I'm going to add this to this discussion:
We still don't know the denominator of how many cases there actually
are. Or even how many digits are in that number.
If you take the 'confirmed cases' today worldwide and divide it by the
deaths, this results in a 7% fatality rate for *confirmed* cases.
This would be truly horrific if this was the real rate, but we all
know that many people have had this but aren't counted as confirmed
cases, so the actual rate is lower.
We don't know if for every confirmed case there are zero, five, ten,
twenty, fifty, or even a hundred non-confirmed cases.
Taking just the USA, if the ratio of confirmed to actual is 1:10, then
we really have 9.39 million cases in the US, and the fatality rate is
only 0.5% - or if due to delays from confirmation to death, you use
cases a week ago, it would be a bit higher at 0.8%. This is still
high enough that taking drastic measures is in the realm of acceptable
behaviors, and I wouldn't argue against taking the measures we have
done, if for no other
If the ratio is more like 1:100, then 29% of us have had it, and the
death rate is under 0.1%. This is starting to get into flu
territory, and starts getting into the realm of "was it worth it". If
it is even higher, then we'll all be looking at it and saying that
this has been a stupid exercise. Worse, next time when it is
actually horrible enough to take drastic actions, people will just
start whining about how the government was wrong last time so they
must be wrong this time.
Either way, the lack of testing has really shot us in the foot here.
If it's not nearly as deadly as is currently thought, then being able
to do some statistical sampling through testing would have shown that,
and we wouldn't have reacted like we did. On the other hand, if it
is still fairly high, then adequate testing would have helped us do
contact tracing, would have helped us determine a lot more about
transmissibility earlier, and so on. All of this would have added up
to saved lives and less economic impact. A couple years from now once
we're really able to look back at this with some clarity, it will be
interesting to look at this all through the lens of history.
In my state (Montana), I feel like the correct actions were largely
taken at the right time. We shut down early, and as a result our
state was apparently actually able to do full contract tracing and
contain outbreaks fairly quickly. There are still a few areas where
new cases are popping up one or two a day, but the trend has been
downward for long enough that our governor has started lifting
previous restrictions, on a phased and reasonable approach largely
mirroring the federally promoted plan. I'm hopeful that this is the
beginning of the end, but I guess time will tell.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 10:24 PM Chuck Macenski <ch...@macenski.com
<mailto:ch...@macenski.com>> wrote:
As I understand your position: Historical contact tracing (where
data is made voluntarily by individuals and businesses) of patents
who present with symptoms, coupled with frequent cleanings of
public places, is the appropriate response. People are encouraged,
but not required, to share tracing data. Testing is not ruled out,
but organized testing of the population is not required as part of
tracing. The scope of any localized shutdown would be measured
using the current local hospital capacity at that moment in time.
I appreciate your taking the time to help me understand your position.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 10:18 PM Steve Jones
<thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
You asked
What was recomended by the White House. Regional opening with
result driven response. (Without rhetoric, example, my county
TRIPLED its cases over the weekend. It went from 1 to 3, the 2
new ones are related, so the increase is pretty irrelevant.)
Tracing is more important than testing. That's just a matter
of fact, testing is a slice in time, you can be infected, and
test negative if you were recently infected, you can get
infected at a test site. You can test positive from an
environmental exposure without having actually caught it. It's
like MRSA of the nairs.
Once identified, the tracing leads back to likely hotspots.
I'd personally put the bulk of the funding into tracing. Use
every bit of data volunteered. Particularly request the
tracking data from mobile devices. If its volunteered, you
have a map. If they dont, well, you work with what you have.
"Testing" is a tool of politics. The only way to effectively
test would be real time monitoring. Which A. Doesnt exist and
B. Wouldn't be feasible.
The governors each now have in their possession the location
of every single test processing facility in the nation. So
what little relevance testing actually plays in management is
their responsibility to delegate coordination. So it's a moot
issue.
Any location exposed in tracing gets a mandatory scrub scrub
(to be honest, I dont understand any public venue that
wouldn't be surface decontaminating once ever 24 hours minimum
anyway, there's no shortage of killitol level disinfectants)
I think the mandatory face covering is nonsense. If it were
mandatory rated filtration masks that would be different.
But there isnt a production capacity for that on the entire
planet. But since it makes people feel like they're doing
something, I'm all for it. Placebo is actually a powerful
medication for much of what ails society. Plus the homemade
masks are keeping housewives occupied and less nervous. That
actually matters.
Occasionally a tracing may require a mandatory compensated
closure. Example being a county here in illinois that has a
processor who has over 20 employees infected, they're still
operational. There is autonomy and constitutional rights, and
then there is stupidity and a true public health risk. That
falls under the latter and should be closed pending
decontamination.
A forcible closure, from a document able and legitimate public
health risk should require medical screening of all
staff/administration prior to resuming activities. There is no
shortage of available healthcare practitioners right now, so
depts of public health can contract that . Once again, the
focus should be on tracing. Heavily funded tracing. "Patient
zero" in the above mentioned case has probably long since
recovered. Tracing is where they are identified, as theyll
test negative now. Cases like this are where antibody testing
should be prioritized, assuming there is consent.
Tracing
The same applies to public venues. If tracing identifies
probable contamination, the venue scrubs. Applicable staff are
cleared, tracing, tracing tracing. Video surveillance has a
huge role where it is voluntarily submitted. Voluntarily being
key and subjective, since it will be a whole lot quicker to
clear a location of all tracing resources are made readily
available. Call it extortion if you want, it is what it is,
and it is a tool.
Metrics must be clearly defined. If two people happenned to
have been in the same place, it doesnt need to necessarily be
shut down. But the threshold must be clearly defined. We have
very little that is clearly defined. That has a whole lot to
do with the defiance. Selling seeds being a prime example, at
no point did illinois shut that down, yet places cordoned them
off and facebook images went nuts. This is literally the same
thing that cause the rapid spread in the US, images of empty
shelves. Many of the people protesting still dont know that
nurseries and greenhouses were specifically deemed essential
last week, but that's why they're there. Clearly define
everything, on the state and county websites. Accurate
information is critical. That and tracing.
Define regional thresholds for stages of opening. If a region
declines, shut it down. If a region does well, progress the
stages. Exactly as the feds recommend.
Define and justify every single essential and non essential
industry. With a mandatory state clarification within 24 hours
of a designation request. Justify being key. And publicly
accessible designations. This would be fluid and ongoing.
Leisure activities need designations. Nuclear family needs
clarification. As it reads, I cant take my family fishing in
illinois because the designated limit is 2. This will get
police in situations with bad outcomes because nobody bothered
to clarify.
If a region's medical resources are verifiably and documented
to be taxed to a predefined and clearly defined level, then
ease back on the stages, all the way to lockdown if need be.
But media reports and public opinion arent the metrics. The
staffing levels and documented patient loads define that.
I can continue
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 9:01 PM Chuck Macenski
<ch...@macenski.com <mailto:ch...@macenski.com>> wrote:
Would you please articulate specifically "what is right"
in this situation? I am asking for your non-political
opinion of the most constructive way forward.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 8:24 PM Steve Jones
<thatoneguyst...@gmail.com
<mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I sit back and watch as people contradict their own
statements. "Its going to be here like this for years"
"tests are growing, as is the number" "it's been here
longer than we think" "it hasn't peaked because muh
testing" "it's going to be worse in fall" "mitigation
has had a major impact"
The best is regarding the medication mien fuehrer
liked. "Its only anecdotal" "a tiny group had a
negative outcome, thisnis the gold standard and this
drug must be banned"
I live in a state where our governor is in a pissing
contest with the White House, but doing pretty much
what the White House recommends, with the exception of
looking at things by region. We only have two regions,
chicago, and people who voted for the current
president at 1600. So the whole of downstate will be
punished for not voting the right way. When asked
about the data, for the "science" behind this, we were
told the state doesnt own the data, so we cant see it.
I'm part of a foster parent group. One of the fosters
is utterly destroyed right now. Her prior ward, that
she stayed in contact with died 3 days ago at 15. He
had returned home, but went back into the system
during this (our state, in its infinite wisdom has
effectively shut down the foster support system, non
essential and all) he couldn't come back to her
because she is at capacity. He had cancer and was in a
drug trial. He had been thriving. The governors orders
didnt allow for him to get access to the trial
resources, so he lost his trial spot, as is the nature
of trials. There were no resources available to get
him into a linear treatment. 3 days ago he succumbed
to the complication. While anecdotal, this is exactly
what the cure being worse than the disease looks like.
Granted, the speed at which he declined from thriving
to dead indicates underlying issues, the chicago
emperors orders made certain there were no resources.
Right now, thanks to the emperors orders, there are
approximately zero resources available to the foster
families. Anticipate a whole lot of negative outcomes.
Point is, everybody is more concerned about proving
how wrong their political enemy is, that nobody is
even actually looking for what is right.
Thankfully mother nature doesnt care and this will,
like all ailments of proximity, diminish in the next
week or so.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:48 PM Bill Prince
<part15...@gmail.com <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Just listened (in part) to a discussion about
COVID-19 as it regards China/US relations. It is a
discussion between Dubner, Michèle Flournoy (
former undersecretary of defense and co-founder of
strategic-advisory firm WestExec.), and Michael
Auslin (historian at Stanford University’s Hoover
Institution).
Within the discussion Auslin asserts that the
death toll within Wuhan alone was between 45 and
47 thousand; at least 10X what they have reported
through official channels. He gets his data
through croudsourcing crematoria activity and the
number of people picking up urns of deceased
family members.
If you don't have time to listen to this, it is at
least worth a read of the transcript.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/covid-19-china/
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 4/25/2020 3:11 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:
This virus doesn't care if you are a Republican,
a Democrat, an Independent, agnostic, religious
or an atheist...if it gets you it might kill you...
Stay smart, listen to doctors and
scientists....not ineptus maximus politicians.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 12:45 PM Bill Prince
<part15...@gmail.com
<mailto:part15...@gmail.com>> wrote:
As we test more, we are undoubtedly going to
find more cases that were previously going
undetected (asymptomatic infection). This is
a long way from over. The other thing we have
not come to grips with is the uneven
spread/mitigation.
There was an interesting graphic for the
state of California showing the state as a
whole versus just the Bay Area (Mercury News
this morning). The 7 counties around the bay
instituted shelter in place very early, and
it's beginning to show in the statistics. The
Bay Area accounts for almost 18% of the
entire state population (7 of the 40 million).
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 4/25/2020 8:45 AM, ch...@wbmfg.com
<mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:
image
Might be Chebyshev BPF though...
hopefully...Bessell.
Hopefully not high pass...
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
- Forrest
