It is important as well to understand that the presence of lab testing is not the ONLY criterion that the CDC uses to established a diagnosis of COVID-19. The presence of only 1 or 2 flu-like symptoms (fever,chills, cough, sore throat, shortness of breath) - in the absence of another proven cause (e.g., influenza, bacterial pneumonia) is SUFFICIENT to give a diagnosis of COVID-19 – as long as the patient also meets certain “epidemiological linkage” criteria as follows:
I understand your point, but I would hold off for a few days. I am also looking at the data of the US as a whole, and comparing it to New York, Louisiana, China and Italy - jurisdictions that had a highly accelerated amount of infections in a short period of time - and Sweden - a jurisdiction that did not have restrictive shut in policies. All the hots spots have a huge drop in the the mortality rate and they are not experiencing any huge new spikes. Sweden's current death rate is very very low. The prevailing view is that they did a better job of shutting people in - but they did it a little different from each other. And New York had large outside protests. I am not sure what is true. (Unlike the media, I admit it).Wrong board. This should be in the Locker Room.
Wait...someone is still buying this pandemic bs? Lol
Understood. I believe it comes to a head before the third week of July.This guy starts off with a character assassination. Then he critiques the author for using CDC data, which he asserts are wrong.
Not a great way to start a post if you want to be believed. The rest of the post basically accuses the author of the other post of not interpreting data correctly and implies that every study, including the CDC data, that doesn't back up his narrative was wrong.
Gotta laugh at it is all.......
Understood. I believe it comes to a head before the third week of July.
I understand your point, but I would hold off for a few days. I am also looking at the data of the US as a whole, and comparing it to New York, Louisiana, China and Italy - jurisdictions that had a highly accelerated amount of infections in a short period of time - and Sweden - a jurisdiction that did not have restrictive shut in policies. All the hots spots have a huge drop in the the mortality rate and they are not experiencing any huge new spikes. Sweden's current death rate is very very low. The prevailing view is that they did a better job of shutting people in - but they did it a little different from each other. And New York had large outside protests. I am not sure what is true. (Unlike the media, I admit it).
I don't know what to conclude other than we will know in two weeks if the spikes in Arizona, Texas, California and Florida lead to a huge increase in COVID hospitalizations and deaths. And that will be right before pro sports starts. So it is sports related, at least by timing.
You don't have to open the thread...My point is, this board is for FSU sports which the article is not. In a round about way, maybe. But it is a stretch. Better for the Locker Room.
Life vs prison
Life is not guaranteed and if it’s your time wearing a mask or
Staying in the basement is not going to stop it,
“ You have to live with a little fear to be human”
The straw man appeareth.Driving to celebrate the 4th of July with your family and a drunk driver crashes into you. Wearing a seatbelt won’t save you or your family. Or will it?
Let’s not live in fear, everybody should drive without seatbelts from now on. Wearing a seatbelt constricts you to a point you feel like you’re in prison.
Driving to celebrate the 4th of July with your family and a drunk driver crashes into you. Wearing a seatbelt won’t save you or your family. Or will it?
Let’s not live in fear, everybody should drive without seatbelts from now on. Wearing a seatbelt constricts you to a point you feel like you’re in prison.
.
It is my understanding that the N95 mask is the only truly effective mask.....if the person facing you has the infection and is not wearing a mask. That is why the general public still has difficult buying them as they are allocated to health professionals and first responders. They are handling people that are not wearing masks because they are being evaluated as a patient, etc. It is very dangerous to not have a N95 mask if you are doing a test on an infected person as the testing may lead to violent sneezing, coughing, etc.a seat belt stops you because the space in between the straps is smaller than the person strapped in. Much the same reason you would not strap a toddler in with a normal seatbelt.
this is the reasoning for a N95 mask. It is the maximum size filtration that will stop the spread of the water droplets containing this virus.
now ask yourself how many people wear N95 masks and then how many of those change them out at the appropriate frequency.
all of the above mentions nothing to those who believe herd immunity is the correct way to go about this.
Happy 4th of July to everyone!
It is my understanding that the N95 mask is the only truly effective mask.....if the person facing you has the infection and is not wearing a mask. That is why the general public still has difficult buying them as they are allocated to health professionals and first responders. They are handling people that are not wearing masks because they are being evaluated as a patient, etc. It is very dangerous to not have a N95 mask if you are doing a test on an infected person as the testing may lead to violent sneezing, coughing, etc.
The movement to have everyone wearing masks, as I understand it, was based on the idea that the masks that are less reliable than the N95 can be effective if everyone wears one. In other words, the N95 is evaluated just on one person wearing a mask, and other masks are evaluated on the concept that all parties are wearing one. In effect, each person is defended by two masks.
Studies now show that the infection rate is higher if the contact is longer than a chance encounter. That is why it is important for everyone in a line waiting to make a food order, or waiting for an elevator, to enter a public event, waiting for the rest room, using public transportation, etc. to wear a mask. But....close gatherings at a bar, no matter how socially distant you are, are an issue because no one wears a mask when they are drinking and talking.
However, everything related to masks only focuses on one metric......the number of infections. Americans have not been wearing masks for decades of flu seasons...even though we see the news clips of how many in Japan operate with masks....especially in crowded areas of public transportation. And millions of Americans never bother getting a flu shot.
As of Monday morning, the mortality rate in the US and Florida is still dropping. But we have to wait a few more days to make any conclusions as the data is now updated by date of death. (So if you look at the Florida daily death count, prior days will be updated and increased as the death certificates are filed). Is the virus getting weaker? Was it always weaker than we thought because we now see many more asymptomatic infections that are able to handle it (but admitting that it is much more dangerous to older people than a general flu)? Is it because doctors are using therapeutic drugs in various cocktails that it didn't use in March (this is not getting as much airplay as it should)? Is it herd immunity?
Don't know yet. Sounds like the general public that is younger than 65, and have no immune decencies, are moving in a certain way. Are they irresponsible and irrational?
Going to be an interesting next ten days.
That was dynamite information - thanks!Great post.....I will add some CDC data. Mean time from symptoms onset to hospitalizations = 5 days. Mean time from symptoms onset to death = 8 days. Those are preliminary numbers and now a month old. According to hospitals and doctors, those being hospitalized now are less sick than those 1 month ago.
For the nation, the increase in cases started around June 13th. By all accounts we should have seen an increase in deaths by now, instead we still see the 7 day average slope going downward.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Great post.....I will add some CDC data. Mean time from symptoms onset to hospitalizations = 5 days. Mean time from symptoms onset to death = 8 days. Those are preliminary numbers and now a month old. According to hospitals and doctors, those being hospitalized now are less sick than those 1 month ago.
For the nation, the increase in cases started around June 13th. By all accounts we should have seen an increase in deaths by now, instead we still see the 7 day average slope going downward.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
The author is an antivaxer. Wikiepedia starts off calling his organization advocates for the scientifically disproved theory that vaccines cause autism in children. I would say it is safe to call him a quack of the highest order.This guy starts off with a character assassination. Then he critiques the author for using CDC data, which he asserts are wrong.
Not a great way to start a post if you want to be believed. The rest of the post basically accuses the author of the other post of not interpreting data correctly and implies that every study, including the CDC data, that doesn't back up his narrative was wrong.
Gotta laugh at it is all.......
The author is an antivaxer. Wikiepedia starts off calling his organization advocates for the scientifically disproved theory that vaccines cause autism in children. I would say it is safe to call him a quack of the highest order.
How long does the statistical positive trend of decreasing deaths have to continue? Until there are ZERO deaths? And once there are ZERO deaths from this coronavirus strain, does the zero deaths mantra shift to the flu? Something that kills MANY MANY more young people?
The trend is clear. Death rate is lower. Positive tests are higher, within a population that isn't dying. It has been the trend for THREE WEEKS.
When someone lacks credibility so obviously I will not waste my time reading their opinions. If this guys article was 100 percent in agreement with my beliefs I still would not read his article. I am so against the antivaxer mentality that would poison anything else the people stood for.Critique his post then. Should be easy to do, but it apparently wasn't for that guy who ended up having to disavow data from the CDC to do it.
When someone lacks credibility so obviously I will not waste my time reading their opinions. If this guys article was 100 percent in agreement with my beliefs I still would not read his article. I am so against the antivaxer mentality that would poison anything else the people stood for.
It is important as well to understand that the presence of lab testing is not the ONLY criterion that the CDC uses to established a diagnosis of COVID-19. The presence of only 1 or 2 flu-like symptoms (fever,chills, cough, sore throat, shortness of breath) - in the absence of another proven cause (e.g., influenza, bacterial pneumonia) is SUFFICIENT to give a diagnosis of COVID-19 – as long as the patient also meets certain “epidemiological linkage” criteria as follows:
“In a person with clinically compatible symptoms, [a “case” will be reported if that person had] one or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms: travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV-2; close contact (10 minutes or longer, within a 6 foot distance) with a person diagnosed with COVID-19; or member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.” Note that the definition of a “risk cohort” includes age > 70 or living in a nursing home or similar facility.
So, in essence, any person with an influenza- like illness (ILI) could be considered a “case” of COVID-19, even WITHOUT confirmatory lab testing. The CDC has even advised to consider any deaths from pneumonia or ILI as “Covid-related” deaths – unless the physician or medical examiner establishes another infectious agent as the cause of illness.
Why pay attention to the data when hysteria is the reigning ir-rationale.
Your champion is a disciple of Andrew Wakefield. Andrew Wakefield falsified research that connected the MMR vaccine to autism. This caused distrust in vaccination and led to the preventable deaths of children and adults. Wakefield did this because he intended to start a testing company that would profit on the lawsuits created by his fraudulent studies. Wakefield perpetuated what is probably the largest hoax in the history of medical science. The people that follow him are no different then Branch Davidian followers or believers infowars. You cannot character assassinate these people enough.This guy starts off with a character assassination. Then he critiques the author for using CDC data, which he asserts are wrong.
Not a great way to start a post if you want to be believed. The rest of the post basically accuses the author of the other post of not interpreting data correctly and implies that every study, including the CDC data, that doesn't back up his narrative was wrong.
Gotta laugh at it is all.......