Covid-19

[Lloyd Braun]

There’s a graph for Georgia in the link below that looks very different, and is quite encouraging. It does show a spike, followed by a serious decline. I don’t know if they are twisting the same numbers, if it’s just a different way to show the same thing, or it’s all just BS and I can’t trust anybody.......(probably that).

https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report

I only see a “confirmed cases” graph and not a “hospitalizations” graph on the Georgia site. Georgia‘s site has been poorly reporting data as well for whatever reason. If you screenshot their graph and go back a couple days later it looks different. Perhaps they are just slow in reporting new data? I don’t know.

[GoMuskies]

I only see a “confirmed cases” graph and not a “hospitalizations” graph on the Georgia site. Georgia‘s site has been poorly reporting data as well for whatever reason. If you screenshot their graph and go back a couple days later it looks different. Perhaps they are just slow in reporting new data? I don’t know.

Georgia explained (stolen from another board):

Georgia came under some criticism for how they were recording new COVID-19 cases because it appeared to be misleading. On their public health page they have been trying to assign positive cases to when that case was acquired, if possible. So the default from the beginning for most places has been to record a positive case on the day it was reported. GA has tried to identify when the patient first had symptoms to assign a date to the case. If they can't do that they use the date the test was collected, and if they can't find that somehow they use the reporting date. This creates more accurate back data, but less accurate real-time markers to follow. They may test 1000 people positive today but only a small handful would be assigned today's date for their case. They include a 14 day uncertainty bracket on it, but it has the visual appearance of cases rapidly dropping off and so some found it misleading.

So this is what it looks like now, with the knowledge that there was partial re-opening on 4/24 and more on 5/1.

[xu82]

That would explain some of the changes in the daily numbers that I’ve noticed from time to time.

[Lloyd Braun]

Yes because that’s all we need is to delay accurate data as much as possible! Seems silly (unnecessary work) when incubation period is not widely variable. Smells fishy to me a tad...

[XU '11]

Could swear I read or hear on the news that Dr. Fauci is now saying that he believes there won't be a second wave come Fall when the cold and flu season hits. It's hard for us lay people to know who to trust when the nation's TOP expert clearly has no idea what to expect with this thing.

Don't believe any of the headlines about any of Fauci's statements. The media takes a kernel and greatly exaggerates it. Fauci's stance has really never changed. If American's act irresponsibly and go back to living the way we did last summer, we'd be at risk of having a second wave bigger than the one we had in the spring. There's also the possibility of no second wave.

For about six weeks, every time a quote that seems startling is in a headline, I go watch the interview/statement in it's full form. (When you live alone in quarantine, what else is there to do) Nine times out of ten, the headline paints a MUCH more extreme picture of what was actually said.

Worst case: people act irresponsibly, all public health best practices are ignored, and the virus spreads at a rate in the 'very bad' end of the range of possibilities. This leads to a very severe second spike in the fall.

Best case: Even if businesses are largely open, best practices are followed. People work at home when possible. Perhaps the most extreme risk venues remain closed (concerts, etc). And the virus transmits at the low end of possibilities. Then we won't have much of an issue in the fall.

The media doesn't seem to like uncertainty so when Fauci says something is possible, the headlines become grossly misleading.

[Juice]

Camilla Stoltenberg, director of Norway’s public health agency, has given an interview where she is candid about the implications of this discovery. ‘Our assessment now, and I find that there is a broad consensus in relation to the reopening, was that one could probably achieve the same effect – and avoid part of the unfortunate repercussions – by not closing. But, instead, staying open with precautions to stop the spread.’ This is important to admit, she says, because if the infection levels rise again – or a second wave hits in the winter – you need to be brutally honest about whether lockdown proved effective.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...-to-tame-covid

[GoMuskies]

Will certainly be interesting to see what spikes we have across the country the next two weeks. If none, then this thing is truly over (at least in outdoor spaces). I don't see how that is possible after the last few days, though.

[Masterofreality]

Will certainly be interesting to see what spikes we have across the country the next two weeks. If none, then this thing is truly over (at least in outdoor spaces). I don't see how that is possible after the last few days, though.

People will stay home to avoid being fire bombed.

[xavierj]

Will certainly be interesting to see what spikes we have across the country the next two weeks. If none, then this thing is truly over (at least in outdoor spaces). I don't see how that is possible after the last few days, though.

It’s been over. I was down visiting my mother in law in Florida last week. Place was bonkers. It was like adult spring break on steroids. Coves in the springs had so many boats and people you could hardly see water. Beaches and restaurants were packed. No one was wearing masks. Florida seemed like an entirely different country. Was good to see some normalcy.

[bobbiemcgee]

Was good to see some normalcy.

I don't see anything as normal. 40 million people out of work, Covid will be with us for a while and the riot season has just begun.