Yet another Southern state "reopening" even though cases are still rising

[Dancing Fire]

I don't understand why people are complaining about others going out in public I mean you yourself have a choice of staying at home for the rest of your life. No one is pointing a gun to your head saying that you must take the risk of contracting the virus.

If I needed groceries I'm going to the grocery store or if I don't feel like cooking I'm gonna order to go, and if the restaurants were to reopen today I would go out for coffee at noon then lunch at 1:00 like I alway have before the lockdown.

 

[Austina]

If the new normal means there still be distancing measures, I’m happy to go with the new normal, because I want to stay alive more than I want to go to the pub or to a restaurant.

We haven’t been out since 18th April, and even when some kind of normality returns, we won’t’ be rushing out to the shops and will continue with home deliveries. I’m not saying we’ll stay in forever, but we’ll be a lot more careful when and where we go.

DS just sent this about Texas

Gov. Greg Abbott to let restaurants, movie theaters and malls open with limited capacity Friday

The businesses must limit occupancy to no more than 25%. Abbott said the state's stay-at-home order "has done its job to slow the growth of COVID-19."

www.texastribune.org

 

[yennyfire]

I don't understand why people are complaining about others going out in public I mean you yourself have a choice of staying at home for the rest of your life. No one is pointing a gun to your head saying that you must take the risk of contracting the virus.

If I needed groceries I'm going to the grocery store or if I don't feel like cooking I'm gonna order to go, and if the restaurants were to reopen today I would go out for coffee at noon then lunch at 1:00 like I alway have before the lockdown.

DF...of course, everyone has a right to their own choices, but imo, anyone who is elderly or immune compromised will not be dining in a restaurant anytime soon. However, unless they have someone able to grocery shop for them (like I do for my parents), they have no choice but to go to get groceries, thus exposing themselves to people who have chosen to go to restaurants, etc. and risk exposure. At the very least, people who are going out socially should wear masks to places like the grocery store, where we all have to get food. The mask doesn’t solely protect the wearer, it also protects other people FROM them....

 

[Dancing Fire]

DF...of course, everyone has a right to their own choices, but imo, anyone who is elderly or immune compromised will not be dining in a restaurant anytime soon. However, unless they have someone able to grocery shop for them (like I do for my parents), they have no choice but to go to get groceries,

I don't want my daughter to expose herself either ,so I'd rather take the risk myself. There's no way to be 100% safe not even after a vaccination unless you are willing stay home for the rest of your life.

 

[MaisOuiMadame]

I don't understand why people are complaining about others going out in public I mean you yourself have a choice of staying at home for the rest of your life. No one is pointing a gun to your head saying that you must take the risk of contracting the virus.

If I needed groceries I'm going to the grocery store or if I don't feel like cooking I'm gonna order to go, and if the restaurants were to reopen today I would go out for coffee at noon then lunch at 1:00 like I alway have before the lockdown.

I enjoy your fun posts, but it would be nice if you actually read the posts answering your questions. This has been explained more times than I can count:

If too many people act like that, the percentage of people in the population who are contagious becomes too high, thus making it impossible for the vulnerable to protect themselves. So even if they stay at home they will at some point encounter someone (delivery person/healthcare worker/ passer-by) who will contaminate them.
Worse if you are not living in a freestanding home. The viral load in a communal ac system, hallway, elevator is enough to catch it, if the majority of people in your building are contagious.

Otherwise we wouldn't make EVERYONE exercise social distancing since the beginning

 

[yennyfire]

I don't want my daughter to expose herself either ,so I'd rather take the risk myself. There's no way to be 100% safe not even after a vaccination unless you are willing stay home for the rest of your life.

If my father were to contract Covid, he’d likely die, so that means protecting my Mom as well, since she’s his caregiver. They didn’t like it at first but have come to understand that I love them and want to keep them safe. No, nothing is 100% safe, but hopefully, I’d recover from Covid, where my parents might not. And to me, groceries are a necessity...dining in a restaurant is not...

 

[Dancing Fire]

Worse if you are not living in a freestanding home. The viral load in a communal ac system, hallway, elevator is enough to catch it, if the majority of people in your building are contagious.

Then turn off the A/C and open the windows and stay inside for the rest of your life.

 

[MaisOuiMadame]

Then turn off the A/C and open the windows and stay inside for the rest of your life.

?

 

[Dancing Fire]

If my father were to contract Covid, he’d likely die, so that means protecting my Mom as well, since she’s his caregiver. They didn’t like it at first but have come to understand that I love them and want to keep them safe. No, nothing is 100% safe, but hopefully, I’d recover from Covid, where my parents might not. And to me, groceries are a necessity...dining in a restaurant is not...

Your parents should stay home period!. But the way I see it if someone in my family were to contract the virus I would prefer is me and not my daughters. I'm I scare? yes!. I'm I that freak out about the virus? No!. ...life must go on.

 

[yennyfire]

Your parents should stay home period!. But the way I see it if someone in my family were to contract the virus I would prefer is me and not my daughters.

They haven’t left the house since 3/13....actually I think it was even earlier. 3/13 they announced schools would be going online. My parents had been home for a week by then.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Those who are elderly or otherwise immuned compromised will need to be cautious and stay home for a long time, I am afraid. But the rest need to gradually return to work using social distancing before a massive number of businesses go under, people lose jobs, homes, mental health, and lives due to suicide or abuse.

Every area is different and should be opened as appropriate. My whole state with over over 10 million people only has around 300 deaths related to the virus (many not the primary cause). We have basically been shut down for 6 weeks at this point. In my county, there are 8 active cases of CV total and zero deaths. We flattened the curve so much that there are doctor practices that have shut down and many doctors and nurses are laid off from hospitals and private practices. I have two friends in my neighborhood who are a PA and NP, and one was laid off and the other's practice closed permanently. Their families are dependent on their incomes and unemployment won't come close to replacing their incomes. It's going to devastate those with lower incomes who live from paycheck to paycheck and need to work. Our county should be one of the first to reopen businesses with precautions taken. If there haven't been hot spots created by Walmart and other big "essential" stores being open by now, it clearly isn't spreading like wildfire. We only have about 3 counties in our entire state that need to delay opening longer and open more slowly (and their numbers are still low compared to population), yet our governor made 1 order for the entire state extending the shutdown. I am sure I know why, but won't go there.

I fully support those who prefer to wear masks just as I fully support those who do not. I have read too many articles by doctors who have said the cloth homemade masks and surgical masks are totally worthless and may cause more harm than good due to people touching them to adjust them and then touching things in a store, taking off and putting back on, etc. I think some people just need the illusion of safety and that's okay for them. I'll continue to be cautious in what I choose to do personally (I won't go to the store if I have a cough or am sick), but I also understand that this virus isn't likely to go away until there is herd immunity, so many more people are going to get it. You may delay it a little with all the social distancing and other precautions, but that's it. We need the freedom to choose to stay home or go to work safely in areas with low number of cases. Most are not lucky enough to get to work from home, and not everyone can get unemployment.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Those who are elderly or otherwise immuned compromised will need to be cautious and stay home for a long time, I am afraid. But the rest need to gradually return to work using social distancing before a massive number of businesses go under, people lose jobs, homes, mental health, and lives due to suicide or abuse.

Every area is different and should be opened as appropriate. My whole state with over over 10 million people only has around 300 deaths related to the virus (many not the primary cause). We have basically been shut down for 6 weeks at this point. In my county, there are 8 active cases of CV total and zero deaths. We flattened the curve so much that there are doctor practices that have shut down and many doctors and nurses are laid off from hospitals and private practices. I have two friends in my neighborhood who are a PA and NP, and one was laid off and the other's practice closed permanently. Their families are dependent on their incomes and unemployment won't come close to replacing their incomes. It's going to devastate those with lower incomes who live from paycheck to paycheck and need to work. Our county should be one of the first to reopen businesses with precautions taken. If there haven't been hot spots created by Walmart and other big "essential" stores being open by now, it clearly isn't spreading like wildfire. We only have about 3 counties in our entire state that need to delay opening longer and open more slowly (and their numbers are still low compared to population), yet our governor made 1 order for the entire state extending the shutdown. I am sure I know why, but won't go there.

I fully support those who prefer to wear masks just as I fully support those who do not. I have read too many articles by doctors who have said the cloth homemade masks and surgical masks are totally worthless and may cause more harm than good due to people touching them to adjust them and then touching things in a store, taking off and putting back on, etc. I think some people just need the illusion of safety and that's okay for them. I'll continue to be cautious in what I choose to do personally (I won't go to the store if I have a cough or am sick), but I also understand that this virus isn't likely to go away until there is herd immunity, so many more people are going to get it. You may delay it a little with all the social distancing and other precautions, but that's it. We need the freedom to choose to stay home or go to work safely in areas with low number of cases. Most are not lucky enough to get to work from home, and not everyone can get unemployment.

DS, I'd agree with you 101% ...

 

[OoohShiny]

@OoohShiny - that is incorrect the death rates will be far worse than seasonal flu rates. The US has already had almost as many deaths in two months from COVID - 19 than you had the whole year during a particularly bad flu season in 2018.

New York - 4,749 deaths (2018 flu) versus 23,000+deaths (so far COVID-19 2020).

If you have states with a young population and low infection rates then yes some things could be reopened in those states but in others the virus will simply spread and continue to kill people....

No, COVID-19 Is Not Like The Flu—And We Have To Stop Comparing Them

What an infectious disease expert wants you to know about the two viruses.

thewell.northwell.edu

May I check if we are definitely talking about rates or are we walking about total numbers?

What I'm tilting at is that yes, it is infectious and yes, it is killing people - but is the rate of fatality more than, less than or equal to influenza?

e.g. If it is more infectious than flu, or at least more communicable at this moment in time due to lack of herd immunity at the start of the outbreak, but it is no more fatal than flu, then the total numbers will be higher because more people are infected - not because the virus is more fatal.


In terms of the numbers for NYC, and in reference to this article:

Coronavirus: Top NYC doctor takes her own life

The father of 49-year-old Dr Lorna Breen says: "She tried to do her job and it killed her."

www.bbc.co.uk

"On Monday, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said random antibody tests indicated that a quarter of New York City (24.7%) - America's most populous city with 8.3 million people - had been infected with coronavirus."

If 24.7% of 8.3m people is 2.05m people, and fatalities are at 23,000, that makes the Infection Fatality Rate to be 1.12% so far. (I acknowledge some of those infections will lead to fatalities, therefore that number will increase, but it's also the case that infection numbers will increase.)


However, I don't know how that estimate of infections is derived, and this story about a US prison population gives figures of 80% infection rates (2011 people) but only 105 showing symptoms, meaning 95% were asymptomatic - many of whom would never even have gone for a test in the outside world because they had no symptoms, which suggests population infection numbers might be far higher than anyone expects.

Why has Ohio’s Marion prison become the number-one coronavirus hotspot in the United States?

Interviews with inmates and activists reveal a number of reasons they say are to blame, including lags in getting test results, inadequate cleaning, no social-distancing measures, and intense strains on their mental health.

www.cleveland.com

There is another article covering that situation (that I now can't find on my laptop ) which said there was a fatality number of 2 people - which makes 0.1%.

I am sorry you feel this way about things. I am not getting this vibe at all from our government & it hasn't even crossed my mind that proposed monitoring will be excessive & certainly no need for military being on the streets! Maybe I am naive about these things because I live in a quiet place where people are towing the line & very much eager to crack on with what is being asked of them. I am happy to continue social distancing & queueing to take my turn in the supermarket- it's not proving a problem to my lifestyle at all.

Big Brother Watch have just published a document listing out their concerns - the fact it runs to 91 pages suggests we should be at least somewhat worried... lol

https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-c...ers-and-Civil-Liberties-Report-april-2020.pdf

The viral load in a communal ac system, hallway, elevator is enough to catch it, if the majority of people in your building are contagious.

Do you have a source for that

 

[missy]

May I check if we are definitely talking about rates or are we walking about total numbers?

What I'm tilting at is that yes, it is infectious and yes, it is killing people - but is the rate of fatality more than, less than or equal to influenza?

e.g. If it is more infectious than flu, or at least more communicable at this moment in time due to lack of herd immunity at the start of the outbreak, but it is no more fatal than flu, then the total numbers will be higher because more people are infected - not because the virus is more fatal.

I don't believe we can say with complete certainty at this point in time simply because we are not testing most people yet. So we don't have the statistics. As of now I would say it is more infectious than the flu and the fatality rate is higher than the flu.

Q&A: Similarities and differences – COVID-19 and influenza

As the COVID-19 outbreak continues to evolve, comparisons have been drawn to influenza. Both cause respiratory disease, yet there are important differences between the two viruses and how they spread. This has important implications for the public health measures that can be implemented to...

www.who.int

.

"Mortality for COVID-19 appears higher than for influenza, especially seasonal influenza. While the true mortality of COVID-19 will take some time to fully understand, the data we have so far indicate that the crude mortality ratio (the number of reported deaths divided by the reported cases) is between 3-4%, the infection mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of infections) will be lower. For seasonal influenza, mortality is usually well below 0.1%. However, mortality is to a large extent determined by access to and quality of health care."

It's difficult to grasp the projected deaths from Covid-19. Here's how they compare to other causes of death

The numbers can seem catastrophic, overwhelming, and difficult for the human mind to grasp: What do 60,000 — or even 240,000 — deaths look like?

www.statnews.com

 

[OreoRosies86]

The death rate here is nearly 6% and that’s only the people who are able to get tested so...

 

[missy]

I fully support those who prefer to wear masks just as I fully support those who do not. I have read too many articles by doctors who have said the cloth homemade masks and surgical masks are totally worthless and may cause more harm than good due to people touching them to adjust them and then touching things in a store, taking off and putting back on, etc. I think some people just need the illusion of safety and that's okay for them.

@diamondseeker2006 I respectfully disagree and would ask you to reconsider if you aren't wearing masks now when you go outside. First of all it does help keep infectious particles in from speaking and coughing and sneezing and so you are protecting others and you are protecting yourself somewhat at least. Many people have Covid 19 and are asymptomatic so by wearing a mask they are protecting others to a greater degree than not wearing one.

I do agree about reopening your area carefully because fortunately you don't have many cases at all and thankfully no deaths. That is wonderful and I do think it prudent to begin opening areas like yours. The economy needs to get back working and for areas that have low or no infection rates it does seem a no brainer. I am interested to hear your governor's motives but I will leave that for another day if you feel like sharing. Glad you are well and hope everyone you love is doing well too.

 

[missy]

The death rate here is nearly 6% and that’s only the people who are able to get tested so...

I think that is similar to the death rate I am hearing about in NJ.

 

[nala]

This just in!

 

[nala]

I think that is similar to the death rate I am hearing about in NJ.

OreoRosies86 said:
The death rate here is nearly 6% and that’s only the people who are able to get tested so...




But how can you figure the death rate if you don’t know how much of the population is infected because Asymptomatic people don’t necessarily get tested? So the death rate is a lot lower than 6 percent unless you test the entire population.

 

[missy]

But how can you figure the death rate if you don’t know how much of the population is infected because Asymptomatic people don’t necessarily get tested? So the death rate is a lot lower than 6 percent unless you test the entire population.

I did write that above.
Here it is again quoted below.

I don't believe we can say with complete certainty at this point in time simply because we are not testing most people yet. So we don't have the statistics.

The link from the WHO states the following. The WHO stated this. I am just quoting it. To answer @OoohShiny 's question.

"Mortality for COVID-19 appears higher than for influenza, especially seasonal influenza. While the true mortality of COVID-19 will take some time to fully understand, the data we have so far indicate that the crude mortality ratio (the number of reported deaths divided by the reported cases) is between 3-4%, the infection mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of infections) will be lower. For seasonal influenza, mortality is usually well below 0.1%. However, mortality is to a large extent determined by access to and quality of health care."

 

[OreoRosies86]

OreoRosies86 said:
The death rate here is nearly 6% and that’s only the people who are able to get tested so...




But how can you figure the death rate if you don’t know how much of the population is infected because Asymptomatic people don’t necessarily get tested? So the death rate is a lot lower than 6 percent unless you test the entire population.

I think I addressed that when I said that’s only the people who can get tested. Maybe saying “but” that’s only the people who are getting tested would have been more concise.

 

[arkieb1]

@OoohShiny this is taken from the WHO;

Severity
There is a misconception that COVID-19 is no different from common seasonal influenza. Both cause respiratory disease and are transmitted through contact, respiratory droplets and fomites (surfaces that harbour the virus following contact with an infected human).
But they vary drastically in severity. According to the WHO (based on the current available data), 80% of COVID-19 infections are mild or asymptomatic, 15% are severe (requiring oxygen) and 5% are critical (requiring ventilation). These figures are considerably higher than what is typically observed in flu.

Lethality
The speed of transmission is very important when assessing the deadliness of a virus. Influenza has a shorter incubation period (the time between infection and the onset of symptoms), so it can be diagnosed and treated more quickly.
While influenza has a shorter serial interval (the time between successive cases) and therefore spreads more easily, COVID-19 has a higher reproductive number - meaning infected individuals pass the virus onto a higher number of people.
COVID-19 is also more deadly than seasonal influenza. The crude mortality rate for COVID-19, based on confirmed cases to date, is currently estimated by the WHO to be between 3-4%, with seasonal influenza sitting well below 0.1%. However, it is important to note that these figures are heavily influenced by the availability of quality healthcare, and by case data.

In some states and counties in the US where you have a young, fit population, in places that you quote like jails yes those numbers are lower because people are younger, but overall if we look at the entire population worldwide YES this is way worse than the flu.

In specific places where it was not contained with an elderly population like Italy, and New York those statistics and numbers are way way higher.... and I've read numerous articles from every single country that state those statistics are inaccurate because in the US, Italy and China and everywhere else people are dying from complications from COVID - 19 and not even being registered as COVID deaths meaning that there are even more deaths than are actually being recorded.

 

[OreoRosies86]

Also flu doesn’t batter hospitals all at once, a million people in 6 weeks. I’m pretty much dreading the Fall/Winter season.

 

[nala]

I guess that it’s safer not to quote a death rate

Also flu doesn’t batter hospitals all at once, a million people in 6 weeks. I’m pretty much dreading the Fall/Winter season.

Are you suggesting that all one million people were hospitalized for covid, when cdc Indicates that 80 percent exhibit mild symptoms at best?

 

[telephone89]

I guess that it’s safer not to quote a death rate


Are you suggesting that all one million people were hospitalized for covid, when cdc Indicates that 80 percent exhibit mild symptoms at best?

The USA has over 1M cases, which I think is what she's refering to. Even 20% is insanely high rate for hospitals to handle.

 

[nala]

The USA has over 1M cases, which I think is what she's refering to. Even 20% is insanely high rate for hospitals to handle.

I think the problem is that the cases are not evenly distributed, with some cities being overburdeneded and many not burdened at all.

 

[arkieb1]

I think the problem is that the cases are not evenly distributed, with some cities being overburdeneded and many not burdened at all.

Yes that is exactly the problem, some states that were hit with the virus later that went in to lockdown faster have much much lower rates than places that did not get the chance to like New York.

Therefore places should be allowed to reopen and get back to some sense of normality on a case by case basis. If the numbers are good they should be allowed to reopen somethings while still telling the elderly to self isolate as much as possible and still practise social distancing as much as possible.

Places with high infection rates should not be reopening everything because all that will do is spread the virus faster and overcrowd ICUs and the health care system.

 

[arkieb1]

If the US gets back to work, goes back to normal - "If 1 in every 200 Americans dies from Covid-19—a fatality rate of 0.5 percent—everyone in the US will know someone who has perished. With a national population of 327.2 million, that’s 1.6 million US deaths."

But if that death % rate is higher which most statisticians argue it is, then it is more likely to be a fatality rate of at least two to three or more times that amount, particularly impacting the elderly, the sick and the vulnerable. Poor people and health care workers are statistically far more likely to be impacted.

I still cannot comprehend the logic that it is acceptable for the US to spend trillions of dollars in a war the US cannot win, but unacceptable to spend trillions in targeted States or places that might not be able to return to work because of an extensive outbreak of this virus.

If the virus was being managed properly in the US, which is currently is not, then states and places with low infection rates able to contain the virus should be allowed to relax restrictions, and people should be allowed to go back to work, schools and so on. However, places that have high numbers should not, and should be supported by the government in doing so. Sick and elderly and "at risk" people should not be going out..... It is a common sense approach that seems to be lacking.

 

[TechieTechie]

And, IMHO, you can't just look at returning to normal based upon infection rates in a given community. For better or worse, we live in a mobile, connected society. Before my recent job change, I traveled up to 150k airline miles a year and interacted with at least a 1k persons a year. And they interact with 500 people each, and those interact with 750 people each. Not necessarily from the same communities.

That's why the topics of herd immunity and contact tracing have been brought up time and time again. We have to look at resolving this as a country or a global region, rather than a series of connected states or communities. Of course, is it going to happen? No. But we better be dang ready to go thru this AGAIN and soon. Until we aquire immunity or have a vaccine (which will likely only cover certain populations and/or strains).

 

[Maria D]

Your parents should stay home period!. But the way I see it if someone in my family were to contract the virus I would prefer is me and not my daughters. I'm I scare? yes!. I'm I that freak out about the virus? No!. ...life must go on.

Unfortunately the virus doesn't leave it to you to decide who gets sick and who doesn't. It doesn't care what you prefer. If you contract it you will put your daughters and grandchildren at risk.

Also, there is a wide range of choices between "stay home for the rest of your life" and "cautiously reopen society to save lives."