U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-23-2020, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Columbus, GA
973 posts, read 458,507 times
Reputation: 670

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
Please provide some evidence as to your assertion that we are more likely to possibly incur “second and third waves”. We are 4 weeks into reopening and the increase hasn’t occurred. Our numbers haven’t plummeted but all the data suggests a slow decline. Hospitalizations are continuing to decline. These are the current facts. The curve has flattened and our hospitals are in no danger of being overwhelmed in GA.

The DPH's own site has evidence of the second wave and has shown it for the past few days.

The graph they started using can be confusing to read, but basically the best way to read it now is by looking at the 14 day line and about one week forward from that, realizing that the data from whatever day you're looking at it to about a week ago from that day is largely incomplete. It's misleading without realizing that.

The lockdown ended on the 24th of April. About two weeks after that is when the downward trend slowed and by the second week of May, the second wave was evident. The time between virus incubation and symptoms is about one week, with the most severe symptoms appearing about one week after that, i.e. those infected after the week after the lockdown ended will just begin requiring hospital care sometime over the next week.



It's plain as day the curve is rising in a second wave already and has been since May 12th. We won't know what the previous week really looks like until this time next week.

What hurts the most is that we could have begun reopening the state and still protected public health by requiring masks in public, specifically indoors. Requiring, not suggesting. Warning, fining, and ultimately closing/quarantining businesses and people who refuse to comply.

This did not have to be a zero sum game pitting "reopening" against public health. Nobody wants to remain locked down a day longer than necessary. Both could have happened and both ultimately will, but likely at the costs of lots of lives needlessly loss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2020, 12:57 PM
 
9,984 posts, read 5,096,902 times
Reputation: 9658
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayHey View Post
The DPH's own site has evidence of the second wave and has shown it for the past few days.

The graph they started using can be confusing to read, but basically the best way to read it now is by looking at the 14 day line and about one week forward from that, realizing that the data from whatever day you're looking at it to about a week ago from that day is largely incomplete. It's misleading without realizing that.

The lockdown ended on the 24th of April. About two weeks after that is when the downward trend slowed and by the second week of May, the second wave was evident. The time between virus incubation and symptoms is about one week, with the most severe symptoms appearing about one week after that, i.e. those infected after the week after the lockdown ended will just begin requiring hospital care sometime over the next week.



It's plain as day the curve is rising in a second wave already and has been since May 12th. We won't know what the previous week really looks like until this time next week.

What hurts the most is that we could have begun reopening the state and still protected public health by requiring masks in public, specifically indoors. Requiring, not suggesting. Warning, fining, and ultimately closing/quarantining businesses and people who refuse to comply.

This did not have to be a zero sum game pitting "reopening" against public health. Nobody wants to remain locked down a day longer than necessary. Both could have happened and both ultimately will, but likely at the costs of lots of lives needlessly loss.
What you say could be true. Let’s say there are more people testing positive. The data you show certainly points to that.

Is that because more people are getting the virus or more people are being tested than previously? Testing has increased dramatically in GA, especially in the Atlanta metro, over the past few weeks when compared to late April.

https://www.11alive.com/article/news...6-ab32a15a1531

I don’t disagree with you that masks should have been mandated. It’s what I do whenever I go out, and will do so for the near future or until I feel comfortable to go without.

As I have said before, it’s still too early to tell if being at the front of the line for reopening was a smart or dumb move. We need another month or 2 of data. What epidemiologists will have though is the ability to compare GA with NY and see if either approach - or neither - helped curb the spread and reduce the impact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Columbus, GA
973 posts, read 458,507 times
Reputation: 670
Regarding that article you linked, it was revealed earlier this week that DPH began early this month counting antibody tests and double counting certain viral tests in the total number of tests.

That inflated the actual number of tests conducted and distorted the total number of positive tests.

Meaning that the significant increase in testing 11Alive is referring to was a false positive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 01:23 PM
 
4,614 posts, read 1,865,562 times
Reputation: 3582
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
#1 is of course likely. But look at NY that still has a high amount of new infections, and Cuomo finding that 2/3 of those hospitalized claimed they were sheltering in place all along.

Continue shelter in place orders for the medically fragile and elderly. As of May 12, 65% of those who died were 70 or older - all either retired or eligible to. The majority of the rest are in their 60’s.

For the rest, maintain social distancing and wear masks where possible and needed. Exercise personal responsibility.
Even with this accounted for, if 2/3rds of those hospitalized were NOT sheltering, they would have also increased the spread potential which could doubling or triple the hospitalizations. That stated, NY's situation technically could have been far worse had those people not sheltered and continued to spread it without restriction.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...ing-fatalities
Quote:
Dismissing Covid-19 as a disease that only endangers those who were going to die soon anyway doesn’t make a lot of statistical sense either. The mortality risks from Covid-19 start exceeding the risk from influenza or transport accidents well below age 65, and the middle-aged and younger seniors can face bigger relative risk increases than the very old. Here, for example, is the increase in mortality risk that 200,000 U.S. Covid-19 deaths in 2020 would imply relative to the actual all-causes mortality rates from 2018.

Whose Risk Goes Up Most in the Covid-19 Pandemic
Percentage increase in U.S. mortality* by age, if 200,000 die of Covid-19

Quote:
For a less-hypothetical look, here’s the increase in mortality rates implied by Covid-19 deaths in New York City through May 3, in this case relative to the city’s 2017 all-causes mortality numbers. That is, I’ve divided the city’s confirmed and probable Covid-19 deaths by age group by the overall deaths per 100,000 in the city in 2017. These aren’t exactly the percentages by which mortality rates will increase in New York in 2020 — some people who died of Covid-19 would have died of something else this year anyway, some have died or will die of other causes because the coronavirus pandemic kept them from getting needed treatment, plus the Covid-19 death toll will continue to rise. But it’s a useful approximation.

Quote:
These are staggeringly large increases in mortality risk, especially given that all the city’s Covid-19 deaths have occurred in less than two months. And they are risk increases for the entire population, not just those infected by the coronavirus. David Spiegelhalter of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at the University of Cambridge calculated estimates for the latter using U.K. mortality data and found that the resulting increases in annual mortality risk start at about 20% for boys under 10 and 30% for girls, then follow a similar pattern of being highest for those in their 50s, 60s and 70s, for whom being infected with the coronavirus appears to at least double their risk of dying in a given year.

Does this age distribution make Covid-19 less harmful than a disease of similar infectiousness and deadliness that targeted children and young adults would be? Definitely! (I’m 56, so I think I’m allowed to say that.) But it remains a highly infectious disease that for everybody over about 40 is significantly deadlier than anything else they’re likely to encounter during the course of a normal year.
Also, the sum of non-elderly meeting fatality to Covid-19 is still 25%, that is still fairly high when considering elderly are typically at risk in most illnesses.


Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
#2 is likely to be true for those activities which cannot maintain social distancing. Bars, concerts, sporting events, airplane travel, etc. will all require major changes.

Please provide some evidence as to your assertion that we are more likely to possibly incur “second and third waves”. We are 4 weeks into reopening and the increase hasn’t occurred. Our numbers haven’t plummeted but all the data suggests a slow decline. Hospitalizations are continuing to decline. These are the current facts. The curve has flattened and our hospitals are in no danger of being overwhelmed in GA.
Coronavirus hot spots erupt across the country; experts warn of second wave in South

4 Weeks is nowhere near enough time to have an idea as to the general trajectory of this illness especially when most of our evidence is at best lagging indicators and at worst, completely enormous by un-standardized testing procedures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:13 PM
 
113 posts, read 31,351 times
Reputation: 188
When are you going to reopen then? I think everyone can agree that it isn't going to be an instantaneous process. You could shelter-in-place until August 1 but that doesn't mean that come August 1 everyone is going to rush out as if nothing happened. You need to do it slowly so you can see how things go.

I'm essential and it's real easy for me to tell you to stay home. But I understand the very frightening concerns that many people have right now about how they are going to support themselves and their families going forward. If you told me my options were take a chance on getting it, then taking a 1.5% chance of dying from it or take a 100% chance that I'm going to be broke then I'll take my chances with the virus.

Unless you are volunteering to pay someone's bills then you can't just sit from home and tell them not to worry about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:37 PM
 
9,984 posts, read 5,096,902 times
Reputation: 9658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Coronavirus hot spots erupt across the country; experts warn of second wave in South

4 Weeks is nowhere near enough time to have an idea as to the general trajectory of this illness especially when most of our evidence is at best lagging indicators and at worst, completely enormous by un-standardized testing procedures.
Thanks for the link to the article. There’s a lot of “could be” in it, and they’re using cell phone data to correlate to risk - as an example, you recently drove from Texas to Atlanta. According to their model that would increase risk as you’re not locked up inside your house. But if you took precautions, washed your hands, social distanced and wore a mask, well...what’s the real added risk? Actually, traveling as you did was extremely irresponsible wasn’t it?

I agree that 4 weeks is not enough time. To support any narrative. We need much more data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:39 PM
 
926 posts, read 340,246 times
Reputation: 1226
Georgia Budget Proposals Would Cut Workers, Reduce Services

https://www.wabe.org/georgia-budget-...duce-services/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 02:44 PM
 
9,984 posts, read 5,096,902 times
Reputation: 9658
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrarctic View Post
When are you going to reopen then? I think everyone can agree that it isn't going to be an instantaneous process. You could shelter-in-place until August 1 but that doesn't mean that come August 1 everyone is going to rush out as if nothing happened. You need to do it slowly so you can see how things go.

I'm essential and it's real easy for me to tell you to stay home. But I understand the very frightening concerns that many people have right now about how they are going to support themselves and their families going forward. If you told me my options were take a chance on getting it, then taking a 1.5% chance of dying from it or take a 100% chance that I'm going to be broke then I'll take my chances with the virus.

Unless you are volunteering to pay someone's bills then you can't just sit from home and tell them not to worry about it.
As metro NYC starts to reopen we can compare and contrast. But they haven’t done so yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 03:52 PM
 
113 posts, read 31,351 times
Reputation: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by markjames68 View Post
As metro NYC starts to reopen we can compare and contrast. But they haven’t done so yet.
Atlanta isn’t metro NYC. There is no reason to compare the two. One has 8 million residents in the city alone trying to get on an island and one has 500,000.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2020, 04:06 PM
 
9,984 posts, read 5,096,902 times
Reputation: 9658
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrarctic View Post
Atlanta isn’t metro NYC. There is no reason to compare the two. One has 8 million residents in the city alone trying to get on an island and one has 500,000.
But that’s the comparison being made here....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top