Comments on: 3DDRR update, April 21

By: Roger Sweeny

Roger Sweeny — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 22:56:21 +0000

where else do they go, special cv19-only homes?

Maye that’s what the Javits Center in New York City and the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center should have been turned into.

By: Handle

Handle — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:52:17 +0000

With regards to nursing homes, On 3/25, NY Health Dept directed that nursing homes re-admit seniors from the hospital, even if they were confirmed to have the virus.

Note: I’m not saying there’s a better option – where else do they go, special cv19-only homes? – but it seems a risky move.

On 4/20, the NY health commissioner, Howard Zucker, was asked about it, and said, “if you are positive, you should be admitted back to a nursing home. The necessary precautions will be taken to protect other residents there.”

Um, maybe?

By: edgar

edgar — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 15:58:39 +0000

Some people are arguing the reason that the expected post-lockdown decline did not occur is because infections had actually spread widely, much earlier, perhaps in December: https://www.thesavvystreet.com/the-pandemic-cardinal-numbers-no-one-talks-about/ The recent testing of older blood samples that has found deaths attributable to COVID in California in early February would seem to support this theory. It increasingly seems as if we are going one step forward, two steps back, with what we can’t assume much about what we know about this disease.

By: The Snob

The Snob — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 14:56:53 +0000

Here in Massachusetts, long-term care facilities are accounting for about 30% of confirmed cases and 55-60% of deaths.

On a population basis, cases are distributed evenly across everybody except very young (few) and over 80, who have far more. Out of slightly under 2000 dead so far, 95% are over 60.

By: blink

blink — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 01:01:09 +0000

I am becoming more convinced that heterogeneity is extremely important and also little understood. Very likely, the first two be infected were those most active socially — the so-called “super spreaders.” As that group was exhausted (reached herd immunity?), contagion rates were certain to fall. Similarly, those most likely to die conditional on infection were among the early to succumb. Thus, on average, death conditional on infection should be lower than a month ago among all demographic groups.

By: Whit Brennan

Whit Brennan — Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:35:13 +0000

What we need is deaths by the actual date of death. Deaths by date of announcement is close to meaningless, but that’s what we are getting. States are starting to go back and count probable deaths, and they haven’t been doing it in a uniform way.

The CDC should be collecting all of this data, normalizing it, and making it public.

By: Handle

Handle — Tue, 21 Apr 2020 23:51:26 +0000

The CDC provisional death counts page is a good place to start, though the way they report the numbers is a bit confusing. Table 2 breaks it down by age, and Table 4 by place (e.g., home, nursing home, etc... ) However, if someone got sick at a nursing home, and died in the hospital, I think that's still one of the "healthcare setting" categories, which frustrates the effort.