The new Corona virus, should we worry?

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
2,076
Points
113

Minnesota hiding data.
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






 

From the Parkinglot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
644
Reaction score
288
Points
63
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






I just found it an interesting change to the way numbers are being reported. It can’t be that difficult to include whether hospitalizations and ICU usage has increased or decreased. Everyone agrees that the rise in positive tests is due to younger people, age 20-25. Most of the time they don’t require hospitalization, not to say they are not sick.
When the governor first introduced these measures back in March the goal was to not over crowd the hospitals, which appears to have happened. I would agree that the percentage of ICU or hospitalizations is also a key metric to this virus. We can all agree this is not going away anytime soon even if there is a vaccine. Hopefully the people that do get sick don’t require hospitalization and there are not long term side effects.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
2,076
Points
113
I just found it an interesting change to the way numbers are being reported. It can’t be that difficult to include whether hospitalizations and ICU usage has increased or decreased. Everyone agrees that the rise in positive tests is due to younger people, age 20-25. Most of the time they don’t require hospitalization, not to say they are not sick.
When the governor first introduced these measures back in March the goal was to not over crowd the hospitals, which appears to have happened. I would agree that the percentage of ICU or hospitalizations is also a key metric to this virus. We can all agree this is not going away anytime soon even if there is a vaccine. Hopefully the people that do get sick don’t require hospitalization and there are not long term side effects.
I probably shouldn't have quoted your post. You posted the tweet. It was a bunch of posters after you that freaked out.
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
7,853
Reaction score
1,214
Points
113
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






SD tells us how many current COVID hospitalizations there are, and what the capacity currently is.

MN no longer tells us how many current COVID hospitalizations there are, just what the capacity is.

So now instead of being able to point out how low COVID hospitalizations are in MN, they just want to show ICU capacity filled, which is currently 87%. Via the last update, ~12% of that would be COVID patients.

Which sounds better to keep restrictions in place? "87% of our ICU beds are filled, so we must keep COVID restrictions in place to keep that number from increasing" or "Only 12% of our ICU beds have patients who have tested positive for COVID, so we must keep restrictions in place"

What Walz is trying to do is very clear, yet you and the usual suspects continue to eat it up.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,304
Points
113
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






There are rumors that Avera and Sanford are both out of isolation rooms in Sioux Falls and are having to have COVID patients air-lifted to MN. Having capacity and having capacity for COVID patients are not the same thing.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,932
Reaction score
606
Points
113
There are rumors that Avera and Sanford are both out of isolation rooms in Sioux Falls and are having to have COVID patients air-lifted to MN. Having capacity and having capacity for COVID patients are not the same thing.
Fuck that, lock down the boarder...
Don't let them lower their hospital cases by shipping them here.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,603
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
Active casses per million as of 9/24

MN 1,260 8.4% increase in two days
WI 2,805 10.4% increase
SD 3,720 16.8% increase.

No difference at all. :rolleyes:
If there was ever a garbage statistic it’s this one. NYC for example has averaged under a thousand daily positives for months but has over 60k active cases.

Other states have kept enormous numbers of unhospitalized cases on the books for weeks and months.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
693
Points
113
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






OK Timmy and your clown assistants, we don't give a rat sch^t about MN hospital capacity (as we're well past the peak), and the number of admissions per day is just a random number that fluctuates around some low average, but we do care about what the current total is. That's the most important statistic. That's the most relevant statistic for showing how severe (or not) Covid-19 currently is in Minnesota.

Now if you're too lazy to do the math, then just give us one total hospital/ICI count to start with, then each day give us the number of new admissions and the number of newly discharged and the number of formerly hospitalized that died, and we'll do the math for you. Most of us had at least high school algebra, so we can compute that if you can't or you're too lazy.

But deliberately hiding this statistic, and not even giving us the numbers from which we can calculate it, is fraud of the highest magnitude. We can only tentatively conclude that you are denying us these statistics in an attempt to continue your dictatorial powers indefinitely.

Impeach Walz!
 
Last edited:

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
7,853
Reaction score
1,214
Points
113
There are rumors that Avera and Sanford are both out of isolation rooms in Sioux Falls and are having to have COVID patients air-lifted to MN. Having capacity and having capacity for COVID patients are not the same thing.
Yet I know for a fact SD is taking in patients from other states. That’s one of the reasons their hospitalizations are up.

I’ll take my fact over your rumor.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
46,496
Reaction score
4,304
Points
113
If there was ever a garbage statistic it’s this one. NYC for example has averaged under a thousand daily positives for months but has over 60k active cases.

Other states have kept enormous numbers of unhospitalized cases on the books for weeks and months.
ND, SD and WI are high because they're # of new cases/day have sky-rocketed in recent weeks, not because they are failing to remove old ones. Most states remove cases after 14 days if there is no other outcome (hospitalization/death.)
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,030
Reaction score
2,376
Points
113
There are rumors that Avera and Sanford are both out of isolation rooms in Sioux Falls and are having to have COVID patients air-lifted to MN. Having capacity and having capacity for COVID patients are not the same thing.
Another typical Howie post. You are simply the most disingenuous and dishonest poster on GH.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
26,105
Reaction score
1,494
Points
113
submitted for your consideration - from the Strib:


A door-to-door COVID-19 testing survey has been halted due to multiple incidents in outstate Minnesota of residents intimidating and shouting racial and ethnic slurs at state and federal public health survey teams.

The CDC pulled its federal surveyors out of Minnesota this week following reports of verbal abuse and intimidation, including an incident in the Iowa border town of Eitzen, Minn., in which a survey team walking to a house was blocked by two cars and threatened by three men, including one who had a gun.

The frequency of problems became clear last weekend when surveyors discussed their experiences. A Hispanic surveyor was called one slur “more in the last week than in her entire life,” said Stephanie Yendell, a state senior epidemiology supervisor.

Insults came at doorways, from angry people approaching the surveyors or just people walking their dogs on the other sides of the streets, she said. The surveyors trapped in the Eitzen incident were permitted to leave and did not file a police report about the gun-toting man or the two others who approached them.

Incidents occurred mostly in central and southern Minnesota.....
Well isn’t that nice.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,603
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
When I post South Dakota's COVID hospitalization numbers all I hear is how it doesn't matter because they're not near capacity in hospitals and also that Minnesota ALSO has high hospitalizations.

When Minnesota posts only hospital capacity numbers, they must be doing it to hide LOW hospitalization numbers and no one cares about hospital capacity.






That’s an awful lot of BS in a relatively short excerpt.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,603
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
ND, SD and WI are high because they're # of new cases/day have sky-rocketed in recent weeks, not because they are failing to remove old ones. Most states remove cases after 14 days if there is no other outcome (hospitalization/death.)
Not all states do, which is why I‘vefound it to be repeatedly useless. Where is the 14 day stipulation posted, and I’ll gladly shut up.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,603
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
Re: “active cases” definition of “recovered” varies. By their numbers only 2.92M of 7M cases have recovered or died. Does that make sense?


From the Covid-19 project

Recovered:
Total number of people that are identified as recovered from COVID-19. States provide very disparate definitions on what constitutes a “recovered” COVID-19 case. Types of “recovered” cases include those who are discharged from hospitals, released from isolation after meeting CDC guidance on symptoms cessation, or those who have not been identified as fatalities after a number of days (30 or more) post disease onset. Specifics vary for each state or territory.
 

balds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
179
Points
63
Covid is real, our response to it is anything but. Cases and deaths, as reported in America, are egregiously inaccurate.
 

CutDownTheNet

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
693
Points
113
Re: “active cases” definition of “recovered” varies. By their numbers only 2.92M of 7M cases have recovered or died. Does that make sense?


From the Covid-19 project

Recovered:
Total number of people that are identified as recovered from COVID-19. States provide very disparate definitions on what constitutes a “recovered” COVID-19 case. Types of “recovered” cases include those who are discharged from hospitals, released from isolation after meeting CDC guidance on symptoms cessation, or those who have not been identified as fatalities after a number of days (30 or more) post disease onset. Specifics vary for each state or territory.
Plus, regardless of the inconsistent definitions, they're just lazy about recording the "recovered" status, such that most recovered patients are never marked as such.

I've been tempted to put together a page in Excel that manually computes the estimated recovered, ignoring completely the posted numbers that are garbage, but just computes it on the basis of "by that late date, they must be either recovered or dead." You subtract out the dead, and the rest are recovered (minus a small error bar that might be left in an ICU).

I just haven't gotten around to this yet.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,932
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
Why aren’t kids back in school in most locations?

Study: Less than 1 percent of teachers, students infected since schools reopened

A new study has found minimal evidence that the novel coronavirus is transferring inside K-12 school buildings despite reports of students and faculty across the country contracting the disease.

Brown University researchers collaborated with school administrators and released data Wednesday from a new National COVID-19 School Response Data Dashboard.

COVID-19 cases recorded in the dashboard show a relatively small degree of spread among staff and students. The study looked at data collected from more than 550 schools across 46 states over a two-week period starting Aug. 31, with more than 300 schools maintaining some level of in-person classes.

Researchers found 0.23 percent of students had confirmed or suspected cases of the virus, while the rate among educators was 0.51 percent. The rates for confirmed cases were lower at 0.076 for students and 0.15 for teachers. The data included those for public and private schools, with many of the schools located in smaller communities.

Researchers at Brown University say the early evidence could mean that a return to classes this fall may not be as risky as school administrators previously expected, though they caution schools to analyze potential risks based on their own virus situation, The Washington Post reported.

“Everyone had a fear there would be explosive outbreaks of transmission in the schools. In colleges, there have been. We have to say that, to date, we have not seen those in the younger kids, and that is a really important observation,” Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told the Post.

The Post noted that inconsistent reporting in parts of the country represent a challenge for fully understanding the virus situation, and it's unclear how certain policies such as mask-wearing have impacted trends in those reviewed schools.

Emily Oster, an economics professor at Brown University who aided in creating the tracker, told the newspaper the number of actual infections would reassure many concerned about the risk of reopening schools.

While she said the rates of coronavirus spread in schools are "much lower" than surrounding communities, she cautioned, "I don't think that these numbers say all places should open schools with no restrictions or anything that comes close to that. Ultimately, school districts are going to have different attitudes toward risk."

The study plans to add more schools as virus transfer trends continue to be analyzed.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
11,689
Reaction score
767
Points
113
Dr Jensen with a new video. Google and watch it.
Justnofacts the dishonest one is running mdh.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,932
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
How much do you think the MSM‘s constant misinformation campaign is worth to Joe Biden? 2 to 3 billion dollars? It was estimated that Trump’s 2015-16 primary network coverage was worth well over a billion dollars in free coverage. Little did they know it would come back to bite them.

Even Dr. Fauci has complained that the MSM has twisted his words to make political points that he was not suggesting at all.

24/7 TDS misinformation in an attempt to convince voters to vote him out of office b/c they hate his guts > than a $300m ad campaign to balance the record.

Your whining about Trump‘s attempts to level the playing field and every little bit of politicking are getting old. Man up you wimp. It’s a f’n election and everything is on the line AND THE MEDIA DECK IS STACKED HEAVILY IN YOUR FAVOR. SO STFU!
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
2,076
Points
113
How much do you think the MSM‘s constant misinformation campaign is worth to Joe Biden? 2 to 3 billion dollars? It was estimated that Trump’s 2015-16 primary network coverage was worth well over a billion dollars in free coverage. Little did they know it would come back to bite them.

Even Dr. Fauci has complained that the MSM has twisted his words to make political points that he was not suggesting at all.

24/7 TDS misinformation in an attempt to convince voters to vote him out of office b/c they hate his guts > than a $300m ad campaign to balance the record.

Your whining about Trump‘s attempts to level the playing field and every little bit of politicking are getting old. Man up you wimp. It’s a f’n election and everything is on the line AND THE MEDIA DECK IS STACKED HEAVILY IN YOUR FAVOR. SO STFU!
It's an election and is everything on the line, so it's fine to spend taxpayer dollars on campaign advertisements even though they were allocated to stop a pandemic that has killed 200,000 Americans.

Trump has gone from "I'm funding my own campaign" to "I'm using federal dollars to fund my campaign" and you couldn't care less. Another promise kept, I guess.

 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
11,698
Reaction score
2,076
Points
113
SD tells us how many current COVID hospitalizations there are, and what the capacity currently is.

MN no longer tells us how many current COVID hospitalizations there are, just what the capacity is.

So now instead of being able to point out how low COVID hospitalizations are in MN, they just want to show ICU capacity filled, which is currently 87%. Via the last update, ~12% of that would be COVID patients.

Which sounds better to keep restrictions in place? "87% of our ICU beds are filled, so we must keep COVID restrictions in place to keep that number from increasing" or "Only 12% of our ICU beds have patients who have tested positive for COVID, so we must keep restrictions in place"

What Walz is trying to do is very clear, yet you and the usual suspects continue to eat it up.
If you don't have the hospitalization data you're looking for, I guess you could compare on deaths.

 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
17,932
Reaction score
2,136
Points
113
It's an election and is everything on the line, so it's fine to spend taxpayer dollars on campaign advertisements even though they were allocated to stop a pandemic that has killed 200,000 Americans.

Trump has gone from "I'm funding my own campaign" to "I'm using federal dollars to fund my campaign" and you couldn't care less. Another promise kept, I guess.

Correcting misinformation is a good thing, even if it’s politically advantageous. The country has been fed narratives of BS from the news media and has people in a panic when they need to be rational.

So yes, spending that money can be good and justified at the same time helpful to Trump.

I haven’t financially contributed to Trump b/c he has said himself, that he will spend his own money if he needs to. If he did, I might too. I have contributed to Senate campaigns.

I’ve always called him out on that “self-funded” line.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
15,603
Reaction score
1,484
Points
113
Why aren’t kids back in school in most locations?

Study: Less than 1 percent of teachers, students infected since schools reopened

A new study has found minimal evidence that the novel coronavirus is transferring inside K-12 school buildings despite reports of students and faculty across the country contracting the disease.

Brown University researchers collaborated with school administrators and released data Wednesday from a new National COVID-19 School Response Data Dashboard.

COVID-19 cases recorded in the dashboard show a relatively small degree of spread among staff and students. The study looked at data collected from more than 550 schools across 46 states over a two-week period starting Aug. 31, with more than 300 schools maintaining some level of in-person classes.

Researchers found 0.23 percent of students had confirmed or suspected cases of the virus, while the rate among educators was 0.51 percent. The rates for confirmed cases were lower at 0.076 for students and 0.15 for teachers. The data included those for public and private schools, with many of the schools located in smaller communities.

Researchers at Brown University say the early evidence could mean that a return to classes this fall may not be as risky as school administrators previously expected, though they caution schools to analyze potential risks based on their own virus situation, The Washington Post reported.

“Everyone had a fear there would be explosive outbreaks of transmission in the schools. In colleges, there have been. We have to say that, to date, we have not seen those in the younger kids, and that is a really important observation,” Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, told the Post.

The Post noted that inconsistent reporting in parts of the country represent a challenge for fully understanding the virus situation, and it's unclear how certain policies such as mask-wearing have impacted trends in those reviewed schools.

Emily Oster, an economics professor at Brown University who aided in creating the tracker, told the newspaper the number of actual infections would reassure many concerned about the risk of reopening schools.

While she said the rates of coronavirus spread in schools are "much lower" than surrounding communities, she cautioned, "I don't think that these numbers say all places should open schools with no restrictions or anything that comes close to that. Ultimately, school districts are going to have different attitudes toward risk."

The study plans to add more schools as virus transfer trends continue to be analyzed.
If you don't have the hospitalization data you're looking for, I guess you could compare on deaths.

The Dakota’s are having their surge which shouldn’t be unexpected or surprising. In states that small all it takes is some slip ups in the hospital or LTCF setting to cause a localized disaster. MN and NYC are familiar with that. Presented below is a graphic for context and to once again ask the questions that are being ignored by most media and observers: what the heck happened in NYC? There are political, social, medical issues/care issues being swept under the rug.


8D312142-3E2D-4A65-AF1A-DFBD997A4251.jpeg
 
Top Bottom