PJYoung said:

---

In Hidalgo County where I live we had 35 die yesterday (31 the day before) including 2 people in their 20s.

That data is directly from the county.

---

They all died yesterday?

Didn't know that.

I still enjoy his charts and graphs.

I'm relatively new to F16, but from what I've experienced, there's nothing worse on the extreme over there than there is with the extremists on the other side. The truth is usually in the middle.

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

sleepybeagle said:
I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

I voted for Trump, but is that not correct?

---

Yes, the Trump administration wants the hospital data reported to the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C. The dept. of health was concerned that the CDC was not reporting data fast enough. As best as I can tell, the CDC is still receiving the data on deaths.

---

Who changes reporting procedures amidst a storm? This means the administration wants the ability to spin the numbers, not release more quickly.

tysker said:

---

ETFan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

Deaths are not down in Texas and the federal government is trying to obfuscate the data now. That's not TDS, it's facts.

Texas had 12k+ new cases and 150+ deaths yesterday. That's not good news.

---

Depends doesnt it? If all 12k+ new cases were presumptive cases of people age 17-25, that's probably not all that concerning. And if all 150+ deaths were recategorized death counts from May and June, that's actually really good. Details matter but they make for boring headlines.

---

Yes but if you consider the fact that those 17-25 year olds will now go out and infect their older relatives or Co workers you can understand the effect of the younger people catching the virus several weeks later.....

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/second-coronavirus-death-surge/614122/

Quote:

---

deaths are rising again... people are dying at higher rates where there are lots of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations: in Florida, Arizona, Texas, and California, as well as a host of smaller southern states ...

The deaths are also not happening in an unpredictable amount of time after the new outbreaks emerged. Simply look at the curves yourself. Cases began to rise on June 16; a week later, hospitalizations began to rise. Two weeks after that21 days after cases rosestates began to report more deaths. That's the exact number of days that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has estimated from the onset of symptoms to the reporting of a death.

---

bay fan said:

---

tysker said:

---

ETFan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

Deaths are not down in Texas and the federal government is trying to obfuscate the data now. That's not TDS, it's facts.

Texas had 12k+ new cases and 150+ deaths yesterday. That's not good news.

---

Depends doesnt it? If all 12k+ new cases were presumptive cases of people age 17-25, that's probably not all that concerning. And if all 150+ deaths were recategorized death counts from May and June, that's actually really good. Details matter but they make for boring headlines.

---

Yes but if you consider the fact that those 17-25 year olds will now go out and infect their older relatives or Co workers you can understand the effect of the younger people catching the virus several weeks later.....

---

You certain that they are infesting other older relatives or coworkers or are you making up possible "What if" stories to continue your narrative...

eta: regardless it doesn't change the fact that details matter and data analysis matters. Not all cases are created equal and not all data points are equal.

Based upon how contagious this virus is and the fact that many of the 18-25's may be asymptomatic it is a logical conclusion.

Excess deathshave been trending toward a more normal range but on the "upside" kids are dying less than normal

bay fan said:

---

Based upon how contagious this virus is and the fact that many of the 18-25's may be asymptomatic it is a logical conclusion.

---

That's a lot of 18-25 living at home and not wearing masks or social distancing at work. While totally possible what transmission percentage are we really talking about here. Obviously >0 but is the actual number closer to 5% or 95%. Even its 50% the 12k cases mentioned would likely lead to 100K cases in a couple of weeks and I don't think the data is trending that way at all.

sleepybeagle said:

---

Yes - that's why I only focus on the CDC death certificate numbers. These are the FINAL and OFFICIAL numbers based on actual reported death certificates.

Too many other sites data are I believe based on non-factual data.

---

These are not "FINAL" numbers. The "Provisional Death Counts" CDC page that you linked to says:
"Why These Numbers are Different
Provisional death counts may not match counts from other sources, such as media reports or numbers from county health departments. Counts by NCHS often track 1-2 weeks behind other data.

• Death certificates take time to be completed. There are many steps to filling out and submitting a death certificate. Waiting for test results can create additional delays.
• States report at different rates. Currently, 63% of all U.S. deaths are reported within 10 days of the date of death, but there is significant variation between states.
• It takes extra time to code COVID-19 deaths. While 80% of deaths are electronically processed and coded by NCHS within minutes, most deaths from COVID-19 must be coded by a person, which takes an average of 7 days.
• Other reporting systems use different definitions or methods for counting deaths."

(and the word "provisional" in the title should be a hint, too). At the time I write this, the CDC is reporting 136,938 US deaths at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/us-cases-deaths.html and 123,995 deaths at the provisional site. Neither count is 100% accurate because there is error in all data, but the bias toward underreporting recent death is well known, and it is almost a guarantee that most of the approximately 12K deaths that differ between these estimates are going to fall be assigned to the last few weeks.

Edit: the dash got deleted when I copied the quote from the CDC. So "1-2 weeks" became "12 weeks". I've fixed that.

Player To Be Named Later said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

The only thing I really feel comfortable saying or trusting is that Government is a joke and has no ability to tell us what's actually happening.

---

This. And while everyone is drawing their political lines in the sand, what they aren't seeing is that no political "side" is doing any better at this than the other.

We "should" be seeing this as a crystal clear point that we could use a 3rd party or fix the 2 we have, but people will still insist 1 of the 2 is any better than the other.

---

We absolutely need more than 2 legitimate party options.

bay fan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

sleepybeagle said:
I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

I voted for Trump, but is that not correct?

---

Yes, the Trump administration wants the hospital data reported to the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C. The dept. of health was concerned that the CDC was not reporting data fast enough. As best as I can tell, the CDC is still receiving the data on deaths.

---

Who changes reporting procedures amidst a storm? This means the administration wants the ability to spin the numbers, not release more quickly.

---

Amazing how many ghosts you can see when you need to see them to fit your prewritten narrative

bay fan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

sleepybeagle said:
I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

I voted for Trump, but is that not correct?

---

Yes, the Trump administration wants the hospital data reported to the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, D.C. The dept. of health was concerned that the CDC was not reporting data fast enough. As best as I can tell, the CDC is still receiving the data on deaths.

---

Who changes reporting procedures amidst a storm? This means the administration wants the ability to spin the numbers, not release more quickly.

---

We should let the media continue to do that.

Aggiegirl1977 said:

---

Where is this Forum 16? Why is it called that? Why would someone be considered a troll? I see people accused of trolling all the time - somewhat randomly it seems. Lord only knows I would not want to make the same mistake and be reprimanded.

---

F16 = politics forum
I would think you would know that and are a troll but if you did not know ; now you know and I take back the troll comment

PJYoung said:

---

---

Why are the daily Texas deaths the same as the weekly Texas deaths in graph posted before this (approximately in July)? Why is trend line different in each graph (trending down on weekly average but trending up on daily)?

About reporting I saw somewhere:

Yesterday, NPR ran a segment about the scandalous decision of the Trump administration to change the Covid-related reporting that hospitals are now doing.

What NPR reported:

(1) Hospitals will now have to send data to the Trump administration, bypassing the CDC.
(2) Interviewed a doctor who said that this is horrible! They are already stressed out and overwhelmed! Bad Trump!
(3) Repeatedly said that the data collection will by done by a private company. Many times, in case you didn't catch it.
(3) Brief in passing mentioned that the head of the CDC said that this was a good move, increased efficiency and accuracy, and also that the CDC will have full access to all information. And also, data will not go to Trump, but to the Medicare division of the DHHS. No interview, no details, all very brief.
(4) Interview with a midlevel manager from the CDC who used to run data collection and is now stripped of juicy bureaucratic office, so he goes on and on to complain how this is terrible. But never once, not once says why it is terrible. Just terrible, and all.

What NPR did not report:

(1) That hospitals already send their data to the DHHS, and also send it to the CDC, and the current reporting is a bureaucratic nightmare, which they hate.
(2) Hospitals are happy to report to a single institution, with one streamlined procedure, so most are very happy about the new system.
(3) There is no evidence that the "private subcontractor" in charge of data collection was not selected properly, or is not expected to do a good job, or that the government employees would have done a better job. News flash: government computers are also made by private companies, as is almost all software they use.

Zero discussions of expected changes in the quality of reported data. (Can argue either way, but need someone who actually knows!).
Zero discussions of cost savings for everyone involved, including hospitals.
Zero discussions for whether this will cause any damage whatsoever to the CDC's (or anyone's) ability to use newly collected data.

No expert on data collection or analysis interviewed or mentioned.

Repeatedly: data will go "to Trump", "bypassing the CDC", and "private subcontractor".

And this concludes the reporting segment.

Different sources, different methodologies.

The CDC weekly data is lagged and incomplete, constantly being revised to back date. Provides a more accurate picture, but slow.

The state data is published a day after the counties report it.

Quote:

---

Bad Trump!

---

So close to being a non-Forum 16 post . . . . it is impossible to hide in the end.

tysker said:

---

bay fan said:

---

tysker said:

---

ETFan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

Deaths are not down in Texas and the federal government is trying to obfuscate the data now. That's not TDS, it's facts.

Texas had 12k+ new cases and 150+ deaths yesterday. That's not good news.

---

Depends doesnt it? If all 12k+ new cases were presumptive cases of people age 17-25, that's probably not all that concerning. And if all 150+ deaths were recategorized death counts from May and June, that's actually really good. Details matter but they make for boring headlines.

---

Yes but if you consider the fact that those 17-25 year olds will now go out and infect their older relatives or Co workers you can understand the effect of the younger people catching the virus several weeks later.....

---

You certain that they are infesting other older relatives or coworkers or are you making up possible "What if" stories to continue your narrative...

eta: regardless it doesn't change the fact that details matter and data analysis matters. Not all cases are created equal and not all data points are equal.

---

aginlakeway said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

In Hidalgo County where I live we had 35 die yesterday (31 the day before) including 2 people in their 20s.

That data is directly from the county.

---

They all died yesterday?

---

Hidalgo county reported 31 deaths Tuesday, 35 yesterday and 22 today.

Houston area reported 9 new deaths today:

" Male | Age 40-49 | White, non-Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/10/2020
Male | Age 60-69 | White, Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/01/2020
Male | Age 70-79 | White, Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/02/2020
Female | Age 60-69 | White, non-Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 06/28/2020
Male | Age 50-59 | Black, non-Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 06/25/2020
Female | Age 60-69 | White, Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/03/2020
Male | Age 70-79 | Black, non-Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/04/2020
Male | Age 60-69 | White, Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 06/25/2020
Male | Age 20-29 | White, Hispanic | Underlying Health Conditions | Death: 07/03/2020"

For any of the doctors/health experts on here, why is there such a lag in the time of death and the day it is reported as a Covid death? Testing delays?

Very interesting that updating the buckets with the same data can give a different picture and different visual analysis

I'm not certain the causal link can be assumed as all age brackets are popping at the same time.
From both graphics, what was happening in late June that may have caused such a large spike in positive cases across all adults? Whatever happened to expected Spring Break surge that the media told us about? And these charts hammer home that schools are safe to open for people under 20 as there is virtually no spread occurring in those age brackets.

"all age brackets are popping at the same time"

Really?? That is your interpretation of the data? The heat map begins to change in the 15-29 year old range in mid-June (between June 4 and June 16) prior to other age groups. Over time (and quickly), other age groups start to show up-tick in case counts while that same 15-29 demographic has the highest density in the heat map. It clearly supports the idea that spread between a younger population will lead to cases in older demographic, as would be expected.

"charts hammer home that schools are safe to open"

Again, largely disagree. As stated above, spread within a younger population will lead to cases in older demographic. If a spread is school-aged children occur, then we will expect to see a rise in cases in the older, more vulnerable population.

"no spread occurring in those age brackets"

Two reasons: if a spark was initiated by a young adult population, it would not be expected to effect younger age bracket as this is the population if the least contact to children. Additionally, most children show no visible symptoms and probably are not being tested, thus unable to be recorded in the dataset shown here.

I think you contradict yourself a bit. So 15-29 year old are infecting older people but not younger? As if 15-29 yr olds don't have contact with their own children, younger siblings or coworkers but they do live with and work with people their grandparents age? Oh but the young aren't showing symptoms and thus are no being tested. The same argument can be made for the older population that are showing no symptoms as well, except they would be tested often by their employer. I would argue young adults generally live and work with each other, infected each other greatly and being more savvy in notifying everyone in their bubble of possible transmission, more people in get tested and test positive.

We don't test kids because it's essentially pointless to do so, right? There is one week where every adult age group has a significant increase in positive cases (around June 20th maybe) the highest being young adults (from the protests and hanging out at bars?) but one has to wonder are certain demographics simply getting tested more and thus leading to more positive cases. Again all groups look like they increased in positives around the same time and while I'll admit the 17-25 yr olds may be f'n it up for the rest of us, without contact tracing information, I see more correlation than causation from the data.

I would love to see similar heat maps for other states and regions. I wonder if some would be brave enough to break it down by race...

Re: Younger people will spread it to older.

https://www.rivm.nl/en/novel-coronavirus-covid-19/children-and-covid-19




Iceland went so far as to sequence infections, and they found no evidence of children as transmission vectors.

https://spectator.us/evidence-children-passing-covid-19-relatives-icelandic-study/

Ranger222 said:

---

tysker said:

---

bay fan said:

---

tysker said:

---

ETFan said:

---

sleepybeagle said:

---

Quote:

---

CDC will have a hell of a lag now that Trump banned them from getting data.

---

I know any good news is hard for many of us to take given this pandemic isn't really about eliminating the Covid virus... but eliminating the Donald Trump virus.

---

Deaths are not down in Texas and the federal government is trying to obfuscate the data now. That's not TDS, it's facts.

Texas had 12k+ new cases and 150+ deaths yesterday. That's not good news.

---

Depends doesnt it? If all 12k+ new cases were presumptive cases of people age 17-25, that's probably not all that concerning. And if all 150+ deaths were recategorized death counts from May and June, that's actually really good. Details matter but they make for boring headlines.

---

Yes but if you consider the fact that those 17-25 year olds will now go out and infect their older relatives or Co workers you can understand the effect of the younger people catching the virus several weeks later.....

---

You certain that they are infesting other older relatives or coworkers or are you making up possible "What if" stories to continue your narrative...

eta: regardless it doesn't change the fact that details matter and data analysis matters. Not all cases are created equal and not all data points are equal.

---

---

Logic, every time. Thanks for posting.

Data across the world continue to show that children are not affected by this. Its unequivocal at this point.

But Ranger is arguing with his heat map that 17-29 yr are the cause of greater spread to everyone and especially folks. I would argue that that everyone got exposed around the same time in late June and community and 17-29 yr olds significantly transmitted among themselves.

From Christian Drosten's group in Germany:

Quote:

---

Data on viral load, as estimated by real-time RT-PCR threshold cycle values from 3,712 COVID-19 patients were analysed to examine the relationship between patient age and SARS-CoV-2 viral load. Analysis of variance of viral loads in patients of different age categories found no significant difference between any pair of age categories including children. In particular, these data indicate that viral loads in the very young do not differ significantly from those of adults. Based on these results, we have to caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation. Children may be as infectious as adults.

---

https://zoonosen.charite.de/fileadmin/user_upload/microsites/m_cc05/virologie-ccm/dateien_upload/Weitere_Dateien/analysis-of-SARS-CoV-2-viral-load-by-patient-age.pdf

Quote:

---

"We did see low transmission," but "we didn't see no transmission," Macartney said. "I think children can still transmit coronavirus. That's certainly the case. We've seen that."

Further, Gary Wong, a researcher in pediatric respiratory medicine at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said widespread school closures and a comparatively lower rate of testing for the new coronavirus among children could contribute to the low number of reported cases of Covid-19 among the group.

Wong added that, since plenty of other respiratory viruses can transmit between adults and children, it would be odd if the new coronavirus didn't have some level of transmission between the groups, as well.

"I don't believe this virus is an exception," Wong said. "As long as there is community transmission in the adult population, reopening of schools will likely facilitate transmission, as respiratory viruses are known to circulate in schools and day cares."

---

Regarding the inaccurate statement "children are not affected by this", please see:

Quote:

---

A complication that has more recently been observed in children can be severe and dangerous. Called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), it can lead to life-threatening problems with the heart and other organs in the body. Early reports compare it to Kawasaki disease, an inflammatory illness that can lead to heart problems. But while some cases look very much like Kawasaki's, others have been different.
Symptoms of MIS-C can include

• fever lasting more than a couple of days
• rash
• conjunctivitis (redness of the white part of the eye)
• stomachache
• vomiting and/or diarrhea
• a large, swollen lymph node in the neck
• red, cracked lips
• a tongue that is redder than usual and looks like a strawberry
• swollen hands and/or feet
• irritability and/or unusual sleepiness or weakness.

---

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/coronavirus-outbreak-and-kids

Really? Please provide some proof. Thank you

What is the prevalence of this mysterious MIS-C? Is it common?

Look at post directly above for science which supports common sense.

What portion of children develop viral loads at that level?

Is it a comparable portion to adults?

Oh its like Kawasaki disease which was dismissed after a couple of weeks because of a clear misunderstanding (misrepresentation?) of correlation and causation?