The new Corona virus, should we worry?

Blizzard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,996
Reaction score
311
Points
83
I would bet the house Minnesota hasn't lowered our cycle numbers for PCR tests and that's why our numbers are still high:

 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113

MN Covid-19 Update - Friday, April 30

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive cases 537,036 +1,634. Including probable cases 575,812.

Positive test rate 4.4%.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 41,377 +89.

Cases no longer needing isolation 553,030 +961.

Active Cases 15,638 +897.

Deaths 6,751 +16. Including probable deaths 7,144.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 4,367 +2. Including probable cases 4,367.

Patients currently Hospitalized 619 -25. Cumulative 30,242 +102.

patients currently In ICU 166 -10. Cumulative 6,152 +25.

Total PCR tests processed 8,534,998 +37,169. Including antigen testing 9,229,945.

Number of people tested 4,025,717 +10,985.

 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
7,482
Reaction score
3,616
Points
113
I would bet the house Minnesota hasn't lowered our cycle numbers for PCR tests and that's why our numbers are still high:


There were not 85-90% false positives.

People like you make me hope it mutates and just f destroys us. I am sick that way...
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,510
Reaction score
3,265
Points
113
I would bet the house Minnesota hasn't lowered our cycle numbers for PCR tests and that's why our numbers are still high:

Stop listening to idiots like Berenson. He keeps talking about things he doesn’t even have a basic understanding of.

 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113

MN Covid-19 Update - Saturday, May 1

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive cases 538,470 +1,437. Including probable cases 577,524.

Positive test rate 4.5%.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 41,456 +79.

Cases no longer needing isolation 555,214 +2,184.

Active Cases 15,156 -482.

Deaths 6,760 +9. Including probable deaths 7,154.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 4,130 +3. Including probable cases 4,370.

Total patients hospitalized-cumulative 30,344 +102.

Total patients in ICU-cumulative 6,180 +28.

Total PCR tests processed 8,566,864 +32,061. Including antigen testing 9,270,547.

Number of people tested 4,039,525 +13,808.

 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113

MN Covid-19 Update - Sunday, May 2

data reported by 4pm the previous day.

Positive cases 539,898 +1,427. Including probable cases 579,235.

Positive test rate 4.7%.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 41,501 +45.

Cases no longer needing isolation 557,099 +1,885.

Active cases 14,976 -188.

Deaths 6,766 +6. Including probable deaths 7,160.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 4,130 (no change). Including probable cases 4,370.

Total patients hospitalized-cumulative 30,360 +16.

Total patients in ICU-cumulative 6,183 +3.

Total PCR tests processed 8,597,392 +30,608. Including antigen testing 9,306,211.

Number of people tested 4,053,093.

 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
9,009
Reaction score
2,652
Points
113
The one on the left is just a link to an interview of a doctor in response to Rogan. The one with Bill Gates is just reporting what he said in his blog. There’s a difference between opinion and reporting.
We’re in a world where people just skim headlines.

Why should I care more any more about Bill Gates wants me to know about a vaccine over Joe Rogan? Those headlines clearly tell me that Gates opinion is superior to Rogan’s even though neither are medical doctors.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
It’s fair to wonder why we’re encouraging young, healthy individuals without risk factors to take a vaccine with very rare adverse effects as the risk of poor outcomes of natural infection in that age group is also rare to very rare. It’s a question worth asking and many physicians and scientists are doing just that. The risk profile is probably favorable for some (and maybe most) but it may be a push or negative for others. I don’t think anyone has put out a good risk benefit analysis at this point. I suppose the biggest incentive is to reduce risk of transmission to seniors but there are ethical questions there IMO.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,510
Reaction score
3,265
Points
113
It’s fair to wonder why we’re encouraging young, healthy individuals without risk factors to take a vaccine with very rare adverse effects as the risk of poor outcomes of natural infection in that age group is also rare to very rare. It’s a question worth asking and many physicians and scientists are doing just that. The risk profile is probably favorable for some (and maybe most) but it may be a push or negative for others. I don’t think anyone has put out a good risk benefit analysis at this point. I suppose the biggest incentive is to reduce risk of transmission to seniors but there are ethical questions there IMO.
At this point really the only risk of getting the vaccine for an overwhelming majority of people is feeling ill for a day or two after.

- Some of the most vulnerable aren’t able to get vaccinated.
- Like all vaccines, this isn’t 100% effective. But if the chances of exposure is reduced, the chances of ineffectiveness is reduced.
- The most important one IMO is that the less people there are that can be infected, the less chances there are for more variants. Who’s to say there couldn’t be a variant down the road that causes more harm to kids? Let’s try to reduce the chances of that happening.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
At this point really the only risk of getting the vaccine for an overwhelming majority of people is feeling ill for a day or two after.

- Some of the most vulnerable aren’t able to get vaccinated.
- Like all vaccines, this isn’t 100% effective. But if the chances of exposure is reduced, the chances of ineffectiveness is reduced.
- The most important one IMO is that the less people there are that can be infected, the less chances there are for more variants. Who’s to say there couldn’t be a variant down the road that causes more harm to kids? Let’s try to reduce the chances of that happening.

We don’t know the risks of vaccination in children and won’t until millions have been vaccinated. The risk of infection for young people OTOH is very low. Clearly some, immunocompromised etc, are at much higher risk and we know of some other common risk factors. It seems reasonable to wait on blanket mandates until we know more, which could be a year or more.


In addition, the risk of death or other bad outcomes is low for children. Between March and October of 2020, among those between the ages of five and 14, the risk of dying of Covid-19 in the United States was 1 in 1,000,000. To put that in perspective, in that same age group during non-Covid times, the risk of suicide is 10 times higher. For young adults ages 15 to 24, the risk of dying from Covid19 was 9.9 in 1,000,000, and they are also generally 10 times more likely to commit suicide.

 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
27,510
Reaction score
3,265
Points
113
We don’t know the risks of vaccination in children and won’t until millions have been vaccinated. The risk of infection for young people OTOH is very low. Clearly some, immunocompromised etc, are at much higher risk and we know of some other common risk factors. It seems reasonable to wait on blanket mandates until we know more, which could be a year or more.


In addition, the risk of death or other bad outcomes is low for children. Between March and October of 2020, among those between the ages of five and 14, the risk of dying of Covid-19 in the United States was 1 in 1,000,000. To put that in perspective, in that same age group during non-Covid times, the risk of suicide is 10 times higher. For young adults ages 15 to 24, the risk of dying from Covid19 was 9.9 in 1,000,000, and they are also generally 10 times more likely to commit suicide.

When you said young, healthy individuals I assumed you meant something like 16-30 range. At this point we aren’t encouraging kids to get the vaccine because they aren’t even eligible yet. We’ll know the risks for children once the trials are completed.

My post previously is about reducing the risk of everyone. We’ll see what happens with the kids trials but for those 16+, the benefits for getting the vaccine far outweigh the risks, especially if you look at the whole picture, not just that specific individual.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
When you said young, healthy individuals I assumed you meant something like 16-30 range. At this point we aren’t encouraging kids to get the vaccine because they aren’t even eligible yet. We’ll know the risks for children once the trials are completed.

My post previously is about reducing the risk of everyone. We’ll see what happens with the kids trials but for those 16+, the benefits for getting the vaccine far outweigh the risks, especially if you look at the whole picture, not just that specific individual.

Again, I don’t think we have enough information to say a healthy college age individual is clearly at no risk from the vaccines, particularly J&J, versus natural infection. People with risk factors, sure, makes sense and probably a no-brainer decision. The immunocompromised are at constant risk and have to take extra precautions from everything, not just Cov2. I only argue it should be voluntary in this age group, until we know more.

As far as the 0-24 yo demographic I’d be willing to bet more Minnesotans in this range will die in lakes and rivers this year than the 7 thus far from Covid-19. I doubt Walz will close the waterways, lake cabins, beaches. Some small level of risk is inherent in so many things.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
53,796
Reaction score
11,086
Points
113
At this point really the only risk of getting the vaccine for an overwhelming majority of people is feeling ill for a day or two after.

- Some of the most vulnerable aren’t able to get vaccinated.
- Like all vaccines, this isn’t 100% effective. But if the chances of exposure is reduced, the chances of ineffectiveness is reduced.
- The most important one IMO is that the less people there are that can be infected, the less chances there are for more variants. Who’s to say there couldn’t be a variant down the road that causes more harm to kids? Let’s try to reduce the chances of that happening.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113
Pompous - I would say that this is a case of individual perspective vs a societal perspective.

A young, healthy person might very well say "there's no reason for me to get vaccinated."

But, one could counter by saying that society benefits from having the highest % of people as possible to be vaccinated to help get the virus under control.

sometimes, you can do something that may not benefit you directly, but it benefits society as a whole. Like donating to a charity. I used to donate to Greenpeace in my younger and more altruistic days. It had no immediate benefit for me, but I thought I was doing something for the greater good. and those baby seals are just so f'ing cute.

And if the young healthy people say "f*ck the greater good," well, that is their right as a citizen to take that perspective. And it is my right to think they are being selfish pricks. But I'm old and bitter now. Bleep the seals. I only care about me. so don't be upset if you are lying the street bleeding and I step over your body.

"It's every man for himself, and God against All." (from 'the mystery of Kaspar Hauser' by Werner Herzog - and also quoted in the cinematic masterpiece "Swamp Thing."
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,105
Reaction score
2,306
Points
113
It’s fair to wonder why we’re encouraging young, healthy individuals without risk factors to take a vaccine with very rare adverse effects as the risk of poor outcomes of natural infection in that age group is also rare to very rare. It’s a question worth asking and many physicians and scientists are doing just that. The risk profile is probably favorable for some (and maybe most) but it may be a push or negative for others. I don’t think anyone has put out a good risk benefit analysis at this point. I suppose the biggest incentive is to reduce risk of transmission to seniors but there are ethical questions there IMO.
Hard to reach herd immunity if many fail to be immune.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
Hard to reach herd immunity if many fail to be immune.

Given the very high infection rates in the 18-24 yo cohort probably 50+% have already achieved some degree of immunity naturally, maybe more. That’s higher than annual flu vaccination in that group. Add in the vaccine takers that may have avoided natural infection thus far, mandatory vaccinations and the rate of immunity will probably be quite high in young adults regardless.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
Pompous - I would say that this is a case of individual perspective vs a societal perspective.

A young, healthy person might very well say "there's no reason for me to get vaccinated."

But, one could counter by saying that society benefits from having the highest % of people as possible to be vaccinated to help get the virus under control.

sometimes, you can do something that may not benefit you directly, but it benefits society as a whole. Like donating to a charity. I used to donate to Greenpeace in my younger and more altruistic days. It had no immediate benefit for me, but I thought I was doing something for the greater good. and those baby seals are just so f'ing cute.

And if the young healthy people say "f*ck the greater good," well, that is their right as a citizen to take that perspective. And it is my right to think they are being selfish pricks. But I'm old and bitter now. Bleep the seals. I only care about me. so don't be upset if you are lying the street bleeding and I step over your body.

"It's every man for himself, and God against All." (from 'the mystery of Kaspar Hauser' by Werner Herzog - and also quoted in the cinematic masterpiece "Swamp Thing."

I agree it’s a nuanced discussion that could be had about many things. There are potential pitfalls, unforeseen adverse events in children, that could increase vaccine hesitancy, not reduce it, thus the discussion about the greater good ecpxtending beyond the obvious.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113

MN Covid-19 Update - Monday, May 3

data reported as of 4pm the previous day.

Positive Cases 540,798 +899. Including probable cases 580,340.

Positive test rate 5.6%.

Health-Care workers with positive cases 41,544 +43.

Cases no longer needing isolation 559,036 +1,937.

Active cases 14,141 -835.

Deaths 6,769 +3. Including probable deaths 7,163.

Deaths at long-term care and assisted living 4,130 (same). Including probable cases 4,370.

Patients currently Hospitalized 576 -17. Cumulative 30,370 +10.

Patients currently In ICU 155 -4. Cumulative 6,183 (same).

Total PCR Tests processed 8,613,847 +16,016. Including antigen testing 9,327,363.

Number of people tested 4,061,256 +8,163.

 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113
Weekend beds in use numbers.

reported on Saturday:
ICU 152 -14
other 454 +1
Total 606 -13

Sunday:
ICU 159 +7
other 434 -20
Total 593 -13

Monday:
ICU 155 -4
other 421 -13
Total 576 -17
 

Go4Broke

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
5,030
Reaction score
1,588
Points
113

Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

Now more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity threshold is not attainable — at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever. It is already clear that the virus is changing too quickly, new variants are spreading too easily and vaccination is proceeding too slowly for herd immunity to be within reach anytime soon.

Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much smaller numbers. How much smaller is uncertain and depends in part on how much of the nation, and the world, becomes vaccinated and how the coronavirus evolves.

1620067417310.png
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113

Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

Now more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity threshold is not attainable — at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever. It is already clear that the virus is changing too quickly, new variants are spreading too easily and vaccination is proceeding too slowly for herd immunity to be within reach anytime soon.

Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much smaller numbers. How much smaller is uncertain and depends in part on how much of the nation, and the world, becomes vaccinated and how the coronavirus evolves.

View attachment 12726

I don’t know of a single (rational) scientist that thought this would ever go away completely. It will become a background virus and most of us will cease to worry about it more than other viruses that can randomly kill us. We are incredibly fortunate the vaccines available in the US have been so effective.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,105
Reaction score
2,306
Points
113
Given the very high infection rates in the 18-24 yo cohort probably 50+% have already achieved some degree of immunity naturally, maybe more. That’s higher than annual flu vaccination in that group. Add in the vaccine takers that may have avoided natural infection thus far, mandatory vaccinations and the rate of immunity will probably be quite high in young adults regardless.
True, yet my point still stands. We kind of need people to actually have immunity to reach herd immunity; refusal to dose up will at the very least slow us from getting there, and perhaps put us at risk with other strains popping up.

Additionally, we kind of need the entire world to reach herd immunity; or the cycle could just restart (in the absence of any necessary booster dosing).
 

Plausible Deniability

Coffee is for closers
Joined
Sep 19, 2016
Messages
1,331
Reaction score
805
Points
113
True, yet my point still stands. We kind of need people to actually have immunity to reach herd immunity; refusal to dose up will at the very least slow us from getting there, and perhaps put us at risk with other strains popping up.

Additionally, we kind of need the entire world to reach herd immunity; or the cycle could just restart (in the absence of any necessary booster dosing).
Don't you really think at this point we should just take it to full-on Martial Law? I mean, that's what most of you want anyway, and it's what Walz has been pushing for since the pandemic began.

Might as well give it a go, eh?
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
16,850
Reaction score
1,989
Points
113
True, yet my point still stands. We kind of need people to actually have immunity to reach herd immunity; refusal to dose up will at the very least slow us from getting there, and perhaps put us at risk with other strains popping up.

Additionally, we kind of need the entire world to reach herd immunity; or the cycle could just restart (in the absence of any necessary booster dosing).

I agree it would be nice if every adult volunteered but that isn’t going to happen, it’s just barking at the moon. Coercion and mandates could backfire in a big way.

I agree with your second point, which is why the best bang for the buck is vaccinating the the at-risk in the rest of the world. We don’t have to vaccinate every American to reach a relatively low level of endemic infection.
 
Top Bottom