming hospitals, and slowing the spread is only ONE component of that process. The other components are having adequate PPE and medical equipment to treat those who are hospitalized, and expanding the capacity for testing and tracing in order to keep the curve flat. That's what all states are working towards, and some are closer than others to meeting all of those parameters. If people think the only number that matters is the number of empty hospital beds, then they do have an oversimplified understanding of the issue.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...