COVID-19 Megathread 5: The Trumps catch COVID-19

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Until we get a vaccine or a very strong treatment that will reduce the risk of mortality to a very low level socially distancing in masks in public are going to be a thing. This is kind of why I'm hoping that the Oxford vaccine ends up working because it works so we can get a vaccine by September life can start to go back to normal around election time and for the holidays.

 but until either one of those two things happen we just have to accept we're going to live in a new reality

The idea that any vaccine will be widely available before next year is crazy. Even if production started to ramp up while being tested, the logistics involved in vaccinating everyone quickly would prevent that.

Right.  I think there is a decent likelihood that we “get a vaccine” by September if by “get a vaccine” you mean “identifying a safe and effective vaccine”.  But if you mean “produce a vaccine that is widely available to the general public”, I think this is basically impossible within the next six months.

[It’s so Joever]

I think we will identify a working vaccine (possibly with some worrisome side effects) sometime in July. But that doesn’t mean we will be out of the dark. At best, we will have the vaccine available for healthcare workers by Autumn, and would be able to distribute it throughout vulnerable populations throughout January. Sadly, in some parts of the US (larger cities, unlucky towns) it’s possible we will have reached herd immunity by the time the vaccine is available (largely because of our “leadership” and culture)

[brucejoel99]

Until we get a vaccine or a very strong treatment that will reduce the risk of mortality to a very low level socially distancing in masks in public are going to be a thing. This is kind of why I'm hoping that the Oxford vaccine ends up working because it works so we can get a vaccine by September life can start to go back to normal around election time and for the holidays.

 but until either one of those two things happen we just have to accept we're going to live in a new reality

The idea that any vaccine will be widely available before next year is crazy. Even if production started to ramp up while being tested, the logistics involved in vaccinating everyone quickly would prevent that.

IIRC isn't one of the vaccines already being mass produced in case it ends up proving effective so that a lot is ready to go ASAP?

[NOVA Green]

A new Georgia hot spot is emerging in Gainesville, a northeastern exurb of Atlanta:

https://www.ajc.com/news/northeast-georgia-new-covid-hot-spot-emerges/ZgbPAH5CHeVQdDGy0KiJUN/

Poultry processing is a major industry in the area, although it's not clear whether the outbreak is tied to the poultry plants; the above article says it's not, but I've seen another that said there is a high number of cases reported in them.

Got a son-in-law from Hall County, Georgia and back in '14/'15 I did some research on his home County and he gave me the low-down.

Despite being from a relatively affluent Anglo family background, growing in some sort of "Mini-Mansion" close to the Chattahoochee River, he described in extensive detail about not only the local "Rednecks" but additionally the plight of Latino, Black, and White workers in the Poultry processing plant down the road in Gainesville, GA....

Although his Dad passed away a few Years back, his Mom still lives out there, and would definitely be considered in a more vulnerable category...

Meanwhile the vast majority of local residents don't have the luxury of doing an Alan Jackson stunt down the Chattahoochee River....

[Dr. Arch]

The updated numbers for COVID-19 in the U.S. are in for 5/6 per: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

I'm keeping track of these updates daily and updating at the end of the day, whenever all states finish reporting for that day.

Δ Change: Day-by-day Growth or Decline or COVID-19 Spread/Deaths.

• IE: Are we flattening the curve enough?

Σ Increase: A day's contribution to overall percentage growth of COVID-19 cases/deaths.

• IE: What's the overall change in the total?

<Last Numbers for 3/26-3/28 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 3/29-4/4 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/5-4/11 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/12-4/18 in this Post>
<Last Numbers for 4/19-4/25 in this post>

4/26: <Sunday>

• Cases: 987,160 (+26,509 | Δ Change: ↓25.56% | Σ Increase: ↑2.76%)
• Deaths: 55,413 (+1,157 | Δ Change: ↓44.13% | Σ Increase: ↑2.13%)

4/27:

• Cases: 1,010,299 (+23,139 | Δ Change: ↓12.71% | Σ Increase: ↑2.34%)
• Deaths: 56,797 (+1,384 | Δ Change: ↑19.62% | Σ Increase: ↑2.50%)

4/28:

• Cases: 1,035,454 (+25,155 | Δ Change: ↑8.71% | Σ Increase: ↑2.49%)
• Deaths: 59,252 (+2,455 | Δ Change: ↑77.38% | Σ Increase: ↑4.32%)

4/29:

• Cases: 1,064,572 (+29,118 | Δ Change: ↑15.75% | Σ Increase: ↑2.81%)
• Deaths: 61,669 (+2,417 | Δ Change: ↓1.55% | Σ Increase: ↑4.08%)

4/30:

• Cases: 1,095,023 (+30,451 | Δ Change: ↑4.58% | Σ Increase: ↑2.86%)
• Deaths: 63,856 (+2,187 | Δ Change: ↓9.52% | Σ Increase: ↑3.55%)

5/1:

• Cases: 1,131,280 (+36,257 | Δ Change: ↑19.07% | Σ Increase: ↑3.31%)
• Deaths: 65,766 (+1,910 | Δ Change: ↓12.67% | Σ Increase: ↑2.99%)

5/2:

• Cases: 1,160,774 (+29,484 | Δ Change: ↓18.68% | Σ Increase: ↑2.61%)
• Deaths: 67,444 (+1,678 | Δ Change: ↓12.15% | Σ Increase: ↑2.55%)

5/3: <Sunday>

• Cases: 1,187,804 (+27,030 | Δ Change: ↓8.32% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 68,589 (+1,142 | Δ Change: ↓31.94% | Σ Increase: ↑1.70%)

5/4:

• Cases: 1,212,835 (+25,031 | Δ Change: ↓7.40% | Σ Increase: ↑2.33%)
• Deaths: 69,921 (+1,332 | Δ Change: ↑16.64% | Σ Increase: ↑1.54%)

5/5 (Yesterday):

• Cases: 1,236,987 (+24,152 | Δ Change: ↓3.51% | Σ Increase: ↑1.99%)
• Deaths: 72,241 (+2,320 | Δ Change: ↑74.17% | Σ Increase: ↑3.32%)

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

[Del Tachi]

Until we get a vaccine or a very strong treatment that will reduce the risk of mortality to a very low level socially distancing in masks in public are going to be a thing. This is kind of why I'm hoping that the Oxford vaccine ends up working because it works so we can get a vaccine by September life can start to go back to normal around election time and for the holidays.

but until either one of those two things happen we just have to accept we're going to live in a new reality

See, I don't really buy this just because the risk of mortality is already so low that vaccination or improved antiviral remedies just aren't going to be massive game-changers.  The basic math of COVID-19 creates a huge barrier for success; already, more than 99% of people with the virus survive.  An unimaginably successful therapy that has a massive 50% reduction in death will therefore only deliver 0.5% absolute risk reduction.

And it seems like there's been a fundamental recharacterization of "social distancing" since the beginning of this crisis.  Social distancing will not lower the IFR.  Even with strict social distancing, the number of cases will likely be the same after two years as a world with no social distancing.  If the number of cases is the same then the number of people who cumulatively die will not likely change either.

[emailking]

Social distancing will not lower the IFR. 

I thought viral load played a significant factor in mortality. You're less likely to get infected with a big load if your're trying to distance.

[emailking]

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

Cases seems to have decreased in the last week. Deaths continue to be just as bad.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

Cases seems to have decreased in the last week. Deaths continue to be just as bad.

Deaths would always be a lagging indicator.  We also have to remember that testing has ramped up.  Nate Silver tweets a metric every day with the percentage of the tests coming back positive, and that has showed a slow, but steady, decline over the last month or so.

[Del Tachi]

Social distancing will not lower the IFR.

I thought viral load played a significant factor in mortality. You're less likely to get infected with a big load if your're trying to distance.

Social distancing assumes that, at some point or another, you will eventually come into contact with a high enough concentration of the virus to get infected.  The only thing that varies is the timing. 

People cannot truly self-isolate and "flattening the curve" models actually account for this.  You may diminish your interactions for a period of time, but it is still the case that an infectious agent moving (however slowly) through a population with no immunity will eventually infect and kill the same number of people as it would have under an unmitigated approach.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Until we get a vaccine or a very strong treatment that will reduce the risk of mortality to a very low level socially distancing in masks in public are going to be a thing. This is kind of why I'm hoping that the Oxford vaccine ends up working because it works so we can get a vaccine by September life can start to go back to normal around election time and for the holidays.

but until either one of those two things happen we just have to accept we're going to live in a new reality

See, I don't really buy this just because the risk of mortality is already so low that vaccination or improved antiviral remedies just aren't going to be massive game-changers.  The basic math of COVID-19 creates a huge barrier for success; already, more than 99% of people with the virus survive.  An unimaginably successful therapy that has a massive 50% reduction in death will therefore only deliver 0.5% absolute risk reduction.

And it seems like there's been a fundamental recharacterization of "social distancing" since the beginning of this crisis.  Social distancing will not lower the IFR.  Even with strict social distancing, the number of cases will likely be the same after two years as a world with no social distancing.  If the number of cases is the same then the number of people who cumulatively die will not likely change either.

And, I know it's different in different places, but I'm seeing almost no one here wearing masks, apart from employees in stores and restaurants.  Obviously, you wouldn't expect people eating in a restaurant to be wearing one, but people walking on the street weren't wearing one, nor were customers in a convenience store.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

Cases seems to have decreased in the last week. Deaths continue to be just as bad.

Deaths would always be a lagging indicator.  We also have to remember that testing has ramped up.  Nate Silver tweets a metric every day with the percentage of the tests coming back positive, and that has showed a slow, but steady, decline over the last month or so.

I don't know if there's an official formula for this, but here's what I use to estimate the actual number of new cases each day:

N*(T/5)

'N' is the number of known new cases. 'T' is the percentage of tests that comes back positive.

Based on that formula, the number of actual new cases lately is way, way, way down.

[emailking]

Social distancing assumes that, at some point or another, you will eventually come into contact with a high enough concentration of the virus to get infected.  The only thing that varies is the timing. 

No I don't think that's right. Suppose a kid is asymptomatic and visits his grandma. If they try to stay 6 feet apart she'll probably get a smaller load than if they hug and kiss when they meet/leave. This affects her mortality. After that, if she survives she's immune. It doesn't matter how many other infected people she comes into contact with at that point.

[Dr. Arch]

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

Cases seems to have decreased in the last week. Deaths continue to be just as bad.

Deaths would always be a lagging indicator.  We also have to remember that testing has ramped up.  Nate Silver tweets a metric every day with the percentage of the tests coming back positive, and that has showed a slow, but steady, decline over the last month or so.

I don't know if there's an official formula for this, but here's what I use to estimate the actual number of new cases each day:

N*(T/5)

'N' is the number of known new cases. 'T' is the percentage of tests that comes back positive.

Based on that formula, the number of actual new cases lately is way, way, way down.

Yes, the curb has been largely flattened at this point, with deaths at highs still because they're a lagging indicator.

However, all of that effort will go to waste if states/people decide to thwart that progress by opening up/going about as usual as if a vaccine has already been developed and administered to the population.

[It’s so Joever]

5/6 (Today):

• Cases: 1,263,092 (+26,105 | Δ Change: ↑8.09% | Σ Increase: ↑2.11%)
• Deaths: 74,799 (+2,558 | Δ Change: ↑10.26% | Σ Increase: ↑3.54%)

Cases seems to have decreased in the last week. Deaths continue to be just as bad.

Deaths would always be a lagging indicator.  We also have to remember that testing has ramped up.  Nate Silver tweets a metric every day with the percentage of the tests coming back positive, and that has showed a slow, but steady, decline over the last month or so.

I don't know if there's an official formula for this, but here's what I use to estimate the actual number of new cases each day:

N*(T/5)

'N' is the number of known new cases. 'T' is the percentage of tests that comes back positive.

Based on that formula, the number of actual new cases lately is way, way, way down.

It’s all fun and games until the positivity rate reaches zero...

On a serious note, this is actually a decent measure (not for actual cases, but to see how the numbers are changing)

[Del Tachi]

Social distancing assumes that, at some point or another, you will eventually come into contact with a high enough concentration of the virus to get infected.  The only thing that varies is the timing. 

No I don't think that's right. Suppose a kid is asymptomatic and visits his grandma. If they try to stay 6 feet apart she'll probably get a smaller load than if they hug and kiss when they meet/leave. This affects her mortality. After that, if she survives she's immune. It doesn't matter how many other infected people she comes into contact with at that point.

Not to nitpick, but that is what social distancing assumes because the "flatten the curve" models are unspecified in regards to viral loads/divergent infectivity.   

Even so, viruses are not poisons - within the body they are self-replicating.  While the initial "dose" of virus someone receives may affect their disease's progression (their innate immune response could be overwhelmed, thus making their later acquired immune response less effective), higher viral loads are themselves a result of severe cases more so than a cause.  Asymptomatic children are not going to be carrying enough virus to seriously impede the innate immune response of an (even older) adult; if grandma gets sick this way and dies, her immune system was already operating at severe disadvantage.   

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

DeSantis says if % of tests that come back positive remains under 5% and cases don't increase we could be going into Phase II reopening in 2-3 weeks. Regular testing and antibody testing will increase

[Smeulders]

Social distancing assumes that, at some point or another, you will eventually come into contact with a high enough concentration of the virus to get infected.  The only thing that varies is the timing. 

No I don't think that's right. Suppose a kid is asymptomatic and visits his grandma. If they try to stay 6 feet apart she'll probably get a smaller load than if they hug and kiss when they meet/leave. This affects her mortality. After that, if she survives she's immune. It doesn't matter how many other infected people she comes into contact with at that point.

Not to nitpick, but that is what social distancing assumes because the "flatten the curve" models are unspecified in regards to viral loads/divergent infectivity.   

Even so, viruses are not poisons - within the body they are self-replicating.  While the initial "dose" of virus someone receives may affect their disease's progression (their innate immune response could be overwhelmed, thus making their later acquired immune response less effective), higher viral loads are themselves a result of severe cases more so than a cause.  Asymptomatic children are not going to be carrying enough virus to seriously impede the innate immune response of an (even older) adult; if grandma gets sick this way and dies, her immune system was already operating at severe disadvantage.   

"Social distancing" does not mean "move from this steep curve to that smaller curve with the same area". The first graphs and arguments published in support of "social distancing" may have used a very simple model where that is the only real effect, but that does not mean that a more thorough understanding can not reveal additional advantages to social distancing. Can you please stop insisting the only effect of slowing down virus spread through minimising contact (= social distancing) are exactly those highlighted by the first model you saw? A model, I am going to add, was probably deliberately kept as simple as possible to be easily understood by an uninformed public.

[American2020]

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

[snip]

please make your image smaller, it's stretching the screen

[Brittain33]

Until we get a vaccine or a very strong treatment that will reduce the risk of mortality to a very low level socially distancing in masks in public are going to be a thing. This is kind of why I'm hoping that the Oxford vaccine ends up working because it works so we can get a vaccine by September life can start to go back to normal around election time and for the holidays.

but until either one of those two things happen we just have to accept we're going to live in a new reality

See, I don't really buy this just because the risk of mortality is already so low that vaccination or improved antiviral remedies just aren't going to be massive game-changers.  The basic math of COVID-19 creates a huge barrier for success; already, more than 99% of people with the virus survive.  An unimaginably successful therapy that has a massive 50% reduction in death will therefore only deliver 0.5% absolute risk reduction.

And it seems like there's been a fundamental recharacterization of "social distancing" since the beginning of this crisis.  Social distancing will not lower the IFR.  Even with strict social distancing, the number of cases will likely be the same after two years as a world with no social distancing.  If the number of cases is the same then the number of people who cumulatively die will not likely change either.

I’m not sure why death/survival is the only metric here. A much larger number of people get hospitalized than die, and many of them have long-term damage to their health. They benefit from a vaccine, too, as well as those people who don’t suffer long-term damage but have a miserable experience of illness.

[Brittain33]

More assaults by people who love freedom. Two teenage employees of McDonald’s were shot by people upset the restaurant was take-out only.

https://www.koco.com/article/suspects-in-custody-after-2-employees-shot-at-mcdonalds-in-southwest-okc-police-say/32395365#

The Founding Fathers would be so proud of this use of the Second Amendment.

[Amanda Huggenkiss]

More assaults by people who love freedom. Two teenage employees of McDonald’s were shot by people upset the restaurant was take-out only.

https://www.koco.com/article/suspects-in-custody-after-2-employees-shot-at-mcdonalds-in-southwest-okc-police-say/32395365#

The Founding Fathers would be so proud of this use of the Second Amendment.

It is beyond my understanding how a country just assumes that incidents like these just happen once in a while because the Founding Fathers were apparently some infallible demi-gods whose opinions can never be questioned, never.

[GP270watch]

More assaults by people who love freedom. Two teenage employees of McDonald’s were shot by people upset the restaurant was take-out only.

https://www.koco.com/article/suspects-in-custody-after-2-employees-shot-at-mcdonalds-in-southwest-okc-police-say/32395365#

The Founding Fathers would be so proud of this use of the Second Amendment.

It is beyond my understanding how a country just assumes that incidents like these just happen once in a while because the Founding Fathers were apparently some infallible demi-gods whose opinions can never be questioned, never.

 The price of freedom is that teenagers working a fast food job should expect to be shot by disgruntled customers. That's just the price we have to pay!

[Koharu]

I highly recommend listening to this, or at least the first section with the former head of the CDC. The whole episode is very informative and talks about what a proper plan to reopen looks like, and what it requires (hint: way more testing than we're doing now).

How We'll Know When It's Safe To Reopen The U.S. Economy

If listening isn't your thing, there is a summary of the episode at the link, as well as a link to the report written by one of the guests.