wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
Yabut at a couple of games I've been to the concession stand had nachos grande....Getting tough to buy peanuts at baseball game these days . . .
Yabut at a couple of games I've been to the concession stand had nachos grande....Getting tough to buy peanuts at baseball game these days . . .
Yabut at a couple of games I've been to the concession stand had nachos grande....
Remember the old saying: you don't buy beer, you rent it.Lol, and it only costs $15 per plate with a $7 domestic beer!
Staying strictly away from political debates, there was an interview with a local epidemiologist the other day. We don't have numbers yet, but he said that based on past experiences, the new strain will probably be less contagious places it appears later. It was discovered first in the UK not because that's where it (necessarily) originated, but because that's where conditions were best for its spread. Other places, like North America (with less crowding, etc etc) it might not be as big a difference, though it will still be more contagious.I have seen previous estimates that likely between 60 and 80% of the population needs to have "immunity" to break the epidemic. Most have stated there is not enough evidence to pin it down further yet.
With about 95% effectiveness for the first two mRNA vaccines you need between roughly 63 and 84% of the population to break the pandemic.
So two questions, First one; with the new strain out of Great Britain, which is some reports is almost twice as contagious. What does that do to the herd immunity numbers?
Two, vaccines like the Astra Zenica which are only 62% effective, could they ever "break" the pandemic?
Tim
Staying strictly away from political debates, there was an interview with a local epidemiologist the other day. We don't have numbers yet, but he said that based on past experiences, the new strain will probably be less contagious places it appears later. It was discovered first in the UK not because that's where it (necessarily) originated, but because that's where conditions were best for its spread. Other places, like North America (with less crowding, etc etc) it might not be as big a difference, though it will still be more contagious.
Second, the way to kill a pandemic is just to get R(t) (or R0, or whatever) below 1.0. R(t) is estimated around 1.06 here in Ottawa right now, so every 100 infected people infect about 106 others, and the caseload climbs every couple of weeks (100 -> 106 -> 112 -> 119, etc). We don't have to block it completely; we just need enough immunity to get R(t) below 1.0 and keep it there. For example, if every 100 infected people infect only 90 others, then the number of cases gets smaller every couple of weeks until it fizzles out (100 -> 90 -> 81 -> 73, etc). That happened with the Spanish flu even without a vaccine, but they're hoping the vaccines will shave months (or more) off that time.
More testing shouldn't contribute to California having almost no hospital beds available. I don't think that has been the case here until the past month or so.California may be suffering now from people getting out more. There are still restrictions, but it seems from reports that some are being ignored, some are being worked around (going where things are open). Some may be from people getting lax, or feeling that it will be over "soon" with the vaccines.
I definitely could be a different strain. Some of it could be more testing. The data in Georgia shows a very high number of cases, higher than every, but deaths plateaued for quite some time and now seem to be back on a slow decline, even though cases have gone way up.
More testing shouldn't contribute to California having almost no hospital beds available. I don't think that has been the case here until the past month or so.
More testing shouldn't contribute to California having almost no hospital beds available. I don't think that has been the case here until the past month or so.
No, it doesn't impact that.
How many of those are used by COVID patients? It's a real question as most people don't realize that hospitals like to keep ICU beds 80-85% utilized normally. So, when they hear "ICU is at 90% capacity!" on the news they freak out.
South Dakota does a good job in covering that; their COVID Dashboard.
View attachment 93196
Ahh hell. Ask and ye shall receive.
The The Atlantic literally just published an article explaining quite a bit of CA’s numbers problem. 1.8 beds per 1000 people.
Disregard all after “Good Morning”, over!
(Seriously... I’m no longer even curious. That number ain’t gonna be a happy dance no matter how one slices it locally. Denser areas it’s likely worse, without confirming... considering that’s a Statewide number. Suuuuper ugly...)
Wow! I just looked, that's basically at the bottom of the list. There are only two states with fewer beds per 1,000 people. No wonder they are having an issue.
For very large cohorts of the unvaccinated population, the level of protection from handwashing is also nearly 100% from serious risk of mortality or long-term morbidity.So the level of protection is quite good, nearly 100% from serious risk or mortality or long-term morbidity
Oh, I would have. California is a mess despite the high taxes. Don't worry, though, you can expect them to ask for/get a bailout.Yeah, I wouldn’t have ever guessed that one.
I should have looked at that sooner.
I don't have a breakdown between Covid and non-Covid hospitalizations, but right now, California is showing 0.0% ICU availability statewide. That's why there are reports of ambulances being turned away.No, it doesn't impact that.
How many of those are used by COVID patients? It's a real question as most people don't realize that hospitals like to keep ICU beds 80-85% utilized normally. So, when they hear "ICU is at 90% capacity!" on the news they freak out.
South Dakota does a good job in covering that; their COVID Dashboard.
View attachment 93196
How would you even know that? Really how? Do you know most of the mathematicians that exist? Are you in communication with them in some way? Please explain how this statement is in any way factual and not just you trying to spin a limited and unverified data set to fit and/or prove your own narrative.Most of the actual mathematicians have either been tossed off social media platforms or have gone silent so they aren’t. Which is sad.
CA also has onerous regulatory staffing requirements.I don't have a breakdown between Covid and non-Covid hospitalizations, but right now, California is showing 0.0% ICU availability statewide. That's why there are reports of ambulances being turned away.
https://covid19.ca.gov/stay-home-except-for-essential-needs/
CA also has onerous regulatorystaffingrequirements.
How would you even know that? Really how? Do you know most of the mathematicians that exist? Are you in communication with them in some way? Please explain how this statement is in any way factual and not just you trying to spin a limited and unverified data set to fit and/or prove your own narrative.
Is that correct? Even if the vaccine does not make one immune, it could certainly reduce the risk of infection by a vaccinated person by reducing the amount of replication-competent virus, reducing the period of infectiousness, and the severity of new infections-- all of with would bring down the r0. Would that not change the total number necessary for effective herd immunity?
Your perspective seems to suggest you feel there only two possible options. Either never leave the house or dramatically increase your risk of exposure.
No, it doesn't impact that.
How many of those are used by COVID patients? It's a real question as most people don't realize that hospitals like to keep ICU beds 80-85% utilized normally. So, when they hear "ICU is at 90% capacity!" on the news they freak out.
South Dakota does a good job in covering that; their COVID Dashboard.
View attachment 93196
I'm wondering if there are categories of people for whom the vaccine is "not recommended" other than youngsters (we haven't run sufficient trials to OK them for the vaccine.) Anybody... Bueller?
Yes. See post #53 above for the formula. These are quantitative questions.
Unfortunately difficult for many of the general public to understand as they like to think in qualitative terms like “If I am vaccinated, I am immune and cannot spread COVID-19”. That kind of thinking works fairly well when the numbers are like 99.5%. Not so well for numbers more in the middling range.
It's interesting that your point is that these are quantitative questions, because that is exactly the point that I was asking about. The statement I was asking about was: "infections required for herd immunity remains the same with/without the vaccine." Would not the number of infections required for herd immunity be decreased if the vaccine reduces the amount of replication-competent virus, thereby reducing the period of infectiousness, and the severity of new infections? My question assumes the premise that vaccination does not completely prevent the spread of Covid.
So now that there are only 450 non-covid patients in the ICUs, what is the rest doing ?
Why would a mathematician know anything more about public health, epidemiology, or virology than your average Joe? Mathematical formulas can also describe how water moves through my pipes, but if I my pipes are leaking, I'm going to call a plumber, not a mathematician.Most of the actual mathematicians have either been tossed off social media platforms or have gone silent
There are people from all walks of life that think they know about public health and epidemiology - you might find some who think they do on this board. Others think that being elected immediately makes them experts - and I'll go no further about politics.Why would a mathematician know anything more about public health, epidemiology, or virology than your average Joe? Mathematical formulas can also describe how water moves through my pipes, but if I my pipes are leaking, I'm going to call a plumber, not a mathematician.
Exactly right. Our outbreaks in Canada aren't nearly as bad as in the U.S. (Ontario, which is one of the worst-hit provinces, had about 1/2 the per-capita deaths of California, 1/3 of of Florida, or 1/8 of NY), and our ICUs aren't overflowing yet, but the province already preparing triage protocols for guidance in case things go south fast. It's a horrible time to be working in healthcare.Right, but you want your ICU at that capacity with a good mix including post-op patients. You can be at 99% and perfectly fine as you know that your typical trajectory of a patient after a valve replacement or bypass includes them leaving the ICU in a predictable manner. If for some reason, you dont have a bed opening up, you just tell the surgeon to postpone elective cases. It doesn't work like that with Covid. Those patients stay a long time and suck up a lot of resources, at some point they start displacing elective patients. And assuming that people dont have brain or heart surgery for frivolous reasons, that displacement eventually will lead to worsened outcomes for non-covid patients.
As one example the statewide ICU situation in Arizona. The length of the yellow bars are the patients who are in the ICU for reasons other than covid. Again, I'll just assume that the 1100 or so patients in the ICUs during the 'lull' in october were not there to get full body lifts or boob jobs but rather because they had a legitimate disease or surgery that required ICU admission. So now that there are only 450 non-covid patients in the ICUs, what is the rest doing ?
View attachment 93200
I have a Ph.D. in Medieval Studies and a torque wrench, and I've read a few of Mike Busch's articles, so I guess I'm qualified to overhaul my own engine now.There are people from all walks of life that think they know about public health and epidemiology - you might find some who think they do on this board. Others think that being elected immediately makes them experts - and I'll go no further about politics.
Why would a mathematician know anything more about public health, epidemiology, or virology than your average Joe? Mathematical formulas can also describe how water moves through my pipes, but if I my pipes are leaking, I'm going to call a plumber, not a mathematician.
Why would a mathematician know anything more about public health, epidemiology, or virology than your average Joe? Mathematical formulas can also describe how water moves through my pipes, but if I my pipes are leaking, I'm going to call a plumber, not a mathematician.