COVID19: Social Distancing might last to 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
sourdough44 said:
I’m already cuing up to go to a ‘peaceful protest’ when one is nearby in WI, wife wants to come too. I’m not a golfer, but feel they should be open with this better weather on the way. The MI restrictions are overboard, heard part was no fishing with a motorized boat? Blocked off stores(paint, seeds) is just to much, but weed & alcohol o.k.?
Click to expand...
As someone who lives in MI and is hearing lots of these complaints, I've got some thoughts on this. Do you know why murder is illegal? Do you understand why we have a law on the books that makes murder illegal? Its because people kill other people. The chronology wasn't that everyone got along and no person ever killed another person or even thought about doing it but despite this, some overzealous law maker said well we'd better make it illegal to kill another person just in case it might happen sometime in the future. That ain't how it happened. People were killing other people so we NEEDED to make it illegal. If no person had ever murdered another person in the history of man, murder would not be illegal anywhere. The idea to make it illegal would never occur to anyone.

So the Governor sees a need to create an EO mandating social distancing. Essential business' can stay open, people can still engage in recreational activities so long as those activities allow you to keep your distance from one another. Simple enough. And if that gotten it done, there would have been no need to impose any additional restrictions. But that didn't get it done.

Boating is a great way to be outside with lots of distance between you and other people. If you live on the lake and your boat is tied up at your dock in your back yard, you can go out on the water and never get within 100' of another person. But the vast majority of Michigan boaters DO NOT live on the lake with their boat tied up at their own dock. Which means they need to use the boat ramp. Along with every other schmuck with a boat on a trailer. And while its entirely possible to use the boat ramp and stay at least 6' from other people the entire time, the fine citizens of our great state proved that large numbers of them were unable or unwilling to do that.

Same with motorcycles. Get out on the road on your bike by yourself and you'll be isolated from everyone. But we don't like to ride alone, we like to do it in groups. And while we very easily keep distance from one another when we're going down the road, riding with a group of other bikers usually involves stopping with that group and hanging out somewhere. Again, entirely possible to still do that and keep distance from one another. But again, our actions showed we were unable or unwilling to do that.

So do the increased restrictions suck? Sure do. But if I'm looking for someone to blame, I'm not pointing my finger at the Governor. She made it clear what needed to happen when the first order was signed. We the people were unable or unwilling to comply so guess what? More restrictions came. Shocking. People act they never had parents who made rules for them and then made more rules when they found a way to get around the first rule.
 
Last I checked governors were not my parent. They are NOT to impose THEIR will upon me because the THINK they know what’s best for me. No no no.

When the government does what it thinks is best for the people, it usually does not turn out very well for the people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
crash7 said:
Last I checked governors were not my parent. They are NOT to impose THEIR will upon me because the THINK they know what’s best for me. No no no.

When the government does what it thinks is best for the people, it usually does not turn out very well for the people.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure I remember reading the reading the word protect more than once in both the state federal constitution. Government does things to protect people from other people who are too stupid to realize the public needs to be protected from them.

So Bubba Gump goes and chugs a few brewskies with his fishin buddies while they're loading up their boats at the ramp, thereby putting himself at increased risk. Then he stops off at the Mejier on the way home to pick up some steaks and ends up breathing down my neck in the checkout line because he's too loaded or ignorant to realize what the X's on the floor are for. Yeah I got a problem with that. If the gov wants to step in and take steps to try and put a stop to it, I'm a ok with that.
 
We’ve all seen the forecast potential deaths changed from 200+k to 60k or so, USA figures.

The shutdowns were ment to prevent hospital overloads, now we’re below numbers prior to Covid.

We can’t stay shutdown until a vaccine is hopefully procured, 1+ year out.

The social distancing can/will actually prolong the lifespan of the pandemic.

Delve in to who is actually dying from ‘Covid-19’, keeping in mind just short of 4 million die in the USA every year. It’s not possible to prevent death.

Look at preventative procedures & exams that are not being done now, colonoscopy, cancer exams, & whatnot. How many early interventions will be missed?

I don’t care what, the MI Gov is overstepping common sense. The talk about spreading at the boat launch is without merit.

Look at even the MI cases, vast majority high density Detroit area. OBTW, that’s also how one gets the higher % minorities represented, compared to the State overall.
 
sourdough44 said:
Look at even the MI cases, vast majority high density Detroit area. OBTW, that’s also how one gets the higher % minorities represented, compared to the State overall.
Click to expand...
% of minority deaths was equal to % caucasian as of yesterday.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I'm pretty sure I remember reading the reading the word protect more than once in both the state federal constitution. Government does things to protect people from other people who are too stupid to realize the public needs to be protected from them.

So Bubba Gump goes and chugs a few brewskies with his fishin buddies while they're loading up their boats at the ramp, thereby putting himself at increased risk. Then he stops off at the Mejier on the way home to pick up some steaks and ends up breathing down my neck in the checkout line because he's too loaded or ignorant to realize what the X's on the floor are for. Yeah I got a problem with that. If the gov wants to step in and take steps to try and put a stop to it, I'm a ok with that.
Click to expand...

Then YOU can CHOOSE to stay home. Don’t ENFORCE your will upon those that need to put food on the table. Or, God forbid, relieve some stress by going out in their boat (or whatever).

“So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause...”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Like I said, soon the naysayers are going to win. But once this jin gets out of the bottle it won't be put back. The disease will make a recurrence in the late fall and winter, and a lot of people are going to die. I'm beginning to think it inevitable. Those of you saying there are no cases in your community just wait. There will be.

I think I'll be OK. My walk to work is solitary. I contact few people in the course of a day. When I teach I do it from a stage. I only get sick very rarely. I think I'll make it to whenever a vaccine becomes available. I doubt I'll engage in any big social gatherings until then. You all do whatever you want.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I'm pretty sure I remember reading the reading the word protect more than once in both the state federal constitution. Government does things to protect people from other people who are too stupid to realize the public needs to be protected from them.

So Bubba Gump goes and chugs a few brewskies with his fishin buddies while they're loading up their boats at the ramp, thereby putting himself at increased risk. Then he stops off at the Mejier on the way home to pick up some steaks and ends up breathing down my neck in the checkout line because he's too loaded or ignorant to realize what the X's on the floor are for. Yeah I got a problem with that. If the gov wants to step in and take steps to try and put a stop to it, I'm a ok with that.
Click to expand...
This sort of action is exactly what that word protect is in there to guard against. Not to protect people from themselves.
 
Salty said:
This sort of action is exactly what that word protect is in there to guard against. Not to protect people from themselves.
Click to expand...

Ah, but we have a social contract in place. That dictates if you are dumb enough to do something, we still take care of you. e.g. Motorcycle helmets.
I prefer a more Darwinian solution. You want to drive a motorcycle without a helmet? Go ahead, you just signed for the fact you will receive no medical care in the case of a crash. You can do the same with COVID-19. You want to go work and resume life. Sure, sign here you will receive no medical care from flu or flu like conditions unless there is excess capacity to accommodate; even "plastic surgery" is ahead of you in the line.

Tim
 
The March numbers are out for KC - domestic violence cases are up 14% from February, before the lock downs (and 22% higher than this time last year). I expect those numbers to go up again. As long as people feel they are being forced into unemployment for their own good and decide to take out their frustrations on whoever happens to be within reach, I don't see those numbers dropping for a while.

Suppose COVID is seasonal, we'll see a drop during the summer, followed by a return in the fall. Then what, go back to lock downs again? I dunno, maybe. Maybe handwashing and staying out of crowds gets into our daily routine and the spread doesn't take off very quickly and hospitals aren't overwhelmed. Maybe by then there is a more effective treatment than whatever it is we are doing now. I don't know what the future will bring with this virus, but keeping tens of millions unemployed and the impact that has to society and families seems like a trade that has a significant cost of its own.
 
tspear said:
Ah, but we have a social contract in place. That dictates if you are dumb enough to do something, we still take care of you. e.g. Motorcycle helmets.
I prefer a more Darwinian solution. You want to drive a motorcycle without a helmet? Go ahead, you just signed for the fact you will receive no medical care in the case of a crash. You can do the same with COVID-19. You want to go work and resume life. Sure, sign here you will receive no medical care from flu or flu like conditions unless there is excess capacity to accommodate; even "plastic surgery" is ahead of you in the line.

Tim
Click to expand...
Then everyone that has COVID-19 by your rules should not get treatment, because obviously, they didn't isolate themselves sufficiently. Thanks so much for deciding what is ok and what is not for all of us. The point is, innocent, healthy people being locked down isn't even close to your social contract.
 
Salty said:
This sort of action is exactly what that word protect is in there to guard against. Not to protect people from themselves.
Click to expand...
I think that some measures I've heard are draconian, especially if you live in a sparsely populated or less affected area. However, the rules weren't put in place to protect you, they were put in place to protect others from you. I don't wear a mask when I'm outside away from other people, or even when I'm on a trail or sidewalk and pass someone momentarily within 6 feet. However, I will don one in a store because I think it's a courtesy to others. I live in a city which is fairly densely populated, with many people using pubic transportation, and many international travelers. We locked down early, and so far things have worked out pretty well as far as Covid is concerned. Could there have been other factors, maybe, but I think it has helped.
 
Everskyward said:
However, the rules weren't put in place to protect you, they were put in place to protect others from you.
Click to expand...
That appears to me to be demonstrably false.
 
DFH65 said:
A vaccine is highly unlikely any time soon and a year to 18 months for a vaccine is wishful thinking. Poverty will kill as many people as this virus so lets get back to work sooner or later we are going to face it head on anyway. All we are doing now is putting it off.

Couple of thoughts 14 days is the outside from what I have read most people see symptoms in 3-5 days.

I have a very close friend who's wife had it and he did not. She was hospitalized with pneumonia and is over 60, overweight and with atrial fib. She went on Hydroxychloraquine and Zpac and was home in 4 days slowly improving.

Stop living in fear. It isn't airborne ebola. If you are high risk stay home and protect yourself but even if you are high risk you will probably be OK. Otherwise lets get back to work and take reasonable precautions for awhile.
Click to expand...
Poverty kills nobody. Starvation, maybe.
We aren't living in fear. Some of us know the numbers, and are acting on the information available to us. Perhaps we'll find that many, many more have been infected than projected, and the 'kill rate' is miniscule. Or we'll find out that it's really a 1% killer. In terms of 'reasonable precautions', why should they always be observed?
 
We're all gonna die.

Some of us want to live until then.
 
Everskyward said:
Evidence? How something appears to you might not be correct.
Click to expand...
I think you demonstrated it in your own post referencing Draconion actions. You obviously don't agree. Further discussion is not likely to be fruitful.
 
It's interesting to watch people fall into one of two camps on this one.

Some are seeing that there's a risk and we MUST do all possible things to mitigate that risk.

Others are doing math like I've done. According to known numbers less than .2% of the overall population is getting it. If you get it, there's some argument over exactly how deadly it is but recovery rates are in the high 90% range. If you follow the math to the end, unless you're in a high risk group, your actual chances of death are miniscule. Right now the estimates seem to be dropping, it might only be 2-3x as bad as the seasonal flu if things go optimistically.

I guess it's down to are you focused on the 99.9+% chance you'll be fine or the .04-ish% chance you might die.

For me personally I won't be going to any rock concerts, sporting events, or packed nightclubs anytime soon. Of course, I never do that stuff anyway. When this lifts am I hopping in the plane and heading for a beach somewhere and going into a restaurant that's (hopefully) not too crowded for a good meal? Probably. We'll wash our hands, maybe think about the mask thing but at some point life does need to go on and every way I calculate the odds the risk doesn't seem significant.
 
Salty said:
Then everyone that has COVID-19 by your rules should not get treatment, because obviously, they didn't isolate themselves sufficiently. Thanks so much for deciding what is ok and what is not for all of us. The point is, innocent, healthy people being locked down isn't even close to your social contract.
Click to expand...

Oh. I did not say it was practical or easy to implement. However, for all those advocating personal responsibility, it will fundamentally take a change in the social contract to make it happen. As such, until such a change in the social contract happens, no possible derivative solutions will work.

Tim
 
cowman said:
I guess it's down to are you focused on the 99.9+% chance you'll be fine or the .04-ish% chance you might die.
Click to expand...

Ah, but that stupid pesky social contract. If you let it run rampant, you endanger all those who would be receiving medical care for heart attacks, car accidents... Compounding this is the contract says we must also take care of the least of us who get COVID-19. (Well at least the appearance)

As a society, we have a social contract in place which in many ways is inherited from the Europeans who invaded a few hundred years ago.
Here are some critical passages from a book revered by that many of us:

Matthew 25:40 (NIV)
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’”

Proverbs 31:8-9 (NIV)
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.”

As such, those who focus on the 99% are forgetting the lessons above.


Tim
 
tspear said:
Ah, but that stupid pesky social contract. If you let it run rampant, you endanger all those who would be receiving medical care for heart attacks, car accidents... Compounding this is the contract says we must also take care of the least of us who get COVID-19. (Well at least the appearance)

As a society, we have a social contract in place which in many ways is inherited from the Europeans who invaded a few hundred years ago.
Here are some critical passages from a book revered by that many of us:

Matthew 25:40 (NIV)
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’”

Proverbs 31:8-9 (NIV)
“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.”

As such, those who focus on the 99% are forgetting the lessons above.


Tim
Click to expand...

Yes yes and that's why we did all this but it looks like we're beyond the peak of it now. Curve flattened. At some point the .06% need to give way to the much larger proportion of the population that are going to have businesses destroyed, homes lost, and lives ruined if this keeps up.

I think asking for people to continue avoiding close contact is a good idea, I think masks are fine, I even think keeping bans on large gatherings would still be warranted. However I think the overall stay at home orders need to end preferably starting May, June at the latest. This virus will never go away, it's in the population now. The line has to be drawn at some point.

The truth is we have a whole host of things we don't do in society that would save more lives than the stay at home orders. We're just so used to the issues that we simply don't think about it anymore. The economy has to run, people have to live their lives, and those lives won't be well lived sheltering from every possible danger.
 
Another point, there are endless ways to soften the restrictions without going back pre-Covid in one step.

Look at golf courses, the MI restrictions that go beyond most common sense, etc. Yeah, maybe hold off on concerts & nursing home visits until the oath forward is clear.

A few crumbs of borrowed Government stimulus $$ can’t take the place of the economy. Those that can sit back & count on retirement checks or some other revenue can continue to do so.
 
sourdough44 said:
Another point, there are endless ways to soften the restrictions without going back pre-Covid in one step.
Click to expand...
For example, baseball in Taiwan has resumed with robots cheering in the stands. Not sure how well that's going with the fans over there or how well it'd go with the fans in the USA.
 
sourdough44 said:
...The MI restrictions are overboard, heard part was no fishing with a motorized boat? Blocked off stores(paint, seeds) is just to much, but weed & alcohol o.k.?...
Click to expand...

Here's the actual order:

https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-525182--,00.html

I don't have an opinion on whether the Michigan policies are good or bad, but for the sake of accuracy, the restriction on carpet, flooring, furniture, garden centers, plant nurseries, and paint at "critical infrastructure" stores only apply to in-person sales in stores of more than 50,000 square feet.

I haven't found a specific mention of fishing, but it doesn't appear to be in the list of permitted reasons to leave home.
 
Think of the nursery trees that have already been trucked into MI. It’s much better to plant trees in early Spring rather than try July or August. If you want to plant a vegetable garden, better off Spring or early Summer. I used to plant cold weather crops very early, covered during frost. I had spinach, peas, & lettuce ready to eat when most were just planting tomatoes & beans. All that is off limits to MI shoppers, at the store.

I don’t want to needlessly spread pain anywhere. If all in this boat together, let some State workers take a paycheck haircut, especially those not working a full schedule. The Gov of WI closed State Parks(May be open now), reasoning being ‘litter & vandalism’? If so, park workers are still being paid, can’t they pick up or police litter’ers and supervise vandals? That’s a normal duty anyway.
 
Palmpilot said:
Here's the actual order:

https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-525182--,00.html

I don't have an opinion on whether the Michigan policies are good or bad, but for the sake of accuracy, the restriction on carpet, flooring, furniture, garden centers, plant nurseries, and paint at "critical infrastructure" stores only apply to in-person sales in stores of more than 50,000 square feet.

I haven't found a specific mention of fishing, but it doesn't appear to be in the list of permitted reasons to leave home.
Click to expand...
I looked at that part about "carpet, flooring, furniture, garden centers, plant nurseries, and paint..." a couple of times.

It does say that in stores >50k sq ft those areas have to be cordoned off. A store like that would be WalMart, Home Depot, or Lowe's that's still open, but is now being told they can't sell those items.

For smaller stores that are also allowed to be open, like an Ace Hardware (which generally is a much smaller footprint than a Home Depot), it looks like they are exempt from those restrictions? Stores like that often have a nursery section either in the parking lot for plants and dirt, or inside for seed packs and fertilizer.
 
Vaccine -

late 18th century: from Latin vaccinus, from vacca ‘cow’ (because of the early use of the cowpox virus against smallpox).
 
crash7 said:
Then YOU can CHOOSE to stay home. Don’t ENFORCE your will upon those that need to put food on the table. Or, God forbid, relieve some stress by going out in their boat (or whatever).
Click to expand...
I have an essential job which provides the food you're putting on your table. If you would like those food providers to stay home, good luck eating. As for stress relief, you're allowed to relieve stress all you want so long as it does not put others at risk. We tried that plan and the people weren't able to manage the not putting others at risk part.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I have an essential job which provides the food you're putting on your table. If you would like those food providers to stay home, good luck eating. As for stress relief, you're allowed to relieve stress all you want so long as it does not put others at risk. We tried that plan and the people weren't able to manage the not putting others at risk part.
Click to expand...

Kinda like the father who was put in handcuffs in front of his wife and young daughter for playing catch in a park with said daughter with no one else around.
Honey, hush.

(I don’t know what job you have that puts food on my table, but if it’s true then I do thank you. And the doc who stitches up my gashed open hand last week, and the guy/gal who drove the truck that delivered those suture kits, and the guy/gal that made sure gas was available for that truck driver, and the...)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
crash7 said:
Kinda like the father who was put in handcuffs in front of his wife and young daughter for playing catch in a park with said daughter with no one else around.
Honey, hush.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The problem is when you allow a government official to decide what is putting others at risk. You have people on this forum that are more than willing to restrict us all in ridiculous ways. I have no problem flying my plane. I can do it without getting within 50 feet of another person. If something goes wrong during the flight it's no different than if something went wrong when I was at home. But there are those on this forum that think that is putting others at risk.
 
Here is data from the CDC that I added some columns with calculated amounts from that data. It is from April 15th, but the CDC's data for this is a bit laggy. I was going to upload the spreadsheet, but POA won't allow that file type; sorry. So I printed it to a PDF, which is allowed.

The yellow highlighted columns are to compare the percentage of deaths by age group between COVID-19 and Influenza so far this year. As the CDC data showed the first COVID-19 deaths on the week of Feb 29, Influenza had about a two month head start. This shows which age groups are being impacted the most by each virus.

The green highlighted columns are the comparisons of the Deaths Per calculation. That's population of that age group divided by the deaths in that age group.

The combination of all age groups under 35 only have 102 deaths from COVID-19 versus 223 from Influenza. The vast majority of those are from people with underlying medical conditions.

The red line is a divider proposed by Dave (retired doctor). On the first page of the PDF it doesn't have as much meaning. Look at page two for the to age split tables. The top table shows Dave's proposed red line. You can see that only ~9% of the people dying of COVID-19 are under the age of 55. So far this year that same group makes up ~16.5% of the Influenza deaths.

The second table is one where I moved the red line to 65+. That would mean the vast majority over that line are retired. If they are quarantined there is very little impact to their income. A small number are still working, but that would mean far fewer people that would need financial assistance. Unfortunately those under the line now make up ~22% of the COVID-19 deaths. While I like this line, as I'm 55, I think Dave's dividing line is better, or at least would be more accepted for our rather risk-adverse population.

Dave proposed early-on that we should quarantine only the old and those "at risk", let everyone else go on with their life. We protect those most at risk while having everyone else available to help them. The data shows he was on the right track.

The important data result that I'm seeing is that a very small percentage of people with no underlying conditions are dying. In Georgia it's currently 3.45% of the deaths. In the NYC data it is just over 2%.
 

Attachments

  • COVID Influenza other deaths by age group - April 15.pdf
    506.4 KB · Views: 15
wayne said:
Here is data from the CDC that I added some columns with calculated amounts from that data. It is from April 15th, but the CDC's data for this is a bit laggy. I was going to upload the spreadsheet, but POA won't allow that file type; sorry. So I printed it to a PDF, which is allowed.

The yellow highlighted columns are to compare the percentage of deaths by age group between COVID-19 and Influenza so far this year. As the CDC data showed the first COVID-19 deaths on the week of Feb 29, Influenza had about a two month head start. This shows which age groups are being impacted the most by each virus.

The green highlighted columns are the comparisons of the Deaths Per calculation. That's population of that age group divided by the deaths in that age group.

The combination of all age groups under 35 only have 102 deaths from COVID-19 versus 223 from Influenza. The vast majority of those are from people with underlying medical conditions.

The red line is a divider proposed by Dave (retired doctor). On the first page of the PDF it doesn't have as much meaning. Look at page two for the to age split tables. The top table shows Dave's proposed red line. You can see that only ~9% of the people dying of COVID-19 are under the age of 55. So far this year that same group makes up ~16.5% of the Influenza deaths.

The second table is one where I moved the red line to 65+. That would mean the vast majority over that line are retired. If they are quarantined there is very little impact to their income. A small number are still working, but that would mean far fewer people that would need financial assistance. Unfortunately those under the line now make up ~22% of the COVID-19 deaths. While I like this line, as I'm 55, I think Dave's dividing line is better, or at least would be more accepted for our rather risk-adverse population.

Dave proposed early-on that we should quarantine only the old and those "at risk", let everyone else go on with their life. We protect those most at risk while having everyone else available to help them. The data shows he was on the right track.

The important data result that I'm seeing is that a very small percentage of people with no underlying conditions are dying. In Georgia it's currently 3.45% of the deaths. In the NYC data it is just over 2%.
Click to expand...
I think you're only allowed to use CDC data to cause more panic.
 
Matthew said:
For smaller stores that are also allowed to be open, like an Ace Hardware (which generally is a much smaller footprint than a Home Depot), it looks like they are exempt from those restrictions?
Click to expand...
That's the way I read the order. It's in section 11, which is about 3/4 of the way down the page.

Stores like that often have a nursery section either in the parking lot for plants and dirt, or inside for seed packs and fertilizer.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that they would count that as part of the square footage, but I don't really know.
 
@wayne @Salty

65 and over consume roughly 2/3 of the healthcare in this country. This group is also the most likely to need assistance; medicine, food, general house maintenance, standing/sitting.... Further, a fair number of mental issues, where they are often best served by visits from family or live with said family.
Therefore, this vulnerable population is therefore in greater day to day personal contact with other people than most of us. Now to protect this segment of the population, you would need to ensure those who come into contact with the vulnerable would need to be virus free. Considering the incubation period where people are asymptomatic but still shedding the virus, you would likely need some form of daily test combined with some level of PPE.
To put it simply, our leaders failed to require the massive ramp up in testing or in PPE to make this a viable option.

Tim
 
tspear said:
To put it simply, our leaders failed to require the massive ramp up in testing or in PPE to make this a viable option.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the people who bring us the high quality service of the DMV, aren’t ever going to be ready for anything of a global scale, ever.

Same people who’s plan to protect you from nuclear annihilation WHILE causing the other side to react, for decades, was... “Duck”.

Plus imagine the butthurt from the public if they tried to “require” buying mass quantities of medical gear before the public knew about the thing... if nothing else it would give away certain intel assets... at best. The tests would have been even funnier.

And you couldn’t ramp that fast and not leak it.

All sorts of reasons one should never trust any politician with their life. None have changed in my lifetime! :)
 
wayne said:
Here is data from the CDC that I added some columns with calculated amounts from that data. It is from April 15th, but the CDC's data for this is a bit laggy. I was going to upload the spreadsheet, but POA won't allow that file type; sorry. So I printed it to a PDF, which is allowed.

The yellow highlighted columns are to compare the percentage of deaths by age group between COVID-19 and Influenza so far this year. As the CDC data showed the first COVID-19 deaths on the week of Feb 29, Influenza had about a two month head start. This shows which age groups are being impacted the most by each virus.

The green highlighted columns are the comparisons of the Deaths Per calculation. That's population of that age group divided by the deaths in that age group.

The combination of all age groups under 35 only have 102 deaths from COVID-19 versus 223 from Influenza. The vast majority of those are from people with underlying medical conditions.

The red line is a divider proposed by Dave (retired doctor). On the first page of the PDF it doesn't have as much meaning. Look at page two for the to age split tables. The top table shows Dave's proposed red line. You can see that only ~9% of the people dying of COVID-19 are under the age of 55. So far this year that same group makes up ~16.5% of the Influenza deaths.

The second table is one where I moved the red line to 65+. That would mean the vast majority over that line are retired. If they are quarantined there is very little impact to their income. A small number are still working, but that would mean far fewer people that would need financial assistance. Unfortunately those under the line now make up ~22% of the COVID-19 deaths. While I like this line, as I'm 55, I think Dave's dividing line is better, or at least would be more accepted for our rather risk-adverse population.

Dave proposed early-on that we should quarantine only the old and those "at risk", let everyone else go on with their life. We protect those most at risk while having everyone else available to help them. The data shows he was on the right track.

The important data result that I'm seeing is that a very small percentage of people with no underlying conditions are dying. In Georgia it's currently 3.45% of the deaths. In the NYC data it is just over 2%.
Click to expand...
The problem with the numbers at this point is the Mark Twain Theorem....There are lies, damned lies and statistics. Until we have mass testing to get realistic numbers of who has the virus and how severe, everything is just hand waving. Those being tested are those with symptoms which skews the curve.
 
@denverpilot

Instead of comparing to the flu; in min January invoke the Defense Production Act. We likely would not have enough now, but we would be three months further along in getting ready.

Tim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top