Mike Pence: "We don't want CDC guidance to be a reason why people don't reopen their schools." Where do you want the educators to get their guidance, Mike?
What should Florida do? You realize how many people have died because they wouldn’t or couldn’t go to hospitals during lock downs? Cancer patients, heart attacks, strokes... Child abuse was way up. Want to shut down Disney? Why? If mass protest didn’t cause an uptick why would being at an outside park? Bars have been affectively closed (and rightly so as they didn’t pay attention to any guidelines). Most people have mask on. We will never be able to convince of the population to have them on since there are some idiots out there. Business need to do a better job of those people out and denying service. 74% of Florida population (under 60) has a very low death rate. 54 and under only make up 7% of total covid deaths in Florida.
I don't. How many people have died because they wouldn't or couldn't go to hospitals during lock downs?
That is older. There is empirical meta analysis that shows statistically significant differences in people contracting the disease depending on whether masks are worn, including a study on the USA Rosevelt that controls for environment. And even though masks aren’t perfect and there is exposure, masks also reduce viral load.
A good break down with very alarming data. The coronavirus is killing thousands. So is the lockdown | American Enterprise Institute - AEI
Note that the article was published April 1. Lot has been learned since then. Not sure what material was used for the "cloth" masks but those numbers differ greatly from the 2 layer high thread count mask tests that I have seen. Then how do you explain the EU and others crushing the curve while the US is growing exponentially? I would counter with these articles that examine the real world effects of mask ordinances and not the laboratory test anticipated results. Still Confused About Masks? Here’s the Science Behind How Face Masks Prevent Coronavirus But the strongest evidence in favor of masks come from studies of real-world scenarios. “The most important thing are the epidemiologic data,” said Rutherford. Because it would be unethical to assign people to not wear a mask during a pandemic, the epidemiological evidence has come from so-called “experiments of nature.” A recent study published in Health Affairs, for example, compared the COVID-19 growth rate before and after mask mandates in 15 states and the District of Columbia. It found that mask mandates led to a slowdown in daily COVID-19 growth rate, which became more apparent over time. The first five days after a mandate, the daily growth rate slowed by 0.9 percentage-points compared to the five days prior to the mandate; at three weeks, the daily growth rate had slowed by 2 percentage-points. https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2020.00818 Study Results Effects Of Mandates For Face Covering In Public Supplemental exhibit 1 in the online appendix19 plots the event study estimates of effects of state mandates for face covering in public on the county-level daily growth rate of COVID-19 cases with their 95% CIs, obtained from the main regression model (in appendix B) using county-level daily data from March 31 through May 22;19 appendix exhibit C1 (column 1) reports the exact estimates.19 The effects are shown over five periods after signing the orders, relative to the five days before signing (reference period). Also shown are estimated differences in daily COVID-19 growth rates between states with and without the mandates over three periods before the reference period. There is a significant decline in daily COVID-19 growth rate after mandating facial covers in public, with the effect increasing over time after signing the order. Specifically, the daily case rate declines by 0.9, 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0 percentage-points within 1–5, 6–10, 11–15, and 16–20, and 21+ days after signing, respectively. All of these declines are statistically significant (p<0.05, or less). In contrast, the pre-trends in COVID-19 case growth rates are small and statistically insignificant. We also project the number of averted COVID-19 cases with the mandates for face mask use in public by comparing actual cumulative daily cases to daily cases predicted by the model if none of the states had enacted the public face cover mandate at the time they did (see details in appendix B).19 The main model estimates suggest that as many as 230,000–450,000 cases may have been averted due to these mandates by May 22. Estimates of averted cases should be viewed cautiously and only as general approximations.
And I’m no expert by any means, but I’d assume that our advances in treatment are a moot point of the hospitals are full and you can’t actually get in for treatment. I’d again assume that death rates will jump at a higher rate of hospitals are maxed out.
They all reduced their rates of spread and reopened. And, the New York nursing home issue was addressed elsewhere as infinitum. Earlier on this thread, In the Florida thread and in the Cuomo thread. Where the New York study on the subject was linked. The Trump sycophantia reflected in your comments about the North East are so classic about the times we live in. NY, NJ and Connecticut were utterly ambushed by seeding in February in densely populated areas and quickly saw hospitals reach capacity in March and April. By the time they knew what was going on, it was too late. And that was because of the Trump’s utter disregard of the briefing he got in January about the risks. As for travel here, Chinese were banned. But anyone could come from China with a passport from anywhere else. And, as for the Northeast, it was seeded by virus from Italy, not China. They know that because of the mutations. And I mentioned Hong Kong repeatedly because they properly handled the spread by early protective measures and universal mask wearing. Why do you think a city of that size and density had not cases? Yet, we have an exponential growth rate in Florida. With warning. Great job here.
New York was seeded earlier. Why don’t you do some research before posting your opinions and actually understand what happened.
I stopped reading after the article stated “we currently have no data but believe it will happen”. Well, that article was from May 4th, can you please find the follow up now that it’s July and there has been enough time to collect support for the hypothesis. It also is based on the believe dangers of lock down, lock downs have pretty much been lifted every where with a few exceptions of places re-locking down, so what is the relevance of your article at this stage?
what does that have to do with the timeline and deaths per day? Maybe you should understand basic statistics first. Obviously only time will tell but based on what we have seen and where we are at in our spike, we will never come close to what some of those northern states experienced in deaths.
Nobody is rooting for more deaths, and if the mortality rate doesn't follow the infected rate, I'll happy eat any and all crow coming my way. But while mortality rates aren't reaching the levels we saw in NY, thank goodness, in states where cases are rising, the deaths are unfortunately following. This link shows positive cases and deaths for Arizona. Cases started to rise exponentially around the third week in June. Sadly, there is a corresponding uptick in death trends that started about three weeks later. Again, not as bad as a spike as NY, but still a significantly higher total the last two weeks than any fortnight prior. And that's a bad trend.
There wasn't any data there. A lot of we don't know ..., but it could ..., it is reasonable to think ..., will likely cause ..., and “I think the toll on non-COVID patients will be much greater than COVID deaths.”
