These guys are driving public health policy.

[url=https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YEj4Vr6lG1jQ1R3LG6frijJYNynKcgTjzo2n0FsBwZA/edit#gid=1579455912][/url]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YEj4Vr6lG1jQ1R3LG6frijJYNynKcgTjzo2n0FsBwZA/edit#gid=1579455912

Multiply total deaths on their spreadsheet by 450 to obtain US deaths and 40 to obtain Texas deaths (population/717,545).

Date Total US Deaths Total TX Deaths
7-Mar 0 0
11-Mar 0 0
15-Mar 450 40
19-Mar 1,800 160
23-Mar 4,050 360 <--- We are here These guys are a joke! Our elected officials are idiots.
27-Mar 10,350 920
31-Mar 24,750 2,200
4-Apr 59,400 5,280
8-Apr 216,450 19,240
12-Apr 579,150 51,480
16-Apr 1,369,350 121,720
20-Apr 2,877,750 255,800
24-Apr 4,968,000 441,600
28-Apr 6,354,450 564,840
2-May 6,609,600 587,520
6-May 6,622,200 588,640
10-May 6,623,550 588,760

I'm not sure I understand. What spreadsheet is that?

k2aggie07 said:

---

I'm not sure I understand. What spreadsheet is that?

---

It is the model the City of Dallas trotted out to justify their policy.

ETA: As presented 583,000 dead claimed in Texas by the idiot Clay Jenkins if no mitigation or suppression.

ETA pt 2: And over 600k dead in this delusional graph. https://covidactnow.org/state/TX


https://covidactnow.org/

all this for 7 deaths in Texas but you dont know math/f16

The_Fox said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Patentmike said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

Social Distanced said:

---

In the United States? 1,000 dollars to the winners choice of charity? Make it a nice round number, say 250,000. I'll take the under and you can make the check payable to the National MS Society.

---

If the US death toll is under 250k, this will go down as the biggest economic boondoggle in American history.

---

No. I think the OP is unnecessarily inflammatory but so is your comment. If 250k die with what we've done so far, then a couple of million would have died if we didn't social distancing.

There is a balance between chicken little and an ostrich. Many of our posters find that balance but plenty don't.

---

We will never know how many would have died but I promise you will be able to acutely feel the economic pain for years to come and it will be easily quantifiable.

---

But can you quantify the economic pain if we did nothing? Nah, no you can't.

---

I can quantify it for me in particular. Assuming I do not die from this, virtually zero.

---

That wasn't the question and you know it. What is the economic impact to the global economy if we made zero fiscal changes and kept businesses open but still had Covid 19?

If you can't ever calculate how many would die if we did nothing because you can't agree on the variables and that therefore proves your point, you can't also say that the economic impact will be felt and can be calculated without first answering my question.

---

It will be measured in the trillions. That is a certainty. What we have already done will cost trillions.

---

So damned if you do, damned if you don't? Might as well try to save people then, right?

---

Not by my calculation. You try to mitigate the economic damage by opening up businesses immediately, help those most at risk, and let the chips fall where they may.

---

What is your calculation though, that's the whole ****ing point? Prove your math. What's the number? What would the economy be like in 8 weeks if we have 150MM infected and deaths are nearing several million.

---

That is not even possible and I will bet you $10K that in 8 weeks we do not have millions of deaths in the US. There are not even 15K deaths worldwide. You need to nut up or just go down in the bunker until 2021.

---

Not in 8 weeks, but there is certainly a scenario where 250+ million Americans get it and around 2 million die within the next 12-18 months. That's worst case and only if the response to this was minimal, but that is the kind of virus you're dealing with. It is one capable of that.

---

I am nowhere near as good at math as you are Doc. But I know a good bet when I see it.

It seems like a lock because I think the chance of that scenario actually playing out in the US is next to zero.

---

Here's the thing. This is, undoubtedly to me, a black swan event. Few people realize that they're living through a black swan event because their experience with them is so minimal they think they don't or can't happen. That's why they're called black swan events.

The thing is, black swans happen all the time. The law of large numbers all but guarantees it. The problem is that most black swans are in minor and completely unimportant things and go unnoticed for what they are, so very few appreciate the true inevitability of unlikely events. They're all of the random coincidences of daily life, like running into a neighbor at the store or realizing you and a co-worker share some random acquaintance. At some point though, a black swan event will inevitably occur in an arena that is major and important, like weather, world health, or stock markets. It's when those black swans occur that people take notice, but they view them as random events instead of statistical inevitabilities. The result is the difference between driving and having insurance because you know you could get into an accident and driving and shrugging off insurance as a waste because you think the probability is negligible since you're a safe driver and you've never been in one before.

The phrase on their website is :"This model is intended to help make fast decisions, not predict the future"

Just seems scary to me. I'd prefer smart decisions over fast decisions.

Tbs2003 said:

---

This We should be keeping a close eye on Florida, Louisiana and Illinois. I suspect some of this is the result of increased testing so I wouldn't take it at face value, but if trends continue, these could be the next hot spots:

Florida: 659 cases -> 1007 in last day (53% increase)
-so the day before it went to 1007 those extra 348 people did not have the virus
Louisiana: 585 cases -> 837 in last day (43% increase)
-so the day before it went to 837 those extra 252 people did not have the virus
Illinois: 753 cases -> 1049 in last day (39% increase)
-so the day before it went to 1049 those extra 296 people did not have the virus

Louisiana seems like it may be hit hard due to poor medical infrastructure, and Florida could end up being hit hard due to the number of elderly.

---

A large % of the increase is due to more testing. How large we do not know. As I understand it, because testing is targeting likely cases we should see large increases in confirmed cases. The fact that we are targeting likely cases, I am surprised the number of confirmed cases isn't higher. Last nights briefing I believe I heard only 10% of tested people are positive for the virus? If we are truly targeting likely cases this seems like good news, but I will hold off cheering because the numbers and assumptions on targeted cases may be flawed.

k2aggie07 said:

---

When a person tells you - numbers are increasing, and you respond - "Have you factored in the increased amount of testing in your calculations?" - you're asking a basic question. This is like asking an engineer - did you consider static and dynamic loading? Do you really think that never occurred to him?? There's absolutely an implied questioning of basic competence in that question.


I think you're missing the two comparisons in the paper.

One is a study, rear-looking, trying to analyze observed information. They say, we saw a spread that looked like this, so based on what we know, the underlying dynamics of the spread must have looked like that. The window of observation closed on January 23. There's no prediction, only a conclusion. In order to see the spread we observed in this data set, there must have been more people who we didn't see. They don't conclude that these are asymptomatic. The word isn't even in the paper. They say "These undocumented infections often experience mild, limited or no symptoms and hence go unrecognized." That means unrecognized by the CDC or other groups, not the patients themselves. And they note "awareness among healthcare providers, public health officials and the availability of viral identification assays suggest that capacity for identifying previously missed infections has increased." And "...these measures are expected to increase reporting rates, reduce the proportion of undocumented infections, and decrease the growth and spread of infection. Indeed, estimation of the epidemiological characteristics of the outbreak after 23 January in China, indicate that government control efforts and population awareness have reduced the rate of spread of the virus."

The other is a paper explicitly used to guide public policy, which takes several assumptions including a very broad range of exponential growth to try to evaluate options for containment. It is fundamentally forward looking. At this point you have to make some assumptions. One of the assumptions they made is that 2/3s of cases will be sufficiently symptomatic to self-isolate.

That's not contrary with the modeled rate of undetected cases in Wuhan in the initial outbreak. There are certainly people in the previous undetected number who, with the increased sensitivity to everything, will self-isolate out of an abundance of caution when they wouldn't have before.

One set is undetected by the CDC or other monitoring agency. The other is detected by the person themselves.

---

We will have to accept we disagree. Assumptions were made whether rear looking or forward looking and the assumptions are at odds with each other.

Quote:

---

These guys are a joke! Our elected officials are idiots.

---

Redundant? If they were gainfully employed they'd be exposed

The only way testing changes the view is if our screening significantly changes. If we're basically restricting testing to those hospitalized - which is what several Aggie docs are reporting - then we're seeing a rise.

As for your numbers, those 348 people didn't get the virus that day, they presented for medical care. They're real cases, but they understate the total.

The ~10% of testing returning positive seems to be fairly common. That's a similar number I saw from other countries.

Quote:

---

We will have to accept we disagree. Assumptions were made whether rear looking or forward looking and the assumptions are at odds with each other.

---

Saying this doesn't make it true. Unless you can show how one contradicts the other

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

FriendlyAg said:

---

It was hypothetical. I said what if... I also never specified USA only.

You're getting off topic because you can't answer the question. You don't know the answer. You're just emotionally fueled because what's done is done. **** happens. We can do it different in the future, but we are committed to fighting this thing now. There will be major implications in the trillions of dollars yes, but there likely would have been if we didn't lock down businesses and ask people to stay home.

---

We will never know whether this is true.

---

We will never know if the economic impacts would have been worse in the long run had we not done what we are doing now. There. Want to keep playing what if's?

---

Nope. The only thing anyone can know with certainty is their own situation. That calculation is an easy one.

---

This is simply not true, and quite frankly, the crux of the issue. Some people are invincible until they're not.

I don't lean strongly one way or the other, but the middle is a lonely place these days.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Already 14k new US cases since yesterday and by the end of the day we'll have more or less doubled in 24 hours (24k to 45-48k estimate).

Worldwide we'll surpass 500k by tomorrow morning and hit a million sometime early Wednesday. We're still at least a week away from curbing the exconential growth internationally if our current measures work and it's essentially a mathematical and medical certainty we'll hit 10 million cases world wide by the start of next week.

A lot of people are about to get a very disturbing math lesson.

---

How many deaths?

jblaschke said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Already 14k new US cases since yesterday and by the end of the day we'll have more or less doubled in 24 hours (24k to 45-48k estimate).

Worldwide we'll surpass 500k by tomorrow morning and hit a million sometime early Wednesday. We're still at least a week away from curbing the exconential growth internationally if our current measures work and it's essentially a mathematical and medical certainty we'll hit 10 million cases world wide by the start of next week.

A lot of people are about to get a very disturbing math lesson.

---

How many deaths?

---

Deaths are a lagging indicator. Why is that so hard for people to understand. Most people aren't even being hospitalized until day ~5 of symptoms. People aren't dropping dead the second they test positive. You'll see a spike in cases, followed by a spike in deaths. It's a really simple concept.

It's because they don't want to understand it. Instead of listening to people who actually know what is going on, they interject their own **** into the arena.

k2aggie07 said:

---

The only way testing changes the view is if our screening significantly changes. If we're basically restricting testing to those hospitalized - which is what several Aggie docs are reporting - then we're seeing a rise.

As for your numbers, those 348 people didn't get the virus that day, they presented for medical care. They're real cases, but they understate the total.

The ~10% of testing returning positive seems to be fairly common. That's a similar number I saw from other countries.

---

They are lined up at the Alamodome today for drive through testing.

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

I don't think you're correct. It's more likely because people believe that steps taken to date will result in a lower death rate than the worst case scenarios included in the clickbait from what are supposed to be reputable news organizations.

Yeah... I don't know how they're screening those either. Originally they said those would be for healthcare workers and first responders. Are they just testing everyone? Do a questionnaire first? Anyone actually know?

In Houston, you go to ReadyHarris.org and take a questionnarie. If you pass that quiz, you get a code and a phone number and you take another screening test. If you pass that one, they give you another identifier and a location.
Once you drive to the location, do not roll down your window?
Then they will test you. Then you will get the result in 2-4 days.

k2aggie07 said:

---

The only way testing changes the view is if our screening significantly changes. If we're basically restricting testing to those hospitalized - which is what several Aggie docs are reporting - then we're seeing a rise.

As for your numbers, those 348 people didn't get the virus that day, they presented for medical care. They're real cases, but they understate the total.

The ~10% of testing returning positive seems to be fairly common. That's a similar number I saw from other countries.

---

You state,"The only way testing changes the view is if our screening significantly changes." which completely ignores increased testing. If we test 100 people 10% is 10 people confirmed...if we test 1000 people 100 people are confirmed, assuming 10% tests are typically positive. This is true whether they presented for medical care or not.

Where is the data on the number of increased tests. What % of the 348 were captured through increased testing? By "only" reporting new confirmed tests it may be giving the impression that the virus is spreading faster that reality.

Gordo14 said:

---

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

---

Not necessarily

Could be a number of things

Virus not as lethal as originally thought, virus mutates and starts dying off....

Many possibilities

Gordo14 said:

---

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

---

How often is that ER overrun any a 'bad day'? Are the patients using the ER as their PCP? The shoulder dislocation was asymptomatic and now is being held in the hospital, I guess. Would they have even known of the infection without the x-ray which depending on the severity of the dislocation may not have even been needed? Why not just reset, send home and isolate? There are moving parts and every hospital and city is going to encounter different modalities of this outbreak. I'm not saying it isnt bad but some localities are going to be hit much, much harder than others.

The local ERs are overrun with panicked people who sneezed twice and want to be tested. Not joking. Multiple triage nurses required and checking people outside.

Captain Pablo said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

---

Not necessarily

Could be a number of things

Virus not as lethal as originally thought, virus mutates and starts dying off....

Many possibilities

---

Not likely. If you're resting your hopes on non-existent data and or that the virus happens to mutate for the better (which does happen sometimes) then you're praying for a miracle. That's not a course of action, or something we can count on. Plenty of evidence that the virus is in a very stable form and unlikely to preferentially mutate into something else on a large scale:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/03/biography-new-coronavirus/608338/?fbclid=IwAR3dJXYLy8rbiVvMTybmVFedZBDparGBHW9lxdOPfbh6-NybtJ9_zShgtXs

k2aggie07 said:

---

Quote:

---

We will have to accept we disagree. Assumptions were made whether rear looking or forward looking and the assumptions are at odds with each other.

---

Saying this doesn't make it true. Unless you can show how one contradicts the other

---

I did and now you are getting snarky.
- It is immaterial whether the papers are related. One paper explicitly states 2/3 of sufficiently symptomatic to self-isolate. There is no equivocation in that statement. The other paper states 86% is undetected cases in which they assume extremely minor or asymptotic.

These studies described basically the same groups of people. One says it is 14% symptomatic (the opposite of asymptomatic/extremely minor), one says it is 67% symptomatic (SUFFICIENTLY SYMPTOMATIC to SELF ISOLATE) . Your long winded refute of this is rationalization.

tysker said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

---

How often is that ER overrun any a 'bad day'? Are the patients using the ER as their PCP? The shoulder dislocation was asymptomatic and now is being held in the hospital, I guess. Would they have even known of the infection without the x-ray which depending on the severity of the dislocation may not have even been needed? Why not just reset, send home and isolate? There are moving parts and every hospital and city is going to encounter different modalities of this outbreak. I'm not saying it isnt bad but some localities are going to be hit much, much harder than others.

---

The person I quoted is an ER doc in New Orleans. What about what he just described sounded like maybe it's just a normal "bad" day in the ER to you? Was it when he said it's much worse than the numbers indicate or the moment he said they are out of vents and ER beds and on the brink of complete collapse? Again, this is the beginning of what is coming.

Of course some places will be hit harder than others. Outbreaks spread at different speeds and at different times in different places.

Quote:

---

You state,"The only way testing changes the view is if our screening significantly changes." which completely ignores increased testing. If we test 100 people 10% is 10 people confirmed...if we test 1000 people 100 people are confirmed, assuming 10% tests are typically positive. This is true whether they presented for medical care or not.

Where is the data on the number of increased tests. What % of the 348 were captured through increased testing? By "only" reporting new confirmed tests it may be giving the impression that the virus is spreading faster that reality.

---

If we ignore false positives, you can't measure cases that aren't there. That's important.

We also aren't testing people who aren't presenting. So if screening criteria stays the same - if you have to be symptomatic - increasing the number of tests can only find more people that you were missing before of the same bracket.

If your test capacity is increasing, and screening stays the same, increased number of tests tells you only one of two things

1. You were unable to test people before who you would have liked to have tested
2. The number of people is increasing

If your screening is changing there's a third

3. You are now testing people you previously would / could not test before

The only way to split those is to understand how the screening is being applied. But that's different county to county or even hospital to hospital in some cases.

At any rate, it was pretty well clear we were undertesting, and seeing only the more severe end of things. At some point our test capacity + changes in screening will pass the rate of infectious growth.

New Orleans is a high risk zone simply due to tourism, Mardis Gras, and lots of drunk people partying together with a "don't give a crap!" mindset.

Look man, I already answered it for you. Long-winded version was detailed clarity's sake, but apparently that was ineffective. Here's the short version.

In one paper they it looks like 86% of cases were missed in the official case count by the Chinese CDC. They assume that this is because they were minor.

In another paper they assume 66% of cases will be symptomatic enough for the person think they might be sick and to stay home.

Those two claims don't contradict. They're not even apples and oranges, they're apples and footballs.

Gordo14 said:

---

Captain Pablo said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

For those of you too lazy to follow the link I posted above, here's what NawlinsAg is saying:

"It is much worse then the numbers indicate. I intubated 4 pts today in the ER. 3 other pts who came in coding and didnt make it. I am one of 9 providers. Saw at least 18 with the clinical profile in my 10 hour shift. I estimate our ER is seeing at least 90 pts a day with it. Testing a small fraction of those due to restrictions.

Shoulder dislocation with no symptom. Xray shows bilateral pneumonia. Mva with chest and abdominal pain no uri symptoms. Ct showed bilateral pneumonia consistent with Covid 19. We are out of vents, out of icu beds, out of gowns for PPE, out of sterilizing wipes, out of hand sanitizer. We are on the brink of complete collapse of resources."

This is only the tip of the ****ing iceberg. Few patients will be leaving the ER in the next few days... And new ER patients will be 20% higher than the day before for the next 2 weeks at a minimum. How many have died isn't the question. It's how many will die. When this is over the absolute best case is 10 of thousands, and that will only be because of the actions the government and businesses have taken (e.g. shutting down restaurants, large gatherings, etc.).

---

Not necessarily

Could be a number of things

Virus not as lethal as originally thought, virus mutates and starts dying off....

Many possibilities

---

Not likely. If you're resting your hopes on non-existent data and or that the virus happens to mutate for the better (which does happen sometimes) then you're praying for a miracle. That's not a course of action, or something we can count on. Plenty of evidence that the virus is in a very stable form and unlikely to preferentially mutate into something else on a large scale:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/03/biography-new-coronavirus/608338/?fbclid=IwAR3dJXYLy8rbiVvMTybmVFedZBDparGBHW9lxdOPfbh6-NybtJ9_zShgtXs

---

I'm not resting my hopes on anything. Nobody knows what this big will be like in a week, month, 2 months

And nobody knows what the true mortality rate is

Like another poster said, the ER is likely being packed with panicked people who are not infected

My position all along is

1. STFU with all the panic mongering (not you personally)

2. Ride these 2 weeks out and implement a common sense middle ground mitigation response that enables the country to get back up and running

Yes, IMO, if the shutdowns run past mid-April, the "cure" will be much worse than the disease

k2aggie07 said:

---

Yeah... I don't know how they're screening those either. Originally they said those would be for healthcare workers and first responders. Are they just testing everyone? Do a questionnaire first? Anyone actually know?

---

My understanding is that they do the questionnaire right in the line and get swabbed at the same time but I can check with someone who's actually one of the providers. I do know that they started this morning with 4 lanes and increased to 6 at 10AM.

That's very close to where I'm at. I think you do a hard blitz to buy some time, figure out what's what, and prep for surge where it's pretty clear you need it.

Then you assess and move forward.

After that, you have a menu of options up to a total shutdown to try to lever into protecting your hospital capacity. No need to be binary, and those decisions should be made as locally as possible.

I'm very happy with Pres. Trump's strong federalism on this, and glad Gov. Abbott is mirroring it at the state level.

Quote:

---

The person I quoted is an ER doc in New Orleans. What about what he just described sounded like maybe it's just a normal "bad" day in the ER to you? Was it when he said it's much worse than the numbers indicate or the moment he said they are out of vents and ER beds and on the brink of complete collapse? Again, this is the beginning of what is coming.

Of course some places will be hit harder than others. Outbreaks spread at different speeds and at different times in different places.

---

I read the original post last night. I dont want to minimize the effort or concern. But also want to understand the context of being an ER doc in NO. Some hospitals are known to be especially primary care locations for the locals and some are constantly inundated with people basically looking for pain meds. Are they detaining all cases that are COVID positive or potentially positive? Are they sending some home to isolate? Dallas hospitals apparently are running smooth right now and there's not much indication that it will be reaching the levels noted in the post. At least not yet.

The need for protective gear is the greater concern for all of us but much of it can be helped with production and logistical solutions.