Covid Discussion

[Markburn1]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/more-pe...ed-11590411600

[willandi]

I am no risk to you if YOU take precautions.

Why is just stay home naive? Unless you have an emergency and need assistance there is no need to interact with any human without keeping your distance. It’s your decisions that will affect you. If I become infected at church and you keep your distance you aren’t in any danger. I would prefer not to get sick so I take care of myself. I don’t rely on others for my personal wellbeing. I’m not fearful when I go out because I don’t put myself in dangerous situations. Because of that, nobody should be afraid of me or anyone else that chooses to attend church.

Not to put too fine a point on it but early Christians were in more danger of getting killed by the authorities just for worshipping together than being a victim of this virus.

By the way, I haven’t been inside a retail establishment, including grocery stores for at least eight weeks. There is no need. We order online, pull up in the parking lot, pop the back door, kid loads the groceries and we drive home. Home Depot, Amazon Prime , UPS, FedEx, etc. drop stuff off at our home on a regular basis. Staying isolated hasn’t been an issue.

I ride a bike 25-50 miles a day with my son. I walk 5-7 miles a day with my wife. I always distance myself from any other humans doing the same. I am no threat to anyone.

Thank you for your dedication and diligence. If all people were the same, there would be no fear.

Again. If there had been a nationwide lockdown for 3 weeks, only medical, pharmacy and food/necessities being exempt, we would be over the major threat. Yes, there would be remote areas that were still a danger, but they are not in the US.

The problem in church, as discussed in this artical and as evidenced in this image https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the...JEkTJdA-UM1xsQ
are that many, unknown to you and themselves, may be infected, and transmit it to you. The danger is made worse by the poor wearing of their masks, but masks in and of themselves, when both parties aren't wearing properly, give a false sense of security.
I still do go out. I wear a mask and have a jar of alcohol in my car. When I get back to my car, i dip both hands in and allow it to air dry. I also dip a rag or napkin in and wipe down what I can.

[Zagceo]

Agua Caliente Casino reopen video

https://youtu.be/LsrCS7WFktk

[willandi]

I wonder if I need to get my eyebrows darkened?

[GU69]

This is a fascinating image. What is the source? How accurate are its percentages? What's the transmission probability from without mask to without mask?

[Markburn1]

This is a fascinating image. What is the source? How accurate are its percentages? What's the transmission probability from without mask to without mask?

Distance between people and length of time spent with them matters a great deal as well.

[LTownZag]

This is a fascinating image. What is the source? How accurate are its percentages? What's the transmission probability from without mask to without mask?

I don't know the answer, but that graphic and its probabilities are massively oversimplified and ignore important things.

For instance, one's contagious is highly variable depending on if you just contracted COVID, have had it for 3 days, or have had it for 3 weeks.

[willandi]

I don't know the answer, but that graphic and its probabilities are massively oversimplified and ignore important things.

For instance, one's contagious is highly variable depending on if you just contracted COVID, have had it for 3 days, or have had it for 3 weeks.

The source of that image was that bastion of knowledge, the internet. It is just one of many. How accurate it is depends on so many factors, but the idea is that wearing a mask helps, both parties wearing a mask helps more.

Here is another bit of internet wisdom on protecting ones self in contact:

[willandi]

[Zagceo]

California country decides

https://news.yahoo.com/orange-county...224850419.html

[willandi]

From the San Francisco Chronical detailing how the cases of Covid have risen since the loosening of the stay at home restrictions.

[Markburn1]

From the San Francisco Chronical detailing how the cases of Covid have risen since the loosening of the stay at home restrictions.

That chart is woefully incomplete. It’s simply a raw number of cases. There has more than likely been a tremendous increase in testing resulting in more positive results. It doesn’t show increase or decrease in hospitalization or deaths.

If you are looking for a reason to be scared you can find a graph to confirm your fears.

[Markburn1]

“In states such as Tennessee and Florida, where lockdowns are ending, infection rates are declining, not increasing, as JPMorgan Chase found, “even after allowing for an appropriate measurement lag.” Rising case counts, where they occur, have more to do with increases in testing capacity than renewed outbreaks.“ City-Journal

The states that have taken a more aggressive reopening policy are doing way better than fear mongers in the media wanted them too. Remember the headlines. “Georgia Experiments in Human Sacrifice “? Predictions of body bags in the street just haven’t come to fruition much to the dismay of some folks. We should be celebrating the slow recovery of our lives.

This virus is a terrible thing. We’ve lost some precious people. But, fear mongering has been an unfortunate part of the reporting. And a lot of it is political.

[MDABE80]

https://am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-...h-compilation/

THis is a very authoratative compilation of corona . Its recent but it's got more facts than any other I've seen. It takes a while plow through the data but it's a clarification of the Johns Hopkins info to date. Hopkins has stayed away from the politics and slanted views engendered by the CDC collection of facts, non facts and confusing facts.

As it turns out, things are getting better in the overall. Not all places are but most are. Still obfuscating are the deaths which , at least for the first month, were and continue to be confusing. Sick people already picked off by Covid cassified as "COVD killed them" when COVID was the last straw to end an older life ( Nursing home types already sicker than hell or they wouldn't be in a nursing home) plagued byt already present disease or older people who had immunodeficiency as part of aging ( Our immunity drops off quite a big with age), and not to forget that much of the NJ and NY cases were given the DX but never had a test confirming Corona but "thought to be" a victim of the virus.

THen come the unreliability of the tests, with poor sensitivity, specificity and that leads to substandard predictive value...... THen comes the major additional funding if the DX on your certificate read Corona........$13 K more, and $39 K more if placed on a ventilator.

And thencomes the boats with 1000 beds and only 10% of the beds were used. THe media has been a trainwreck this entire time./to the point wheere nobody knows the real numbers. Hopkins is closest to reality though but even they admit their info has liitations.
COmforting to know that the under 60 yrs old crew has a lesser chance of getting Covid than the Flu.

Anyway, make up your own minds. Draw you r own conclusions...Best wishes and good luck. A word: do not let anyone tell you what to think. Surely do not let anyone tell you whatever based on media or weak databases.

I have hopes that this will just mutate and go away as it's denied a host. SARS did that. Masks, distance , wash hands, etc. It may not help a ton but it won't hurt. I think it helps.

[LTownZag]

That chart is woefully incomplete. It’s simply a raw number of cases. There has more than likely been a tremendous increase in testing resulting in more positive results. It doesn’t show increase or decrease in hospitalization or deaths.

If you are looking for a reason to be scared you can find a graph to confirm your fears.

I've (generally) been more worried about COVID than Mark, and expected (expect) it to be a bigger loss of life than he did. That said, I agree with Mark 100% that this graph alone is close to meaningless since it doesn't say how many tests were being given, or to whom (random sample? all patients admitted to hospitals? evenly distributed across these counties per-capita?). The story of that graph alone could be as basic as that the Alameda county health department had a very very small testing system in place, and has been rapidly expanding their tests per day much faster than other nearby counties.

The hospitalization numbers and deaths number (3-4weeks out) are much more indicative of the rate of spread, not the rate of test-taking.