Walz Should Be Locking Things Up Right Now - COVID

Blizzard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,632
Reaction score
139
Points
63
It depends entirely on the quality of the ventilation system, air exchanges and hepa filters.
Yes, I understand what you're saying but fatboy has been pretty clear about 'sharing' air.
 

RahSkiUMah

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
345
Reaction score
345
Points
63
I can’t speak for GWG, especially since I disagree with almost everything he says.

But yes, if your goal is to slow the spread through mandated shutdowns, have some balls and shut down non-essential retail and construction sites for a month too. I don’t see the particular business restrictions chosen putting a dent in the current trajectory.

Contract tracing is a very valuable mitigation measure. However, relying on the statistically insignificant data (The data cited as reasoning for the shutdown of restaurants, bars, youth sports and gyms accounts for 1.8% of the total cases!) to use the “scalpel” approach while ignoring some of the biggest issues causing the spread is not science.

If I missed the release of the science that went behind those numbers, please forward them to me. I failed as I searched for more explanation last night and this morning.
Going off of what the southern states did, I think bars is a good place to start. Closing/limiting bars in Florida/Texas/Arizona seemed to go a long way in plateauing their spread. Check out the potential effect noted in the June surges in these states in this paper - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.09.26.20202457v1.full.pdf

These places all left retail open but closed bars, from Figure 4:
1605887080753.png
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
You may not interact with one person for 15 minutes, but at MOA you’re going to be indoors with 1000s of people in hallways, stores, etc for long periods of time, breathing the same air, that’s ok now? And let's not forget that MOA has no central heating system that filters the air, it relies on solar, lights, and body heat.
Did walz say everyone should go to MOA?
You act like they are encouraging it. They are encouraging people to stay home as much as possible. They are closing what they think are the highest risk settings and trying to be equitable about it, like Lifetime, maybe that huge club could have a small number of people but then what do you say to the little Orange Theory franchise who gets shutdown and their customers change over to Lifetime? The logic is pretty clear to me.

Your making these science claims as smokescreen because you really want it all open, f the hospitals.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,473
Points
113
Science often involves voluntary surveys and patient reported outcomes. Observational data and case series can be crucial for advancing science. Is this high quality, indisputable evidence? NO.

I personally think we could be allowing stadiums at low capacities (if done properly), especially open air ones. I think we're not because teams are happy with their TV money right now and not clamoring for it... Gyms should probably be considered lower risk than bars too.

In the absence of HARD science, which we'll never get in a rapidly evolving situation, we need to quantify risk to the best of our ability and then make decisions. It seems like we're all in agreement a packed, unmasked bar is the highest risk scenario - so start there. If it's not enough then we'll have to have a conversation about further restrictions in the future.
Bolded: correct response.

Would encourage you not to engage with the PE/GWG/Spoofin tribe (Libertarians) further on this topic. Unless of course you enjoy it, then you do you.

That tribe has been dead wrong on the pandemic, every step of the way. They've been bold and loud, and wrong.

They wanted covid19 to be a perpetual disease, like the seasonal flu, and they've tried every way conceivable to push the alternative reality that there's nothing anyone can do, it will get everyone in the end. As if the harder they push, somehow the more likely they can make it happen.

They do this because above all, they want to force decision makers to have to put "freedom" over restrictions/intelligent public health policy/control of people's lives.

Very happy that they will fail miserably in that regard.


Also notable their visceral hate for experts and people in authority in higher education, who nearly universally disagree with them and shoot down their agenda.
 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
12,444
Reaction score
2,897
Points
113
Science is a process that works by running experiments using control groups, where does that process exist in a voluntary survey?

I'll ask again, where is the logic here?

You may not interact with one person for 15 minutes, but at MOA you’re going to be indoors with 1000s of people in hallways, stores, etc for long periods of time, breathing the same air, that’s ok now? And let's not forget that MOA has no central heating system that filters the air, it relies on solar, lights, and body heat.

If that’s ok, why can’t we have at least 25%-50% at stadiums? I’m not interacting with people I don’t know there for 15 minutes.

I don’t interact with people at gyms for 15 minutes either, why are those closed? Does MOA help strengthen your immune system and help fight coronavirus like a gym does?
With retail you have a mask on the whole time. At a gym you not only don't wear a mask, you breathe heavily.


 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,473
Points
113
Gyms could require people to wear masks the whole time. But my understanding is that the state orders allow people to not wear masks while exercising, so long as they maintain distancing.
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
8,079
Reaction score
1,422
Points
113
Science often involves voluntary surveys and patient reported outcomes. Observational data and case series can be crucial for advancing science. Is this high quality, indisputable evidence? NO.

I personally think we could be allowing stadiums at low capacities (if done properly), especially open air ones. I think we're not because teams are happy with their TV money right now and not clamoring for it... Gyms should probably be considered lower risk than bars too.

In the absence of HARD science, which we'll never get in a rapidly evolving situation, we need to quantify risk to the best of our ability and then make decisions. It seems like we're all in agreement a packed, unmasked bar is the highest risk scenario - so start there. If it's not enough then we'll have to have a conversation about further restrictions in the future.
"Observational data and case series can be crucial for advancing science. Is this high quality, indisputable evidence? NO."

Yet this is the data we are using to destroy businesses, livelihoods, and mental and physical health.

This was a rapidly evolving situation back in March, where I supported shutdowns, but that is no longe the case. We have now had 8 months of preparation, while accumulating HARD data, that aligns quite well with the hypothesis we had at the beginning.

The problem is that HARD data continues to be ignored, in favor of circumstantial data that may or may not be accurate. There's no 'probably' to gyms are lower risk than bars, they are significantly lower risk than bars, and there's plenty of data to prove it.

I agree with restrictions that make sense, and are supported by data. We've accumulated a lot of data in 8 months. A number of the restrictions, or non restrictions Walz implemented, are not supported by data. There is no reason this far into the pandemic that businesses need to be 100% closed.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,473
Points
113
Hospitals begging for help, people grieving over dead family members.

GWG: go F yourself! You can't destroy businesses, livelihoods, and mental and physical health!

:rolleyes: thank goodness he's not in charge of anything. What a piece of human excrement.
 

Gold Vision

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,359
Reaction score
191
Points
63
With retail you have a mask on the whole time. At a gym you not only don't wear a mask, you breathe heavily.


These are the same numbers Walz referenced in his press conference. I’ve seen this chart and data referenced quite a few times as well. It’s obviously not all encompassing as it only accounts for 6,500 total cases of 260,000. Is the retail number zero? Where are schools shown? Neither are listed in the “other” group.

Here's a deeper look into that same data:
MDH Data Source
likely exposure.jpg
  • The 6,500 cases above are just half of the 12,554 community outbreaks where they actually know the source and have categorized it. There are 6,000 categorized cases that are not included in this chart.
  • There are another 43,000 cases listed as Community (Known): Defined as a case that has a known exposure to a positive case and does not fit into any of the previous categories.
  • There are another 49,000 cases listed as Community (Unknown): Defined as a case that has no known exposure to a positive case and does not fit into any of the previous categories.
  • Finally, there are another 101,000 positive cases they apparently don't know enough about to list them as Community Unknown. I imagine the system is overwhelmed and these eventually fit into the other buckets as more information from the contact tracing is finished.
I'm just curious what the other 6,000 "Community Spread" cases and 43,000 "Community Known" outbreaks were classified as. I can't find that data anywhere on the MDH site. It seems like if you have 43,000 cases that don't fit into one of your previously assigned categories, you should add a few more categories...

I'm not a "let it rip" guy by any means, but I do expect transparency and smart decisions.

For you visual learners, the area I highlighted in red below represents the dataset released to make the decision.
likely exposure 3.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,561
Reaction score
2,754
Points
113
These are the same numbers Walz referenced in his press conference. I’ve seen this chart and data referenced quite a few times as well. It’s obviously not all encompassing as it only accounts for 6,500 total cases of 260,000. Is the retail number zero? Where are schools shown? Neither are listed in the “other” group.

Here's a deeper look into that same data:
MDH Data Source
View attachment 10569
  • The 6,500 cases above are just half of the 12,554 community outbreaks where they actually know the source and have categorized it. There are 6,000 categorized cases that are not included in this chart.
  • There are another 43,000 cases listed as Community (Known): Defined as a case that has a known exposure to a positive case and does not fit into any of the previous categories.
  • There are another 49,000 cases listed as Community (Unknown): Defined as a case that has no known exposure to a positive case and does not fit into any of the previous categories.
  • Finally, there are another 101,000 positive cases they apparently don't know enough about to list them as Community Unknown. I imagine the system is overwhelmed and these eventually fit into the other buckets as more information from the contact tracing is finished.
I'm just curious what the other 6,000 "Community Spread" cases and 43,000 "Community Known" outbreaks were classified as. I can't find that data anywhere on the MDH site. It seems like if you have 43,000 cases that don't fit into one of your previously assigned categories, you should add a few more categories...

I'm not a "let it rip" guy by any means, but I do expect transparency and smart decisions.

For you visual learners, the area I highlighted in red below represents the dataset released to make the decision.
View attachment 10570
Fantastic post. Thank you for taking the time.
 

manderson1984

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
753
Points
113
Know any nurses working in the metro? Anywhere in MN? What do they tell you?

I know quite a few and their responses agrees with the post you just slammed.
I know plenty in metro and in rural MN. My best friend is a supervisor of one of the busier EMT units in the state as well. He gets numbers of beds available and knows if they can transfer patients to hospitals. Luckily they’ve been ok. They are full/more so than a “busy flu season”, but still managing. The ones I’ve talked with mention that it’ll get real tricky these next couple weeks and if they get some quarantined or sick it’ll get really hard. My point is, my data is small and not reliable enough to use as a sole basis for my opinion on if we should shut down or find a need to flatten a curve. My rural friends in hospital systems are more worried than my metro friends as well. That’s just their opinions however.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
Gyms should probably be considered lower risk than bars too.
Yes obviously, but the state we are in requires more. I wish he closed bars a month or more ago. Given the reaction from some its no surprise Walz waited until there was no choice to shut things down.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
Fantastic post. Thank you for taking the time.
Tell us exactly what you would do.

I am fine letting it rip, I really don't care about death, honestly. I just want a plan so a 16 year old getting in a car accident can get the very best care and a 45 year old having a heart attack gets the very best care, their lives have much more value than someone in a nursing home. If that means sending 70+ year olds home to die/deal with covid I am fine with it, I just want the politicians to own it. That could mean my own parents are denied an ICU, I am fine with it as long as its transparent and someone steps up and says this is how it is and I take responsibility.

I just hate those on the right that push all the problems onto the hospitals and take no responsibility for the consequences. Own it, don't be a bitch.
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
I think the Feds have oversight and are the ones approving tests, so its Trump administration you should direct your concerns to.

Do you think every state health department should be approving tests, setting different cycle requirements ect for each state?
This is what you imply.
That would be a Clusterfuck.

Again I will ask what would you do about Covid.
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
8,079
Reaction score
1,422
Points
113
So even though we have over 5 months of actual data showing that gyms are loosely tied to .3% of cases in MN, he's continuing to use a failed hypothesis of 'breathing hard' to shut them down. That's not Science.

 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
That's not Science.
Its making assumptions based on common sense. They shut down all gyms for fairness. Remember all the criticism in the spring that Target is open while the little clothing shop is shutdown? I DO.

Why don't you give us your plan. I said what would be acceptable to me above. Whats not acceptable to me is allowing the hospitals to be overrun, either shut things down or publicly tell everyone who excactly will not get hospital treatment for their covid, ie ltc people and people over a certain age.
 
Last edited:

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
8,562
Reaction score
1,173
Points
113
I think the Feds have oversight and are the ones approving tests, so its Trump administration you should direct your concerns to.

Do you think every state health department should be approving tests, setting different cycle requirements ect for each state?
This is what you imply.
That would be a Clusterfuck.

Again I will ask what would you do about Covid.
Feds? Youre just making stuff up
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
3,175
Reaction score
1,310
Points
113
Feds? Youre just making stuff up
Who approves Covid tests?
Someone in the FDA/CDC or elsewhere in federal government approves or authorizes the test.

Your telling me they don't?
Anyone can come up with any test and just say they have a covid test?

FDA approves tests, the moron needs to ask the right agency if they want the answer.

COVID-19 Update: FDA Authorizes First Diagnostic Test Where Results Can Be Read Directly From Testing Card
 
Last edited:

fan of Ray Williams

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
6,514
Reaction score
381
Points
83
Who approves Covid tests?
Someone in the FDA/CDC or elsewhere in federal government approves or authorizes the test.

Your telling me they don't?
Anyone can come up with any test and just say they have a covid test?

FDA approves tests, the moron needs to ask the right agency if they want the answer.


Agree FDA, but savememagnets.com might work in a pinch.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,473
Points
113
So even though we have over 5 months of actual data showing that gyms are loosely tied to .3% of cases in MN, he's continuing to use a failed hypothesis of 'breathing hard' to shut them down. That's not Science.

Gyms is going to be your hill to die on?

Just so you can fake up a "win"?


Hahahahaha

Guys! No gyms for 4 weeks! OUR COUNTRY IS SO F'ED !!
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,561
Reaction score
2,754
Points
113
It's not that hard.

"So, person A who has COVID, where all did you go in the last 72 hours?" "I went to work at the bank, to McDonald's, to Scheel's, and to church"

"So person B who has COVID, were all did you go in the last 72 hours?" "I went to work at Jiffy Lube, to Wendy's, to a park, and to Scheel's."
Well, if you were trying to contact trace only 2 people to where they crossed paths you have a point. Of course, no one is doing that. In the past week in the state of MN there has been approximately 25,000 positive cases. Now, if we listed everywhere those people had been I suspect we would see hundreds of cross-overs --- and many people with a multiple crossovers. Now what about timing on these visits? What about asymptomatic people that are passing it? Time for assumptions and speculation at that point and your little analogy of how "its not that hard" falls apart completely. I'm 100% for contact tracing to identify others that have been exposed. I also find it highly subjective and flawed in way too many cases when trying to use it to figure out where (and when in some cases) someone caught it.
 
Top Bottom