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.
Today is 8 days since our youngest daughter tested positive for Covid while we were on a ski trip to Utah with her and her sister. All four of us are fully vaccinated and had our boosters the weekend after Thanksgiving. Our daughter felt bad for a couple of days and has recovered very quickly. None of us have had any symptoms. We rode in a car with the Covid positive daughter for 12 hours two days prior to her symptoms and testing positive. At this point we think the vaccines and booster are doing their job.
The 3 people I know with Covid recovered quickly as well. They missed having Christmas with family though but already feel so much better. The oldest one about 50 is still a little tired, but that's about it.
Omicron now accounts for 3/4 of covid cases in the US, which seems like a good news, ie, it seems to have pushed out the far deadlier delta. From everything I have read so far (South Africa, UK, US), omicron covid seems to cause lower incidence of serious illness than an ordinary flu virus, with less mortality than ordinary flu, and mostly negligible symptoms in vaccinated folks. Plus, the number of cases has just dropped dramatically in South Africa, suggesting that herd immunity is rapidly achievable against omicron, without too much hospitalization and death (again, per capita figures for hospitalization and death seem to be lower than in an average flu season, and very close to zero among vaccinated people).
You may remember that I pointed out that the 3/4 number above was from a CDC model, not actual data. The purpose of the model was to account for the lag in reporting sequence data, one of several weeks. Turns out the model was, ahem, a bit aggressive. Reported today:
Quote:
Dec 28 (Reuters) - The Omicron variant was estimated to be 58.6% of the coronavirus variants circulating in the United States as of Dec. 25, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on Tuesday.
The agency also revised down the Omicron proportion of cases for the week ending Dec. 18 to 22% from 73%, citing additional data and the rapid spread of the variant that in part caused the discrepancy.
(my bold)
A good reminder that a number from a model is not data!
You may remember that I pointed out that the 3/4 number above was from a CDC model, not actual data. The purpose of the model was to account for the lag in reporting sequence data, one of several weeks. Turns out the model was, ahem, a bit aggressive. Reported today:
(my bold)
A good reminder that a number from a model is not data!
Medical publications do not report that type of data, but Reuters (a rather reputable news agency) reported on Dec 19 that omicron accounted for 73% of covid cases in the US. You copied and pasted Reuters subsequently saying that the discrepancy in reporting was caused by additional data and the rapid spread of the variant (ie, Reuters does not say that they initially reported a model. They did not report it as a CDC model. I don't know from where they obtained the data, presumably there is a national registry). Okay, so omicron does not account for 3/4 but for 59% of covid in the US right now. What I said still stands: omicron seems to be pushing out delta, because the first omicron case in the US was reported on Dec 1 in California, and less than a month later it accounts for almost 60% of cases nationwide. That to me indicates rapid replacement of other covid variants in the US by omicron. If it were 73% of cases, it would have been more rapid, but 59% of cases in the US only 25 days after the first case is rapid enough.
Medical publications do not report that type of data, but Reuters (a rather reputable news agency) reported on Dec 19 that omicron accounted for 73% of covid cases in the US. You copied and pasted Reuters subsequently saying that the discrepancy in reporting was caused by additional data and the rapid spread of the variant (ie, Reuters does not say that they initially reported a model. They did not report it as a CDC model. I don't know from where they obtained the data, presumably there is a national registry). Okay, so omicron does not account for 3/4 but for 59% of covid in the US right now. What I said still stands: omicron seems to be pushing out delta, because the first omicron case in the US was reported on Dec 1 in California, and less than a month later it accounts for almost 60% of cases nationwide. That to me indicates rapid replacement of other covid variants in the US by omicron. If it were 73% of cases, it would have been more rapid, but 59% of cases in the US only 25 days after the first case is rapid enough.
And this is precisely the problem. Many news agencies, responsible or not, took a number put out by CDC as data even though it was not. It wasn't even an estimate. It was a projection (i.e. from a mathematical model).
My beef from the start of the pandemic has been the poor quality reporting by popular media, so much so that I've stopped commenting on most of it because I don't want to spend every day commenting. But this one was so egregious, especially with the follow-on correction, that it bears noting.
Yes, omicron is taking over quickly. So what's novel about that? Delta did the same, and another before that. Just be wary of what you read, even in reputable sources, especially if it has any whiff of novelty.
And this is precisely the problem. Many news agencies, responsible or not, took a number put out by CDC as data even though it was not. It wasn't even an estimate. It was a projection (i.e. from a mathematical model).
My beef from the start of the pandemic has been the poor quality reporting by popular media, so much so that I've stopped commenting on most of it because I don't want to spend every day commenting. But this one was so egregious, especially with the follow-on correction, that it bears noting.
Yes, omicron is taking over quickly. So what's novel about that? Delta did the same, and another before that. Just be wary of what you read, even in reputable sources, especially if it has any whiff of novelty.
Reuters is a good agency (I know a journalist who works for them), and I don't know what CDC presented to them. What is of interest about omicron taking over quickly is that it tends to cause a milder disease. When delta cases spiked, hospitalizations and deaths spiked too. That is not the case with omicron - not so far, and hopefully (based on South Africa) not in the future either. Yes, omicron can still occasionally kill, but it appears less often so than flu. So, my point is that the rapid displacement of delta by omicron could be good - more herd immunity (which could finally lead to the end of the epidemic) with less of serious morbidity and death.
Reuters is a good agency (I know a journalist who works for them), and I don't know what CDC presented to them. What is of interest about omicron taking over quickly is that it tends to cause a milder disease. When delta cases spiked, hospitalizations and deaths spiked too. That is not the case with omicron - not so far, and hopefully (based on South Africa) not in the future either. Yes, omicron can still occasionally kill, but it appears less often so than flu.
I keep hearing that hospitalizations and deaths are not spiking, yet I am also hearing that in the MD/VA area, hospitalizations are spiking, ICUs are getting stressed and in Maryland at least, the hospitals are on some emergency alert threshold. I have not seen the deaths spike, fortunately, but I think the hospitals are getting crushed.
I keep hearing that hospitalizations and deaths are not spiking, yet I am also hearing that in the MD/VA area, hospitalizations are spiking, ICUs are getting stressed and in Maryland at least, the hospitals are on some emergency alert threshold. I have not seen the deaths spike, fortunately, but I think the hospitals are getting crushed.
I briefly checked the occupancy of the ICU and hospital beds. It's not looking good in the non-metropolitan counties. We're talking 100-111% occupied ICU beds in at least four counties, and, it's a cluster ---- for the non-ICU beds, as well. You can probably guess which counties are getting crushed.
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.
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.
