COVID-19 2nd wave - Texas only - Stats and such

[kevwun 15659]

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

I don't think we know what percent have been exposed. If chitowndoc takes an antibody test today with low sensitivity does anyone have confidence to bet one way or the other. I think I was infected in late February. I haven't been tested and I have a hard time understanding why I should be tested now. A negative or a positive antibody test wouldn't change anything.

And exposure rates like I stated earlier vary dramatically by region so that 12% that you are guessing includes low percentages in some rural areas and high percentages in some urban areas. And that 12% also has a significant impact on how the virus spreads. And that number will surely grow (whatever it is) after schools reopen and people vacation and more people go back to working in the office.

As for the 45%, I was just giving an analogy when no great one exists. I don't think 45% of the population has been infected. It is much, much lower. And people probably don't remember a flu season that was particularly mild where the flu shot was highly effective. And people probably can't imagine what such a flu season would be like if people wore masks and kids stayed at home.  What I was saying is that if a decent percentage of people are immune to this coronavirus and people continue safe practices, this virus will be pretty well contained.

As for the predictions above that the flu will be particularly bad, I highly doubt it, at least through the rest of 2020. Many places around the world are doing a pretty good job with safe practices, flights are still somewhat limited. People here are generally doing okay with masks and working at home. And people here are spooked to where an outbreak of the flu will start sending people to the doctor to get tested for COVID and the flu and cause the government to intervene again and create another strong run of good practices. 

They did some antibody testing in New York and even they were nowhere near close to herd immunity.  It is a pipe dream.  There are 326 million people in this country and we are at just under 4 million confirmed cases.  That's .01%.  We would have to get between 195 and 228 million cases for herd immunity.  Our hospitals cannot handle that many people needing treatment so the death rate would go up to horrifying levels.

Edited July 22, 2020 by kevwun

[whithou 149]

At my Houston hospital we are now opening up a third COVID ICU overflow and a third medical/surgical and stepdown COVID overflow. We also now have travelers on our units as more nurses are calling off due to having COVID. I came onto shift the other day and saw an oxygen tank in our break room. I thought that was odd, and found out that one of the nurses couldn't breathe during her shift and she had to take a time out and get supplemental oxygen. A few days later she ended up testing positive for COVID. We have access to IPads now for our patients which brings about some heartbreaking conversations. A daughter was pleading for her dad to show some sign of life while he sat motionless on the ventilator. He's been off sedation for days but he is still unresponsive. One of our long stay COVID patients passed the other day. Her oxygen saturation read 1% on the ventilator. The lowest I have ever seen is in the 60s with a good oxygen saturation being between 90-100%. 

While I was watching one of my unstable COVID patients through the window yesterday an IT contractor came up to me and told me that I should try to get COVID. I laughed and then stopped once I realized he was actually being serious. He said that we need herd immunity and that he had already gotten COVID to protect himself. I told him I'll pass on that on the off chance that I myself end up where my patient currently is. 

[Captainant 27471]

3 minutes ago, kevwun said:

They did some antibody testing in New York and even they were nowhere near close to herd immunity.  It is a pipe dream.  There are 326 million people in this country and we are at just under 4 million confirmed cases.  That's .01%.

And hell, even using the CDC's worst case estimate of a 10:1 ratio of unknown to known cases, that's still only 40 million confirmed cases out of 326 million people. At worst, 12% of the population has had COVID - and herd immunity starts around 60% of the population. 

I don't think ramping (at least) to 5X the number of cases and deaths is a good or desirable outcome. That's over half a million dead Americans, while our allies and neighbors are handling their pandemics with significantly fewer deaths and less economic uncertainty. 

[B00M 6280]

9 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

I just think the amount of avoidance we have done (handwashing/masks/sanitizer) could have a short term adverse effect on our immune system for the various seasonal viruses we are used to encountering.  

Did we see anything like this anywhere after sars or mers?

[Bevo 13528]

14 minutes ago, Captainant said:

And hell, even using the CDC's worst case estimate of a 10:1 ratio of unknown to known cases, that's still only 40 million confirmed cases out of 326 million people. At worst, 12% of the population has had COVID - and herd immunity starts around 60% of the population. 

I don't think ramping (at least) to 5X the number of cases and deaths is a good or desirable outcome. That's over half a million dead Americans, while our allies and neighbors are handling their pandemics with significantly fewer deaths and less economic uncertainty. 

So let's pick a city - NY or Austin or Houston. I say that we will have an outbreak after Labor Day and when schools reopen and then no more peaks through 2020. What is your doom and gloom prediction? After you let me know, we can make a little bet.

[Captainant 27471]

3 minutes ago, Bevo said:

So let's pick a city - NY or Austin or Houston. I say that we will have an outbreak after Labor Day and when schools reopen and then no more peaks through 2020. What is your doom and gloom prediction? After you let me know, we can make a little bet.

I don't think I'm giving doom and gloom predictions, I'm applying numerical analysis to the "let's go for herd immunity" argument. But your eagerness to literally bet on the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans is noted

Edited July 22, 2020 by Captainant

[Bevo 13528]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I don't think I'm giving doom and gloom predictions, I'm applying numerical analysis to the "let's go for herd immunity" argument. But your eagerness to literally bet on the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans is noted

If you followed what I said, you wouldn't be talking about herd immunity. It will lead you astray. As for the bet, I'm not superstitious. What I think will happen will have zero effect on what actually happens.

[iodeac 138]

They did some antibody testing in New York and even they were nowhere near close to herd immunity.  It is a pipe dream.  There are 326 million people in this country and we are at just under 4 million confirmed cases.  That's .01%.  We would have to get between 195 and 228 million cases for herd immunity.  Our hospitals cannot handle that many people needing treatment so the death rate would go up to horrifying levels.

This will probably be a dumb question, but what defines the boundaries of herd immunity? If it's defined as an entire geographical area, we're screwed because like you said that would be 228 million people, but can it be applied to small cities or towns where the percentage of infected would reach those levels?

Enviado desde mi SM-G973U mediante Tapatalk

[Captainant 27471]

5 minutes ago, iodeac said:

 

 

This will probably be a dumb question, but what defines the boundaries of herd immunity? If it's defined as an entire geographical area, we're screwed because like you said that would be 228 million people, but can it be applied to small cities or towns where the percentage of infected would reach those levels?

Enviado desde mi SM-G973U mediante Tapatalk
 

 

Not a dumb question, John's Hopkins has a good information page on it

(Relevant excerpt below)

https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/achieving-herd-immunity-with-covid19.html

What will it take to achieve herd immunity with SARS-CoV-2?

As with any other infection, there are two ways to achieve herd immunity: A large proportion of the population either gets infected or gets a protective vaccine. Based on early estimates of this virus’s infectiousness, we will likely need at least 70% of the population to be immune to have herd protection.

• In the worst case (for example, if we do not perform physical distancing or enact other measures to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2), the virus can infect this many people in a matter of a few months. This would overwhelm our hospitals and lead to high death rates.
• In the best case, we maintain current levels of infection—or even reduce these levels—until a vaccine becomes available. This will take concerted effort on the part of the entire population, with some level of continued physical distancing for an extended period, likely a year or longer, before a highly effective vaccine can be developed, tested, and mass produced.
• The most likely case is somewhere in the middle, where infection rates rise and fall over time; we may relax social distancing measures when numbers of infections fall, and then may need to re-implement these measures as numbers increase again. Prolonged effort will be required to prevent major outbreaks until a vaccine is developed. Even then, SARS-CoV-2 could still infect children before they can be vaccinated or adults after their immunity wanes. But it is unlikely in the long term to have the explosive spread that we are seeing right now because much of the population will be immune in the future.

[Homercles 10205]

45 minutes ago, kevwun said:

  There are 326 million people in this country and we are at just under 4 million confirmed cases.  That's .01%. 

I agree with your point except this part.  4/326 is about 1%.  

[Bevo 13528]

Just now, iodeac said:

This will probably be a dumb question, but what defines the boundaries of herd immunity? If it's defined as an entire geographical area, we're screwed because like you said that would be 228 million people, but can it be applied to small cities or towns where the percentage of infected would reach those levels?

Enviado desde mi SM-G973U mediante Tapatalk
 

It isn't a dumb question. It is very hard to answer. We live in an open system but it isn't fully open. What happens in NYC may be very different than what happens in Covelo, CA.

But most people on this board don't get herd immunity. The number isn't fixed. It was approximated based on what experts thought the R0 was and used assumptions based on no preexisting immunity, the Wuhan experience, government interventions and people's willingness to follow guidelines and people's willingness/ability to travel. Now in some places we have gone through 1 or more outbreaks and will have another one when schools reopen and after labor day. What do you think constitutes herd immunity at that point? Do you still think it will require 60% of the population to get infected? If fewer people are infected than necessary for herd immunity but there is some percentage of the population immune, do you think we will have outbreaks like in NYC or do you think they will be less severe?

[BradInATX 9208]

This whole schtick of just saying random words that make no sense, ignoring any factual pushback, and continuing to just randomly say words is an interesting strategy

[Bevo 13528]

8 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

This whole schtick of just saying random words that make no sense, ignoring any factual pushback, and continuing to just randomly say words is an interesting strategy

Try addressing points that you disagree with or don't understand. It is a better approach than passive aggression. 

[BradInATX 9208]

Try addressing points that you disagree with or don't understand. It is a better approach than passive aggression. 

I did. You didn't respond. Try addressing this entire thread with actual facts and data, not just your feelings.

[aggie08 21436]

17 minutes ago, Homercles said:

I agree with your point except this part.  4/326 is about 1%.  

If there's one good thing about this pandemic, it's that it exposed how absolutely terrible most of the country is at math. I've lost count of how many texts, messages, posts, etc. that I've read from people trying to minimize this by using their own hand-calculated percentages but forgetting to move over the damn decimal.

[BrazilHorn 6576]

Big fat old jump in cases yesterday in Travis county (603). Hopefully was due to some lingering weekend catchup as there were four days in a row of declining daily cases prior to yesterday.

Age Bracket 1 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 60 to 69 70 to 79 >80 Total New Cases 7/21 vs 7/20 22 22 180 123 97 76 46 16 21 603 % of Daily Change 3.65% 3.65% 29.85% 20.40% 16.09% 12.60% 7.63% 2.65% 3.48%   % of Total Cases 2.64% 7.53% 27.67% 21.72% 16.49% 11.65% 6.37% 3.35% 2.58% 18,307

[Bevo 13528]

2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I did. You didn't respond. Try addressing this entire thread with actual facts and data, not just your feelings.

Go for it. Show me what you are talking about. If it requires math, I'll try to get to it between patients.

[Trey3216 15325]

51 minutes ago, B00M said:

Did we see anything like this anywhere after sars or mers?

Don’t know, would have to go back and look.  

[BradInATX 9208]

3 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Go for it. Show me what you are talking about. If it requires math, I'll try to get to it between patients.

It's been addressed not only by me but by others countless times and you've ignored it completely.

Another winter spike might get us to 20% total infected. How do you imagine that 20% total infected is going to have us "cruising to the vaccine" after that winter spike? It doesn't make any sense.

[B00M 6280]

2 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Don’t know, would have to go back and look.  

That's why I asked, so you'd support your post. Is this our thread for unfounded fears now? Lulz

[Trey3216 15325]

2 minutes ago, B00M said:

That's why I asked, so you'd support your post. Is this our thread for unfounded fears now? Lulz

No, it’s not. And I’m not at my office right now which would be easier for me to grab that info in a timely fashion.  I’ll go look.   
 

But one thing’s for certain, our bodies build immunity to certain viruses and other illnesses merely by interacting with other people.  With our interactions way down, and mass utilization of sanitizers and soaps further eliminating bodily interaction with viruses, it isn’t a stretch to hypothesize that our bodies wouldn’t be as suited as normal to fight off viruses that we’ve been able to fairly readily rid from ourselves in the past.  

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

No, it’s not. And I’m not at my office right now which would be easier for me to grab that info in a timely fashion.  I’ll go look.   
 

But one thing’s for certain, our bodies build immunity to certain viruses and other illnesses merely by interacting with other people.  With our interactions way down, and mass utilization of sanitizers and soaps further eliminating bodily interaction with viruses, it isn’t a stretch to hypothesize that our bodies wouldn’t be as suited as normal to fight off viruses that we’ve been able to fairly readily rid from ourselves in the past.  

 

The docs on the board would know better, but I wouldn't imagine we're going to lose much capability to fight off colds and little winter bugs after what looks to be less than a year of quarantine. I mean I said I expect to catch a bunch of stuff from my little germ magnet toddler, but I'm not actually worried about it being a serious problem. We're not going to see people keeling over from the cold or a sinus infection because we've been using hand sanitizer for a year. We may all just be walking around with colds the first few days. It might suck a little bit but I don't think it presents an actual serious health risk, though I'm not sure if that's what you're putting out there either.

Edited July 22, 2020 by BradInATX

[Trey3216 15325]

1 minute ago, BradInATX said:

 

The docs on the board would know better, but I wouldn't imagine we're going to lose much capability to fight off colds and little winter bugs after what looks to be less than a year of quarantine. I mean I said I expect to catch a bunch of stuff from my little germ magnet toddler, but I'm not actually worried about it being a serious problem. We're not going to see people keeling over from the cold or a sinus infection because we've been using hand sanitizer for a year. We may all just be walking around with colds the first few days. It might suck a little bit but I don't think it presents an actual serious health risk, though I'm not sure if that's what you're putting out there either.

Pretty much what I’m getting at, that we’ll see higher instance of various colds, maybe more cases of mild flu.   Not a public health crisis, just kind of a quick and noticeable uptick.    
 

but like I said, it was just me thinking about unintended consequences, which is one of the things I always think about.   

[NorthLoop 14094]

The problems that will arise with cold/flu season will be the amount of people who think they have covid that may inundate the testing centers or possibly the hospitals. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

It isn't a dumb question. It is very hard to answer. We live in an open system but it isn't fully open. What happens in NYC may be very different than what happens in Covelo, CA.
But most people on this board don't get herd immunity. The number isn't fixed. It was approximated based on what experts thought the R0 was and used assumptions based on no preexisting immunity, the Wuhan experience, government interventions and people's willingness to follow guidelines and people's willingness/ability to travel. Now in some places we have gone through 1 or more outbreaks and will have another one when schools reopen and after labor day. What do you think constitutes herd immunity at that point? Do you still think it will require 60% of the population to get infected? If fewer people are infected than necessary for herd immunity but there is some percentage of the population immune, do you think we will have outbreaks like in NYC or do you think they will be less severe?

Here’s a thread that kinda hits on what you’re talking about

[dcar00 14036]

3 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

 

 

Here’s a thread that kinda hits on what you’re talking about

 

I believe the estimation of total US pop that ended up getting spanish flu was approx 1/3rd after it was over.  I'm not saying it was herd immunity but it did "end".  there was no vax. shouldn't the estimation be much higher?

[Bevo 13528]

20 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

It's been addressed not only by me but by others countless times and you've ignored it completely.

Another winter spike might get us to 20% total infected. How do you imagine that 20% total infected is going to have us "cruising to the vaccine" after that winter spike? It doesn't make any sense.

Do you want a simulation? What do you want use as assumptions? 20% immunity rate, people wearing masks, children staying home, no contact tracing, limited travel. What is "cruising to a vaccine"? My feeling is that it that the phrase "cruising to a vaccine" is a low rate of spread like we got between March lockdown and July 4/protests/re-opening.

[BradInATX 9208]

5 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Do you want a simulation? What do you want use as assumptions? 20% immunity rate, people wearing masks, children staying home, no contact tracing, limited travel. What is "cruising to a vaccine"? My feeling is that it that the phrase "cruising to a vaccine" is a low rate of spread like we got between March lockdown and July 4/protests/re-opening.

 

I don't know what "cruising to a vaccine" is, you're the one that said it. But your assumptions are all over the place. You're saying that in the fall/winter all of the kids will get it and recover thus removing a big source of spread. But kids aren't even a big vector for C19 and haven't been this entire time, so that assertion makes no sense.

I'd like to see you make a real case for why we'll get a 2nd fall/winter wave and then it's going to burn itself out, cruise to a vaccine, or whatever you said. Because really all you've said is "I think this and I think that" which isn't really adding anything to the thread.

[Bevo 13528]

19 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

 

Here’s a thread that kinda hits on what you’re talking about

 

 

Thanks. It talks about it but reading twitter is kind of a beating. About 200 or so pages back someone linked a page that had some simulations. It would be pretty helpful now.

 

 

[Bevo 13528]

6 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

I don't know what "cruising to a vaccine" is, you're the one that said it. But your assumptions are all over the place. You're saying that in the fall/winter all of the kids will get it and recover thus removing a big source of spread. But kids aren't even a big vector for C19 and haven't been this entire time, so that assertion makes no sense.

I'd like to see you make a real case for why we'll get a 2nd fall/winter wave and then it's going to burn itself out, cruise to a vaccine, or whatever you said. Because really all you've said is "I think this and I think that" which isn't really adding anything to the thread.

I've been consistent. You may not agree with things but there is nothing inconsistent with what I have said. If you want further explanation, I'm more than willing. You are being a bit cantankerous and thick headed though.

Cruising to a vaccine means to me at levels similar to what we saw in Texas between March and June. So we will use that definition.

I did say that going back to school will be a problem. Kids up through college age will get it and become a big vector driving it into homes and throughout the community. Saying that it hasn't happened in the past means nothing about what will happen in the future. But you are incorrect about that point anyway. Older adults aren't going to COVID parties and aren't going on spring break. 15-30 year olds drove this most recent outbreak. But if you want to narrow the talk to those in high school and younger, I'll dive into that as well: Those ages are going to bring it from their homes and spread it to their parents and spread it to the community. If you don't believe me, I have no problem in making a bet that we will see a spike in communities after schools re-open. If you have a budget in mind, I'm game. Name the community that we want to look at in an urban area and I'll bet we see a jump in cases in that community a few weeks after schools re-open. Although it might be a little delayed because those kid probably will have mild symptoms and not get tested and it won't be until their parents and teachers pass it along that we will see the spike.

[StruggleBus 3922]

6 hours ago, justhookit said:

I made this post about Nueces County exactly a month ago on this thread when I was starting to get concerned about a spike in new cases. Today’s hospitalization number is 408. ICU is 121.

the really, really good news is that we were under 300 cases again today, reporting 289. One week ago we reported 605. People are finally taking this seriously here. Now comes the hard part of continuing to take it seriously as cases decline. I don’t have a lot of faith.

We'll be doing this back and forth until there is a vaccine. Cases are low, people get careless. Cases go up, people are more careful. 

[Bevo 13528]

7 minutes ago, StruggleBus said:

We'll be doing this back and forth until there is a vaccine. Cases are low, people get careless. Cases go up, people are more careful. 

Here is one article that talks about it: https://voxeu.org/article/it-s-not-exponential-economist-s-view-epidemiological-curve

 

[BradInATX 9208]

8 minutes ago, Bevo said:

I've been consistent. You may not agree with things but there is nothing inconsistent with what I have said. If you want further explanation, I'm more than willing. You are being a bit cantankerous and thick headed though.

Cruising to a vaccine means to me at levels similar to what we saw in Texas between March and June. So we will use that definition.

I did say that going back to school will be a problem. Kids up through college age will get it and become a big vector driving it into homes and throughout the community. Saying that it hasn't happened in the past means nothing about what will happen in the future. But you are incorrect about that point anyway. Older adults aren't going to COVID parties and aren't going on spring break. 15-30 year olds drove this most recent outbreak. But if you want to narrow the talk to those in high school and younger, I'll dive into that as well: Those ages are going to bring it from their homes and spread it to their parents and spread it to the community. If you don't believe me, I have no problem in making a bet that we will see a spike in communities after schools re-open. If you have a budget in mind, I'm game. Name the community that we want to look at in an urban area and I'll bet we see a jump in cases in that community a few weeks after schools re-open. Although it might be a little delayed because those kid probably will have mild symptoms and not get tested and it won't be until their parents and teachers pass it along that we will see the spike.

 

Who is arguing that cases aren't going to jump after schools re-open? Every single person in this thread expects that.

Stop jumping around and answer the question I've now asked you three times. Why do you believe that after the fall/winter spike (that pretty much everyone expects) it's just going to suddenly drop back to March through June levels until we get a vaccine? Do you believe that 18-20% of the population is enough for herd immunity? Do you believe that our society has the patience to stay distanced and masked up even if we see numbers going down? Or do you believe this virus is a magical fairy virus that behaves unlike every other virus known to man?

 

[Bevo 13528]

40 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

Who is arguing that cases aren't going to jump after schools re-open? Every single person in this thread expects that.

Stop jumping around and answer the question I've now asked you three times. Why do you believe that after the fall/winter spike (that pretty much everyone expects) it's just going to suddenly drop back to March through June levels until we get a vaccine? Do you believe that 18-20% of the population is enough for herd immunity? Do you believe that our society has the patience to stay distanced and masked up even if we see numbers going down? Or do you believe this virus is a magical fairy virus that behaves unlike every other virus known to man?

 

You stated: Who is arguing that cases aren't going to jump after schools re-open? Every single person in this thread expects that.

You stated: You're saying that in the fall/winter all of the kids will get it and recover thus removing a big source of spread. But kids aren't even a big vector for C19 and haven't been this entire time, so that assertion makes no sense. Now, I didn't say that so I clarified by stating: I did say that going back to school will be a problem. Kids up through college age will get it and become a big vector driving it into homes and throughout the community. Saying that it hasn't happened in the past means nothing about what will happen in the future. But you are incorrect about that point anyway. Older adults aren't going to COVID parties and aren't going on spring break. 15-30 year olds drove this most recent outbreak. But if you want to narrow the talk to those in high school and younger, I'll dive into that as well: Those ages are going to bring it from their homes and spread it to their parents and spread it to the community. If you don't believe me, I have no problem in making a bet that we will see a spike in communities after schools re-open. If you have a budget in mind, I'm game. Name the community that we want to look at in an urban area and I'll bet we see a jump in cases in that community a few weeks after schools re-open. Although it might be a little delayed because those kid probably will have mild symptoms and not get tested and it won't be until their parents and teachers pass it along that we will see the spike.

You stated: Stop jumping around and answer the question I've now asked you three times. Why do you believe that after the fall/winter spike (that pretty much everyone expects) it's just going to suddenly drop back to March through June levels until we get a vaccine? Do you believe that 18-20% of the population is enough for herd immunity? Do you believe that our society has the patience to stay distanced and masked up even if we see numbers going down? Or do you believe this virus is a magical fairy virus that behaves unlike every other virus known to man?

Me: See the article above. We will see an attenuated sine wave with the big peak now and with another peak after labor day and another when schools reopen. I think schools will create a large peak equivalent to what we just saw so maybe not attenuated but more like 3 peaks with a decline after that point. After that peaks will be smaller than before. I've explained it previously with logic. If you want more, we need someone to do some google searching to find it.

I'll go through the logic again. We need to start with one set of facts. If each person infected passes it along to fewer than one person, the virus will disappear. If one person passes it along to more than one person, the disease will spread. That rate of spread is slow if on average one person spreads it to 1.1 people and is fast if one person spreads it to 10 people. Now imagine a city with some people with total disregard for containment, others too young or incompetent to understand containment, some people with understanding of containment but at high risk of spread (healthcare workers, police, EMTs, etc.), a general caring population that vacillates based on what they see and hear from the news, and a population extremely diligent about infection. If you assume that the people who are major disease spreaders are those with total disregard, incompetent, or people at high risk what happens when those people have some immunity because of previous exposure? My understanding is that the rate of spread slows. When one person becomes infected, he goes to the supermarket and encounters people with masks, some people exposed and with masks, some others with crappy masks or masks pulled down below their noses, some kids with no masks, etc. People overall are keeping away from the infected person. He touches a few items that he doesn't buy. So there is a risk of exposure by someone touching an item that he touched or by breathing infected air droplets. This risk is lower than if the same person went into the store where there was no immunity, no PPE, and no social distancing. But not only is the initial passage of the disease less probable but the person who catches it is less likely to pass it along as well.

Do you believe that 18-20% of the population is enough for herd immunity? No. Read above.

 

Do you believe that our society has the patience to stay distanced and masked up even if we see numbers going down? Some will and some won't. Some people will do a good job when the news is bad and relax when the news improves. See above.

Or do you believe this virus is a magical fairy virus that behaves unlike every other virus known to man? No. Please explain yourself.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Bevo

[ABSR 5289]

18 hours ago, LebongJames said:

Fucking Tuesday’s 

Why you hate birds?

[Bevo 13528]

18 hours ago, LebongJames said:

Fucking Tuesday’s 

New restaurant aimed at the TGIF target market?

[ABSR 5289]

3 hours ago, aggie08 said:

If there's one good thing about this pandemic, it's that it exposed how absolutely terrible most of the country is at math. I've lost count of how many texts, messages, posts, etc. that I've read from people trying to minimize  maximize this by using their own hand-calculated percentages but forgetting to move over the damn decimal.

Fixed it for you to reflect the post in question with faulty math.

[Texas Jeff 1932]

Back in May, Texas was somewhere around 44th among states in COVID cases per capita and was below the national average.
After a lot of hard work by our fellow Texans, we now rank 18th and are above the national average.

Among the states that are above average, we have the lowest per capita testing rate.
Oklahoma has a much lower per capita COVID rate and a higher per capita testing rate than Texas.

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, but we’ve got more people than Oklahoma so of course we are gonna have more per capita cases!   And we test more people at a lower rate because we have more hospitals.
 Besides those rankings don’t take into account households with more than two TV sets.   And other things...of that nature 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Lobo

[InkaUtexas 25527]

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, but we’ve got more people than Oklahoma so of course we are gonna have more per capita cases!   And we test more people at a lower rate because we have more hospitals.
 Besides those rankings don’t take into account households with more than two TV sets.   And other things...of that nature 

Yep, and when your house is on wheels easier to wait at testing sites. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

Yep, and when your house is on wheels easier to wait at testing sites. 

Zero chill

[InkaUtexas 25527]

Just now, Trey3216 said:

Yeah, but did their house pass inspection this year? 

Shit, set up COVID testing AT registration locations. Win Win for Boomer Sooner! 

[Trey3216 15325]

25 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Yep, and when your house is on wheels easier to wait at testing sites. 

Yeah, but did their house pass inspection this year? 

[Trey3216 15325]

6 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Shit, set up COVID testing AT registration locations. Win Win for Boomer Sooner! 

I mean, if your home was diesel, would you try and cheat with the farm diesel or fill up at the sevumleven?

[Johnny Sack 8397]

36 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, but we’ve got more people than Oklahoma so of course we are gonna have more per capita cases!   And we test more people at a lower rate because we have more hospitals.
 Besides those rankings don’t take into account households with more than two TV sets.   And other things...of that nature 

We also share a border with Mexico.  And Mexican nationals are coming over to our border cities for treatment.  
 

California hospital directors have gone on the record admitting that they have been treating patients from Mexico. Now we have on-the-record proof that this is happening in Texas as well.

The numbers are truly extraordinary. On Sunday, 42% of all deaths reportedin Texas were in border counties, even though those counties account for just 9% of the state’s population and are generally much less dense than the counties closer to the major population centers. The positivity rate of testing is almost twice as high in Hidalgo County (border) as in Harris County (Houston). Since June 1, Hidalgo County’s cases have grown by 1,800%, while Harris County’s cases have grown by 346%. Now we know why.

On Friday, KVEO’s Sydney Hernandez, who has been covering cross-border news for years, reported that “doctors say they are not only treating Rio Grande Valley residents but people who crossed the border seeking medical attention.”

“One of the factors is the border, we in McAllen Medical are receiving many patients from Mexico, they are coming in because their resources over there are also limited so they are coming into our area seeking medical attention and by law we have to provide it,” said Dr. Ivonne Lopez, medical director of McAllen Hospital Group at McAllen Medical Center. “The patients that cross the border say ‘we don’t have hospital space over there, the oxygen is gone, we don’t have medications so we cross the border,’ that’s the situation in the border.

[Scary Stranger 1712]

Where's that text from?

[babysdaddy 2718]

15 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

I think we’re going to have a flu season like we haven’t had in a long while unfortunately.   

I'm thinking the opposite.  Increased social distancing/hand washing/mask wearing should reduce influenza and I think a lot of the folks that would've died from the flu this year are, sadly, passing from covid.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-measures-have-all-but-wiped-out-the-flu-in-the-southern-hemisphere-11595440682?mod=hp_lead_pos10

[Uncle Boobs 1246]

This whole schtick of just saying random words that make no sense, ignoring any factual pushback, and continuing to just randomly say words is an interesting strategy

Gargling flat rates of Covid works in Texas but the extreme instances are intending to continue without 21% in reduction despite attempting this in hospitals or under scale to differentiate.

Unless the government understands or tributes this down or further South, doctors won't enter or use manual conditions.

[babysdaddy 2718]

Dallas checking in with 413 cases today after 734 yesterday.  That was after 18 straight days over 1000.  Mask up!

[Rougarou 594]

9 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Dallas checking in with 413 cases today after 734 yesterday.  That was after 18 straight days over 1000.  Mask up!

You love to see it baybay!