Covid virus in phoenix (2014, charge, weather)

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

There have been various studies on this, but the above link suggests lower humidity contributes to a rise in flu transmissions more than humid air does.

True. But the studies i read linked together low humidity and low temps called "dry cold". Still, HIGH temps degrade viruses. As in, +100F. At 130F for instance (easily obtainable on surfaces in AZ), a virus that normally can last 3 weeks will be killed inside of 15 minutes.

Here is the study on a coronavirus known as the common cold https://www.hindawi.com/journals/av/2011/734690/

The bottom line is that "hot (95+ degrees) and humid (90% relative humidity)" offer the best combo. Unfortunately, they didn't model desert temps. But we do know, transmission through fomites (indirect contact) is reduced in very hot temps.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

True. But the studies i read linked together low humidity and low temps called "dry cold". Still, HIGH temps degrade viruses. As in, +100F. At 130F for instance (easily obtainable on surfaces in AZ), a virus that normally can last 3 weeks will be killed inside of 15 minutes.

Here is the study on a coronavirus known as the common cold https://www.hindawi.com/journals/av/2011/734690/

The bottom line is that "hot (95+ degrees) and humid (90% relative humidity)" offer the best combo. Unfortunately, they didn't model desert temps. But we do know, transmission through fomites (indirect contact) is reduced in very hot temps.

UV is probably a big factor. It's kryptonite for viruses. At this time of year we already have the right sun angle, cloudless skies and dry air to achieve strong UV values. Nobody does it better in the US.

What it boils down to though, is that all anyone who does not have to go to work needs to do to survive this is stay the F at home. Get food delivery or pick it up where they load it for you which is everywhere. In a couple weeks we can get in the pool if these temps keep up and sit in a chlorinated virus killing pond of water.

[Hal Roach]

They closed the pools here. They even closed the beaches in Phuket, but there is a concentration of cases there.

This shows how politically corrupt the WHO are. https://www.hongkongfp.com/2020/03/2...qfD3868gtsx0HQ

Taiwan may provide the best model for the war on the virus, yet they are not even allowed in the WHO...

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by autism360

What do you know about fauci, have you done any research on him? Anyone who in a few days can go from predicting is not being responsible and causing needless panic and just guessing. My prediction is this guy will hog the limelight and makeup crap as long as he can because he likes being on TV and being considered an expert.

IMO and most others, Fauci is a straight shooter. Hell, he may like the recognition and enjoy educating people. I would.

So let's discuss what he said:
From https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...caremongering/
" During a congressional hearing this week Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — and probably the most helpfully even-keeled government official during coronavirus outbreak — noted that that media tends to report on the higher end of ranges predicted by models. “Remember the model during the Ebola outbreak said you could have as many as a million,” he noted. “We didn’t have a million.” Two Americans died of Ebola."

Yep! ^^ He is instilling panic in all of us!

Next:
[i]"ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked Fauci on “This Week” about the New York Times report on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) worst-case projections. The CDC reportedly predicted 160 million to 214 million infections, 2.4 million to 21 million hospitalizations and 200,000 to 1.7 million deaths in the country.

Fauci responded that a model is “only as good as the assumptions you put into a model.”

I fully recognize you don't get promoted to the top of the food chain in any large organization without being somewhat political. It goes without saying Fauci doesn't want to throw the President OR WHO under the bus when they make bold predictions. So some of what he calculates in his head as wrong is by way of a gentle political correction. Smart people realize that's what has to happen in life. It's how you get things done!

So we are clear, the worst-case scenario models are 1 to 2M people that die in the USA. But it's a model with literally hundreds of variables via computer modeling. Fine-grained data like "are there masks, how many hospital beds, ICU units, population age, population health, what are the health risks, and the list goes on and on. A couple of the variables will have a massive swing on the numbers. One of which is the mortality rate that was almost certainly inaccurate early on. But if you let mother nature take its course, the mortality rate is going to be MUCH higher. As in, most people who land up in the hospital all at once could be screwed. It's why smart people all across the world were willing to lose trillions (with a T) and take away a lot of freedoms. Here is the skinny, if they avoid a massive death toll, people are going to be walking around talking trash about how everything was overblown. You know, the statistically-challenged. If I was in your shoes (age, health, etc), I'd hope that people are taking this seriously. So stop defaulting that you have a 1 percent of fatality. It's much higher. And WHEN the ER's are overwhelmed (sorry, UV and heat won't be enough) and if you land up in the hospital, the odds are not going to be 1%. I wish my odds were 1% because they aren't.

Luckily, I'm technical. I did well in statistics and I understand basic modeling concepts. It's also obvious that you didn't do so well in stats or you would be more flexible on what you read. And so we are clear, WHO tossed around numbers to get people's attention like "worse case". Rest assured it was done to be political. The goal here was to have people pay attention, it won't be worse case 1-2M or anything close because of what we have been doing by at least some social distancing in a combo of beefing up resources.

People with a balanced POV understand that you need to put any mortality number in a filter. To some level, WHO is helped with power and money by this pandemic. Therefore, I am looking gat their data with a level of skepticism which is healthy. Follow the money.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

IMO and most others, Fauci is a straight shooter. Hell, he may like the recognition and enjoy educating people. I would.

So let's discuss what he said:
From https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...caremongering/
" During a congressional hearing this week Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — and probably the most helpfully even-keeled government official during coronavirus outbreak — noted that that media tends to report on the higher end of ranges predicted by models. “Remember the model during the Ebola outbreak said you could have as many as a million,” he noted. “We didn’t have a million.” Two Americans died of Ebola."

Yep! ^^ He is instilling panic in all of us!

Next:
[i]"ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked Fauci on “This Week” about the New York Times report on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) worst-case projections. The CDC reportedly predicted 160 million to 214 million infections, 2.4 million to 21 million hospitalizations and 200,000 to 1.7 million deaths in the country.

Fauci responded that a model is “only as good as the assumptions you put into a model.”

I fully recognize you don't get promoted to the top of the food chain in any large organization without being somewhat political. It goes without saying Fauci doesn't want to throw the President OR WHO under the bus when they make bold predictions. So some of what he calculates in his head as wrong is by way of a gentle political correction. Smart people realize that's what has to happen in life. It's how you get things done!

So we are clear, the worst-case scenario models are 1 to 2M people that die in the USA. But it's a model with literally hundreds of variables via computer modeling. Fine-grained data like "are there masks, how many hospital beds, ICU units, population age, population health, what are the health risks, and the list goes on and on. A couple of the variables will have a massive swing on the numbers. One of which is the mortality rate that was almost certainly inaccurate early on. But if you let mother nature take its course, the mortality rate is going to be MUCH higher. As in, most people who land up in the hospital all at once could be screwed. It's why smart people all across the world were willing to lose trillions (with a T) and take away a lot of freedoms. Here is the skinny, if they avoid a massive death toll, people are going to be walking around talking trash about how everything was overblown. You know, the statistically-challenged. If I was in your shoes (age, health, etc), I'd hope that people are taking this seriously. So stop defaulting that you have a 1 percent of fatality. It's much higher. And WHEN the ER's are overwhelmed (sorry, UV and heat won't be enough) and if you land up in the hospital, the odds are not going to be 1%. I wish my odds were 1% because they aren't.

Luckily, I'm technical. I did well in statistics and I understand basic modeling concepts. It's also obvious that you didn't do so well in stats or you would be more flexible on what you read. And so we are clear, WHO tossed around numbers to get people's attention like "worse case". Rest assured it was done to be political. The goal here was to have people pay attention, it won't be worse case 1-2M or anything close because of what we have been doing by at least some social distancing in a combo of beefing up resources.

People with a balanced POV understand that you need to put any mortality number in a filter. To some level, WHO is helped with power and money by this pandemic. Therefore, I am looking gat their data with a level of skepticism which is healthy. Follow the money.

Ignoring all you said but the bolded , the models are clearly based on seasonality. They all reduce infections to near zero by early June which would not occur if the seasonality was being discounted in the model assumptions. How that plays out across the globe and across the US remains to be seen. Importantly, it is an assumption.

Anyway, let me repeat: you don't have to die from this or even get sick. There is a simple solution.

WARNING: Some will find the language offensive. If you think that might be you, then don't watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OogGCSovU3k

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Ponderosa

Ignoring all you said but the bolded , the models are clearly based on seasonality. They all reduce infections to near zero by early June which would not occur if the seasonality was being discounted in the model assumptions. How that plays out across the globe and across the US remains to be seen. Importantly, it is an assumption.

Yep, seasonality is another variable. As we all should realize by now, this virus is different. Type A and Type B flu as an example have billions of people with antibodies. Hence, 7%(ish) people a year get it and not 20-80% for the 1st year (depending on what you read). To me at least, it boils down to will the hospitals by 2x overloaded, 3x overloaded or 5x overloaded. Seasonality will play in "flatten the curve".

[autism360]

As of 3.31.2020 Arizona has 1,158 reported cases and 20 deaths from the Chinese covid virus

For the entire country there are
Confirmed cases
165,722
(Today: +3,915)
Deaths
3,175
(Today: +197)

[asufan]

Originally Posted by autism360

As of 3.31.2020 Arizona has 1,158 reported cases and 20 deaths from the Chinese covid virus

For the entire country there are
Confirmed cases
165,722
(Today: +3,915)
Deaths
3,175
(Today: +197)

You're a day behind again.

[autism360]

Originally Posted by asufan

You're a day behind again.

I am using https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng...state-by-state

if you have a more up to date source please share it with the rest of us otherwise please quit throwing stones

[asufan]

Originally Posted by autism360

I am using https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng...state-by-state

if you have a more up to date source please share it with the rest of us otherwise please quit throwing stones

I'm not throwing stones, settle down. I corrected your numbers yesterday with the numbers you just posted today. Go to AZ family.com and click on the Coronavirus updates article. It usually updates numbers between 9-9:30 am every day