OT: Corona virus

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The map is useful in conjunction with the other one DW posted. It's not granular but there is utility.

By the same token, the city population rank was all kinds of wonky but still useful to an extent. Jacksonville is there but Atlanta isn't, etc. etc. That's due mostly to the extent of city limits, the extent of suburbs and satellites, etc. But still of some use.

Allow me to clarify.

There may be utility, but no more utility than what already exists in other maps. That was my point. Just because it has counties colored in 3 different colors, where there is some blue next to some tan, doesn't make it intrinsically useful.

Another problem with the utility of that map... Here's a source on the age distribution in the US. https://www.statista.com/statistics/270 ... ed-states/

Around 15-16% of the US population is age 65+, and a histogram of the number of counties with a given percentage of age 65+ residents should resemble a bell curve centered around roughly 15.8%. And yet that map uses what should be roughly the midpoint (15%) as the category boundary between its lowest and middle buckets.

[Canoerebel]

Why weren't you and others asking for similar restraint last week?

A week later, when a post is made based on an additional week's worth of data and appropriately qualified that this is subject to change...why do you call for caution when not doing so last week (not just you, plenty of others).

From my perspective there has been a double-standard in play here. A consistent pattern today, yesterday, and last week, in particular.

When projections were high, there seemed to be an assumption they were reliable and likely to get worse. Calls for care and declarations about "4th inning" were few.

Yesterday, we appropriately (and with clear cautionary notes) took a moment to celebrate a bit of terrific news - projections that mortality might be 20k less than feared in the US. Protests immediately followed. It was eerie.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

No one is.

Where were the folks asking for restraint in here last week? Where were the folks asking not to call it in the 4th inning when The Atlantic called it in the 1st?

[:'(]

Concluding that "the South" (or anywhere) has done well in the context of what the total impact is going to be when the infection curve isn't even half over yet is calling it in the 4th inning.

Bottom of the 4th at best.

[Canoerebel]

It's essential to be cautious when facing something like this. We need to err on the side of safety, and it's better to come in under rather than over.

Every person I've interacted with in this forum is smart. We all well-intentioned, at least as much as we can be. We all wish this to end better than we feared.

It seems that the majority of our community is by nature inclined towards pessimism and a minority towards optimism (will we end parsing this un-endingly to pursue shades of "realism"?).

Pessimism is a needed trait in dealing with this. Perhaps the most important, as long as rational (and there's little doubt about that here).

Hey, cut us optimists some slack, especially when we qualify our comments and take a moment to celebrate news that ought to be celebrated.

[Canoerebel]

Tallies for each US state are coming in. Thus far, NY is up just a smidgen from yesterday. NJ is down considerably, as are Louisiana and Pennsylvania. A few states are up, including Florida and Indiana. Sometimes states update during the day, though increasingly rarely, so the total is premature. But based upon how reports have come in the past week, today may be a bit better than yesterday.

[Canoerebel]

Germany reported an encouragingly low total today; Italy's totals were discouragingly high (thought not out of whack with the general decline in place); France hasn't reported yet; we discussed Spain early in the a.m.

[Canoerebel]

Netherlands was basically the same today, Belgium up a good bit.

Denmark is about the same and still low.

Four or five days ago, Denmark announced intentions to gradually ease restrictions, beginning I believe next week. That may give helpful guidance to other countries for when their turn comes.

[Canoerebel]

Waiting for UK totals to come in. Mortality yesterday was much under the U. Washington projection but within the margin of error (whatever the technical term is). A few more "under" reports and U. Washington might re-calculate. Right now the projection is so out of line with its neighbors that it's alarming. A number of UK folks here have advised caution due to doubts about the data, I think.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn




I've read that they are contemplating everyone wearing mask in public. USA.

Yup.

Is there some new research on this?

Because what I have read, other than outliers, is that masks should be reserved to medical staff PPE.

And non sufferers wearing them is a waste of scarce resources.

New advice virtually everywhere is to wear a mask to protect others, especially. There are so many asymptomatic cases it makes sense. The second reason is to protect yourself from touching your own face, especially the mouth.

Surgical masks won't help much, Mayne just a little, if it's aerosolised inside somewhere, but could offer some protection from spits, coughs and sneezes.

So yes, wear one.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Hans is one angry man!

Anyway, those of you worrying about fresh stuff, don't

Once the initial shock of the stockpiling dies down, then it will return to normal pretty quickly.

Only thing you can't get over here now is flour and sultanas as it seems the entire UK is attempting to bake bread and cakes!

Our local has loads of flour. We've been baking bread. Working on my own sourdough. Not bad.

We get a box of veggies from an organic farm direct once a week. We also have some lettuce growing up, some Arugula/Rocket, Beet greens, and a lot of small radish micro-greens. I also got some mason jars and made sprouts from the radish seeds.

[Canoerebel]

Worldometers just updated with UK numbers.

The mortality number is 881. Like yesterday, that's significantly under the U.Wash. projection. If that keeps up, the projection will undergo a major overhaul.

(No doubt UK, and forumites from there, have preferred local models. This happens to be the only once I have access to from a reputable source.)

[Canoerebel]

A fair bit of attention was given to Nigeria (and Africa), but almost entirely in the early part of the thread.

It's probably fair to say that most attention has been drawn to the crisis in Europe and North America...in comparison to the lower numbers in Africa.

We've discussed the possibility that the comparatively low numbers, which are now long-term, may be artifacts of low testing, inconsistent or improper reporting, climate, etc.

As an armchair observation: I'd have expected the pandemic to have seized control of the continent by now, given how long it's been there. Even with inconsistent testing, reporting, etc., the news would have picked up on it.

Africa and its nations have been remarkably "stable."

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

The Swedish experiment is interesting. And now the numbers are starting to rise.....

Much like Japan.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I just found a nugget I thought would be too elusive for retrieval. A memory from more than 15 years ago, but I found it in the dusty archives of the internet. It flies contrary to expectations, and relates to some of our previous discussions, so here it is.

The Drudge Report (for those of you unfamiliar) posts an accumulation of links to news stories from various sources. For much of its existence it was widely perceived as right wing. But UCLA and other schools did a study (in 2003, I just learned) that rated it as centrist, of all things. Other sources (New York Times) received different ratings.

Here's the link to the study: https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty_p ... eMilyo.pdf

For clarity: I am not a fan of The Drudge Report.

That paper is almost old enough to vote. I don't think it should be used in a current context.

No, things are even more extreme now. It's so obvious just reading and listening to them.

Well, not according to research. The other more recent article posted in response show most big press organisations are sitting very close to the middle. I'm looking periodically for more studies and I'll post a range once I have some research that gives a wide view from different models.

Opinion columns do range more widely, which is not surprising.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I clearly qualified my assessment (above) regarding the possibility that things are subject to change. They are, no doubt.

But it's been a week since we discussed this first and things haven't fluctuated much if at all. The situation is basically the same. The South is doing comparatively well. And according to the University of Washington projections, that won't change. Including Florida, which is projected to have 4,357 deaths. That's 207/M. If that holds it can finish no worse than 2nd (it's population rank is #3) even if no other states have a single additional mortality. It's likely to finish considerably down the list.

The narrative has been wrong and is projected to be wrong.

Wrong is a very definite word. It's a bit too definite for this moment in time. We all hope things are better than the most dire reports. That doesn't mean they're wrong, yet.

The post I added recently about the effects to Black and Brown communities is also a difficult component of this. There are large communities being hit very hard in the South, North East, and West that may not really be known due to lack of testing, not going as often or early to hospitals and possibly dying from related causes and not being counted as a "Covid death" as well.

There is a lot of coverage about different areas and hotspots in the US, and in the world. These are speculative based on early samples. This is a long haul and we'll just have to wait to see how it all plays out.

[Canoerebel]

Wiggle, wiggle. Squirm, squirm.

[Cap Mandrake]

Working in our "fever clinic" today. All the pediatricians in the group (14 or 15) screen their patients by telehealth and the ones they are worried about they send here.

If I think they need Covid screening I send them over to our "Drive-in" in Yorba Linda. Working in a gown, face shield and N-95 mask wears you out. We have to reuse everything except the gloves. It's totally 3rd world.[:)] 5 hrs of this crap and I am worn out. 4 to go. Never wanted a martini this bad before.

[Canoerebel]

The folks making media bias assessments are usually in league with the folks being evaluated. Both media and higher education are decidedly liberal leaning in the US. Frequently they have admitted this or studies have confirmed this. Attached are a few excerpts from looks at the media. There is also yesterday's 2003 study from UCLA. There have been studies of media voting habits showing a skew of 90% Democrat.

If you agree with the views taken by the media, you naturally think your source is mainstream - whether Fox or CNN or NBC. That's human nature. One of the studies below addresses that the media reflects the leanings of its readers. So if NYC tends to vote Democrat, the NYT tends to report left-leaning. Naturally.

Members of the media have acknowledged overt bias in the past and tried to take measures to alleviate the bias because it hurt their business in "red" states. I was an avid reader of the Atlanta Constitution from 1979 to 2014 (stopping due to price, not political leaning - that was always there). Every day and sometimes twice a day, when there was an evening edition, I read it. Over that span, the AJC admitted more than once that it was left-leaning. At one point (as I referred to early in this thread), the AJC acknowledged its bias and searched for a right-leaning columnist to offer a more balanced viewpoint, as reflected in one of the excerpts below. But the editorial board and much of the content remained where it was - it's very hard to detach your writing/reporting from you sincerely-held beliefs.

The nation has broken into two camps. Many right-leaning viewers choosing Fox and many left-leaning ones choosing CNN, et al. Total viewership share is instructive, since the country is also kinda split down the middle (roughly and subject to some shifts right or left).

If your perception is that the NY Times, Washington Post, CNN is mainstream...there you go.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Why weren't you and others asking for similar restraint last week?

A week later, when a post is made based on an additional week's worth of data and appropriately qualified that this is subject to change...why do you call for caution when not doing so last week (not just you, plenty of others).

From my perspective there has been a double-standard in play here. A consistent pattern today, yesterday, and last week, in particular.

When projections were high, there seemed to be an assumption they were reliable and likely to get worse. Calls for care and declarations about "4th inning" were few.

Yesterday, we appropriately (and with clear cautionary notes) took a moment to celebrate a bit of terrific news - projections that mortality might be 20k less than feared in the US. Protests immediately followed. It was eerie.

If projections are high, I feel that helps people to take this seriously and keep safe.

If projections, reports, even ones that show drops in numbers, happen now, that worries me that some people will begin thinking they can relax and not be as safe.

It also feels to me insincere to "celebrate" as I watch each day's death tolls.

[Lokasenna]

At the request of another forumite, I've collected the state-level .CSV (from here https://covidtracking.com/data/#states-top), data reported through yesterday, April 8th.

While the data grades listed on that page are for the overall data, there are some oddities in the most recent days. E.g., some states reported 0 positive tests, 0 deaths, and/or 0 overall tests (etc.) on April 8th. This is clearly some kind of data quality error. The presence of these for the most recent days means we should take the last 1-2 days' worth of data with a little bit of salt.

It would be quite a bit of work to update these daily, but I'll post charts through April 8th for prominent states and then any states by request.

I don't have a good way to quickly renumber the dates at the bottom of the graph with the format in which the data is available, but for most states it starts around March 4th to March 8th. Depends on the state, and many of those early dates are 0's.


Here's New York to start.

[Cap Mandrake]

17 year old comes in with a fever. Been to the skate park every day since school was canceled AND he went out on a date last night. Is that "social distancing"?