Coronavirus COVID-19 - Global Health Pandemic #62

[Deleted member 158085]

I just ordered two masks on Etsy that have two layers of batik cotton with a layer of chiffon "as an electrostatic filter." The batik print looks beautiful in the photo.

Batik is also a very high quality of cotton.

 

[Lilibet]

Well, cities can renegotiate new wages for their various departments, although it would help if all citizens were on the same page about CoVid. Our economy is rolling back to levels seen years ago. Economy is already back to 2016, all gains wiped out, and the predictions are we're going back to 2000. That means all workers are going to have to work for wages that are lower than they expect.

Americans have the highest standard of living in the world, and it's not as if the year 2000 was so bad, in terms of what we could afford and buy.

That's the solution many municipalities are exploring, including my own. It won't be popular, but when unions and employee groups are faced with firings, the communal, unified thing to do is to take the hit together.

BBM

I agree with you @10ofRods that lowering wages is the solution to firings in the public sector. When my husband taught school they often compromised on salary or benefits to avoid layoffs. He retired in 2000. I just hope there is a willingness nowadays to accept this sacrifice for the good of all. Based on what we see with mask-wearing and social distancing, I’m not optimistic.

You mention the year 2000 not being so bad in terms of what we could afford and buy. True. But items such as smart phones and tablets that we’ve all come to depend on weren’t available then, so that’s a new expense we didn’t have in 2000. It makes a dent in income for many people. So if wages are rolled back to that level, it will be interesting to see whether tech companies lower their prices. One would hope so in order to keep their customers. One more ripple effect requiring self-sacrifice, but in the private sector.

An economic sea change is a-coming.

 

[10ofRods]

Here's an interesting article and I'm sure of one thing - this study will be controversial. What do you think, are most of us overestimating or underestimating our risk of getting Covid-19?

Controversial California Study Claims Americans Are Overestimating Their Risk Of Getting Coronavirus And That The Odds Of Infection Are Around One In 4,000

Researchers looked at coronavirus case incidence data for the week ending May 30 in the 100 most populous US counties

They calculated that someone who has a single contact with an infected person has a one in 3,836 chance of getting sick themselves

For Americans between ages 50 to 64, the risk of being hospitalized is one in 852,000 and the risk of dying is one in 19.1 million

The team says action from governments, media attention, and the lack of feeling in control may be influencing the perception of risk


"Americans may be overestimating their risk of contracting the novel coronavirus, a controversial new study from California suggests.

Researchers found that, on average, a person who has a single contact with an infected individual has a one in about 4,000 chance of becoming sick, without using preventive measures such as social distancing or wearing a mask.

For the middle-aged, the risk of hospitalization is nearly one in a million and the risk of death is almost one in 20 million.

The team, from Stanford University and the University of California Los Angeles, says action from local and state governments, attention from the media, and the lack of feeling in control may be influencing the public's perception of risk."

I think the risks have changed a bit since that study was done (for example, at that time the case rate in California was half what it is right now). I'd say the chances are greater than 1 in 4000 right not - probably more like 1 in 3000. If you look at the projections from all universities at the end of May, they were much more optimistic than they are right now - because not even the Memorial Day data had come in yet. And frankly, I knew no one in May who had CoVid, and now I do. And now I have a family member who has it, whereas until a week ago, it was all people who were outside my own family and friend group.

However, having said that, those odds don't apply to those with jobs in hospitals or urgent care centers. So the odds are not evenly distributed through the population. People who have public-facing jobs (TSA agents for example) have a much higher rate. So the general public may be alarmed by the stories, but some real people in real jobs have a much higher risk. I worry very much about grocery store workers and truck drivers in the refrigerated sector. 500 Delta workers are positive. Other airlines are remaining silent, but you can guess at their rates. Perhaps Delta has 2,000,000 workers but I doubt it - instead it's likely that the odds of getting CoVid while being involved somewhere in the air travel business are much much higher (which means the odds are lower for many others). (If anyone knows how many employees Delta has, please share!)

Those of us who work with populations where transmission is mostly silent (partying college students for example) are at higher risk too.

So, each of us has to do our own risk assessment. I think my risk is considerably higher than 1 in 4000 were I to go back to my regular job. As I actually have been in touch with one of those Stanford researchers (who is working from home, btw), I think we see eye to eye on it. I would be someone who is older than 64 in touch with the population that has

I am also not in the age group 50-64 (I'm a bit older). Google analytics shows that people aged 18-25 in my area are much more social than the average American is right now. Lots of variables - and since each person has been given so little information and most get it from MSM, realistic risk assessment is difficult.

So if someone told me that 1 in 4000 small planes were going to crash over a 3 month period, I wouldn't fly in one. If there were a 1 in 4000 chance that the big tree outside my house was going to fall on my roof tonight, I'd go to a hotel. But we're all different. If a person has had a serious illness that only afflicts 1 in 100,000, they view things differently.

My personal desire is to avoid contexts in which my chances of running into a CoVId+ person are less than 1 in 100 - while I'm wearing a mask. And at 1 in 3000 (which is closer to the real rate today, June 23 than the rate in the article based on earlier data), I'd still wear a mask. The spaces I work in involve about 1000-3000 bodies in the building per day, with A/C and recirculated air. Sometimes it's higher than that (beginning of semester). If I'm in one of the big classrooms in a big building, it's about 5000 young people in the building per day. Just my regular classroom sees 1800-2000 pass through it on the daily. There's almost always someone coughing...at first administrators tried to match the "more vulnerable" (code for Old Profs) to the smaller buildings and classrooms (they even thought about trailers but that didn't make sense either, due to expense and having to put so few students in each A/C'ed unit - it gets too hot for public health to allow occupancy otherwise). But it turned out that there were way too many "Old Profs," as well as people with immune disorders, and who are family of vulnerable people.

So it's not to hard for some of us to come into contact with 4000 people in a matter of a few days. Do you feel lucky? I don't feel lucky regarding this one - and I can't say why.

I'd love to hear which of those researchers actually plan to teach large lecture courses and are going to still consider their odds 1 in 4000. Or go to a Stanford football game, where in theory (according to them) there would 5-6 active transmitters of CoVId (in reality it would be higher because students party a lot during football seasons). Or to a music venue that seats 4000 indoors - where one person has CoVid. I truly do wonder if they, themselves, would bring their parents or families to such an event.

If I lived in rural New Mexico (a dream I"ll never realize), I'd feel very differently than living and teaching in Los Angeles. And it's interesting that both UCLA and Stanford have devised schedules that do not allow that kind of contact.

 

[10ofRods]

BBM

I agree with you @10ofRods that lowering wages is the solution to firings in the public sector. When my husband taught school they often compromised on salary or benefits to avoid layoffs. He retired in 2000. I just hope there is a willingness nowadays to accept this sacrifice for the good of all. Based on what we see with mask-wearing and social distancing, I’m not optimistic.

You mention the year 2000 not being so bad in terms of what we could afford and buy. True. But items such as smart phones and tablets that we’ve all come to depend on weren’t available then, so that’s a new expense we didn’t have in 2000. It makes a dent in income for many people. So if wages are rolled back to that level, it will be interesting to see whether tech companies lower their prices. One would hope so in order to keep their customers. One more ripple effect requiring self-sacrifice, but in the private sector.

An economic sea change is a-coming.

I love your thinking on this. You are absolutely right about the lack of cell phones. I keep saying that families that could afford one for every member (right down to the 10 year olds) are going to find that impossible. WHAT? It's poverty! (No it's not).

The big burst in eating out came post-2000. Almost none of us grew up eating out as much as our kids or grandkids. There will be a rollback, nothing to be done about it, it's happened throughout history and will happen again. And of course it makes people unhappy. Relative deprivation theory should be retermed a law of human nature.

Apple stands to lose a lot, IMO. There are so many problems for them, in this new reality (not least of which is that now everything has to be flown from China, no more freight ships for a while - maybe for a very, very long while, China doesn't move quickly in these things). Meanwhile, of course, China will at least have manufacturing capacity to aid its economic recovery (and of course, they're able to contain CoVid fairly quickly when it pops up).

A lot of people I know are looking into much scaled down smart phones from third party vendors (usually direct from China). I'm trying to assess my own use of the phone - do I really need all those apps? This app-paring and change in phone use began among university students before CoVid, as a noticeable trend, but I think it will accelerate. I'm not there yet, but I'm sure a lot of people will wait much longer in between new phones (I've always been on the later adopter end of new phone technology).

One more ripple effect. Personally, I don't really care if tech companies lose much (all my retirement funds are in different sectors than major consumer tech). Even if my retirement fund diminishes, that just means I'll work longer. I have colleagues who are 80.

What I care about are musicians, live music, artists, art installations, a guaranteed living wage, reconstruction of social services, smaller classroom size and allowing experts in the field to guide curriculum decisions. I also think that allowing the upcoming wave of homelessness to sweep over people who previously have never missed a payment is tantamount to choosing evil, as a nation, if that's what we do. I don't want my taxes to continue to go to anonymous large corporations and certain other entities that I won't name. In that, I have no choice.

So we all make our choices, we all have our spheres of influence, and there will be many, many ripple effects.

 

[tresir2012]

One in 4,000 doesn’t seem even close to accurate when you look at the church spreads. Dozens among hundreds is not 1 in 4K.

We have just had the example of 2.5% from an outside gathering/protest so I think that would be more accurate. So that would be one in 40, which sounds more realistic than 1 in 4,000.

 

[tresir2012]

Can air filtration stop coronavirus at a Trump rally in Phoenix? Experts doubt it.

We now have this discussed in MSM.

The Dream City Church in Phoenix, where President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend a rally Tuesday, made a surprising claim Sunday: its building has an air filtration system that could neutralize the coronavirus. Many experts found this startling, because there is little evidence such systems can stop the spread of the virus.

The claim came in a video in which the senior pastor, Luke Barnett, and Chief Operations Officer Brendon Zastrow discussed the upcoming presidential visit and the air purification system from a local company, IONaer, which echoes the claim of its system’s effect on the virus on its website. IONaer does business as CleanAir EXP.



"It was a technology developed by some members of our church," Zastrow said. "And we've installed these units. And it kills 99 percent of COVID within 10 minutes."

It's the kind of claim that has little basis in reality, experts say. Both the ionization technology on which the system is based, as well as the way it works, are of limited effectiveness.

"When it comes to COVID-19 transmission, person-to-person transmission between those within 6 feet of each other is driving the majority of transmission," Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, said. "Any 'air cleaning' type of device would not be able to have an impact on this close range transmission and the video could give attendees a false sense of security.”

The videos with the claim about the air purification system have since been removed from the church's social media accounts.


Tim Bender, the CEO & co-founder of IONaer, which makes the air purification systems, stressed that they had only been tested on "surrogates," which are viruses similar to the coronavirus.

IONaer's CleanAir EXP published Tuesday the results of the third-party testing of its system that used "airborne coronavirus test surrogates," which are viruses similar but not identical to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. The study found that it was able to eliminate 99.9 percent of the coronavirus surrogates in air that passed through its system.

Bender also clarified that the system is ineffective if people come into close contact with one another.

Continued at link.

 

[Lilibet]

I love your thinking on this. You are absolutely right about the lack of cell phones. I keep saying that families that could afford one for every member (right down to the 10 year olds) are going to find that impossible. WHAT? It's poverty! (No it's not).

The big burst in eating out came post-2000. Almost none of us grew up eating out as much as our kids or grandkids. There will be a rollback, nothing to be done about it, it's happened throughout history and will happen again. And of course it makes people unhappy. Relative deprivation theory should be retermed a law of human nature.

Apple stands to lose a lot, IMO. There are so many problems for them, in this new reality (not least of which is that now everything has to be flown from China, no more freight ships for a while - maybe for a very, very long while, China doesn't move quickly in these things). Meanwhile, of course, China will at least have manufacturing capacity to aid its economic recovery (and of course, they're able to contain CoVid fairly quickly when it pops up).

A lot of people I know are looking into much scaled down smart phones from third party vendors (usually direct from China). I'm trying to assess my own use of the phone - do I really need all those apps? This app-paring and change in phone use began among university students before CoVid, as a noticeable trend, but I think it will accelerate. I'm not there yet, but I'm sure a lot of people will wait much longer in between new phones (I've always been on the later adopter end of new phone technology).

One more ripple effect. Personally, I don't really care if tech companies lose much (all my retirement funds are in different sectors than major consumer tech). Even if my retirement fund diminishes, that just means I'll work longer. I have colleagues who are 80.

What I care about are musicians, live music, artists, art installations, a guaranteed living wage, reconstruction of social services, smaller classroom size and allowing experts in the field to guide curriculum decisions. I also think that allowing the upcoming wave of homelessness to sweep over people who previously have never missed a payment is tantamount to choosing evil, as a nation, if that's what we do. I don't want my taxes to continue to go to anonymous large corporations and certain other entities that I won't name. In that, I have no choice.

So we all make our choices, we all have our spheres of influence, and there will be many, many ripple effects.

I always appreciate your analyses @10ofRods. You make me think about things in different ways.

I tend to separate my feelings about the corporations (ugh) from the individuals who work for them when I think about impact. No matter what, an economic roll back will be felt on a personal level by those employees. My daughter works in management at a large communications company headquartered in Atlanta. I’ve mentioned that she was scheduled to move there for a new position in April...postponed until at least September. Meanwhile, she’s been working in this new position from home in SoCal. Time will tell whether this position is scrapped. So far she’s survived numerous layoffs in 24 years by reconfiguring her job so she’s an essential employee. In any case, whatever this corporation decides or needs to do, she will likely feel the impact, as will all workers for large corporations making changes. The trickledown effect in the economy and effect on individuals in all lines of work is enormous and ugly, as you point out. And we can’t ignore public health in the equation and just focus on the economy as some want to do. It’s the elephant in the room.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Statement from Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband and U.S. Attorney Matthew Schneider on New York City’s Reopening Plans




Home » Office of Public Affairs » News
wrote Mayor de Blasio to express the concern that New York City was permitting large gatherings for political protest while not permitting in-person religious gatherings when the Constitution’s First Amendment protects both free speech rights and religious exercise.

New York City had vigorously enforced restrictions on religious gatherings, including by sending police officers to disperse numerous gatherings of the Jewish community, including outdoor funerals. At the same time, Mayor de Blasio marched in large in-person political gatherings concerning the recent tragic death of George Floyd and made statements suggesting — in a manner forbidden by the First Amendment — that religious exercise was less valued and protected by New York City than political exercise.

Attachment(s):
Download Letter to Mayor de Blasio 6.19.2020
Topic(s):
Coronavirus
Civil Rights
Component(s):
Civil Rights Division
USAO - Michigan, Eastern
Press Release Number:
20-574
Updated June 22, 2020
Speeches and Press Releases
Videos
Photos
Blogs

That could get sticky. Cherry picking the amendments.

It seems like the current outdoor infection rate is 2.5%. I wonder what it was when church gatherings were broke up. Jmo

 

[ilovewings]

People are microwaving library books and masks to kill COVID-19 — and that's bad

Never overestimate the intelligence of the American people (sigh)

 

[tresir2012]

That could get sticky. Cherry picking the amendments.

It seems like the current outdoor infection rate is 2.5%. I wonder what it was when church gatherings were broke up. Jmo

So will there be repercussions for De Blasio? Has the coronavirus or other federal law been broken? I need someone to interpret it. Will de Blasio have to answer for it in court? I mean people came from out of state to join the protests yet New Yorkers couldn't attend church/synagogue/funerals. That's unfair. It looks to me like this is a pre-amble to court action. MOO.

 

[bears10]

People are microwaving library books and masks to kill COVID-19 — and that's bad

Never overestimate the intelligence of the American people (sigh)

Uh oh. Paging @JaneEyre

 

[JerseyGirl]

One in 4,000 doesn’t seem even close to accurate when you look at the church spreads. Dozens among hundreds is not 1 in 4K.

Yes, proven in New York back in March:

Lawrence Garbuz, who Gov. Andrew Cuomo referred to as "Patient Zero," was connected to a large cluster in New Rochelle, in suburban Westchester County, that included his family and people at his synagogue, as well as his Manhattan law office. The cases from that cluster grew to one of the largest in the nation.
Lawyer at Center of Earliest NY Coronavirus Cluster Goes Home From Hospital

his update: After COVID-19 Illness, NY Lawyer in Recovery, Planning Limited Return to Practice | New York Law Journal

 

[bears10]

That could get sticky. Cherry picking the amendments.

It seems like the current outdoor infection rate is 2.5%. I wonder what it was when church gatherings were broke up. Jmo

when deblasio was breaking up the Jewish funerals and social gatherings, it was at the height of covid in NY, and said gatherings were a reoccurring issue in NY and NJ.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

People are microwaving library books and masks to kill COVID-19 — and that's bad

Never overestimate the intelligence of the American people (sigh)

Lord, no!

 

[JerseyGirl]

Dr. Anthony Fauci warned that health experts are seeing "more and more" coronavirus complications in young people while testifying during a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing.

Though young people initially appeared to be spared from the virus' worst symptoms early on in the outbreak, Fauci said they are at risk for suffering "deleterious consequences," CNBC reports.

Though some states, such as New York, have seen a decline in Covid-19 cases, others have seen rising case numbers that "reflect an increase in community spread," which Fauci called concerning.

Coronavirus live updates: Some colleges cut academic programs as data suggests the virus is spreading

 

[jjenny]

We have seen multiple events where multiple people get infected. So tell me again how the chance of getting infected could be 1 in 4000?
"Rob Sproul, the Belmont County Health Commissioner, said that 91 people had traveled to Myrtle Beach. “Of those, 45 are Belmont County residents and 14 have already tested positive for COVID-19,” he told WTRF. "
Ohio teens test positive for COVID-19 after trip to Myrtle Beach: Report

 

[CSIDreamer]

when deblasio was breaking up the Jewish funerals and social gatherings, it was at the height of covid in NY, and said gatherings were a reoccurring issue in NY and NJ.

Do you recall what the RO was then vs now?

 

[bears10]

Do you recall what the RO was then vs now?

what is RO?

 

[JerseyGirl]

The seven-day average of daily new Covid-19 cases increased more than 30% compared with a week ago, according to a CNBC analysis of Johns Hopkins University data. Cases are growing by 5% or more in 26 states across the U.S., including Arizona, Texas, Florida and Montana.

Texas added 4,846 new cases on Monday bringing its seven-day average of daily new cases to 3,940. The state has seen more than 100% increase in its seven-day average compared with a week ago.

Arizona is averaging about 2,500 daily new cases as of Monday, which is about a 94% increase since one week ago.
.

Coronavirus live updates: Some colleges cut academic programs as data suggests the virus is spreading

 

[CSIDreamer]

what is RO?

R-naught. It's how many people an infected person will infect.