Coronavirus news

[D. Engebretson]

If your neighbor was illegally or unsafely burning leaves in his backyard (like we all used to do in the 50s when it was legal), wouldn’t you report it?
School teachers are required to report it if a child appears to have been abused.
We all have a role to play in keeping our neighbors and the public safe.

Yet even here the government, in a potentially serious situation, has to make a judgement call on what they can or will prosecute.  Sometimes the DA will not prosecute, even when law enforcement knows there is a case of abuse.

BTW, many in the rural areas still burn such things 'in their backyard.'  Some times they are reported and we run, lights and sirens, to the residence as we did the other night, only to find a fairly safe brush pile. 

[John_Hannah]

As an independent voter I will observe that political issues must be very hard to find if it comes down to being anti-mask.   

Peace, JOHN

[D. Engebretson]

Pastor Engebretson writes:
We don't need police going around to enforce that which we should be able to make responsible personal and private judgements about.
I comment:
You cannot possibly be that naïve. We should be able to make responsible decisions about how fast to drive in a school zone. But we’re not.We should be able to make responsible decisions, private decisions, about the safety equipment on our cars and inspection of our automobiles. But we’re not.
Foolish people will say: “oh, it’s all right to have the cousins and their significant others and some random friends fill the house on Thanksgiving day.” No, it isn’t. Not when you don’t know where those random people came from Or where they will go after they leave.

I'm not so naïve as to think we shouldn't have regulations on many things.  Remember, I'm an emergency responder in my spare time.  I get that. We do building inspections every year.  My own church is inspected by my department. My point has been about the extent of enforcement.  Resources are limited.  Not sure about your area, but we're stretched a bit thin out here.  Choices are made about what regulations, orders and laws to enforce, and which they will not.  Sometimes we have to 'grade' them on the level of risk to the overall community.  Policing private thanksgiving dinners simply is not a priority for many law enforcement agencies, and they are saying so publicly. 

[Randy Bosch]

Got it, Randy Bosch. They were old, close to death anyway. They were sick, that probably would have killed them anyway.
But others are sick and dying too. You want to write them off also?
I am at times inclined to say of someone who won’t take precautions, “OK, they will get sick and maybe die and then the world will have one less fool in it.” But I won’t say that.

You obviously didn't get it.  You see a post from anyone who has a slightly different viewpoint than the one you have determined to require, and in knee jerk fashion suspect the worst construction and intent.  The new directives from Minnesota didn't write off anyone, nor do I.  I applaud these common sense directives (not everything the Governor says or does, or how he does it, but in the instance.) 

I have family in Minnesota, and desire that they be aware of current conditions and the reasonable attempts being made to communicate those conditions as well as methods of mitigating negative effect on them and on you, as well.  I have shared this information with those among them who will best communicate with the others and their communities, in case they did not get the news.

The Governor and Health Department's direction to citizens was common sense based upon the ongoing situation in the State.  Their direction applies to all citizens regardless of age, as an actual reading of the linked and quoted information proves.

I am at times inclined to conclude that some who won't pay attention or have a myopic outlook are nihilists.  But I won't say that.  I'm not sure why you appear to despise your Governor, State Health Department, and fellow Minnesotans so much, but the best advise is to stay up on the news and pay attention to their ministrations.

[Charles Austin]

I support our governor’s actions.

[peterm]

Charles Austin wrote:
We just cannot avoid the shocking idiocies.
The governor of Michigan announced plans to deal with the soaring infection rates.
They include some shutdowns of restaurants, casinos and theaters.

I respond:
Rev. Austin, what isn’t noted is that the fatality rates are plummeting. Here in Washington state the fatality from this virus was over 4. Now, as the virus has moved into the general, healthier population, the fatality rate is 1.89, which means that it has been even lower these past few months.

Yes, we should protect the most vulnerable, and we should encourage safe practices. Moreover, in our corporate gatherings we should take into account that many parishioners are in vulnerable categories. However, we should also recognize that for the vast majority of people this virus will come and go without causing death or long- term, debilitating consequences and let people engage in their activities.

Jeff

An additional part of the challenge Jeff, at least in our area, has nothing to do with the fatality rate which is indeed sinking Thanks be to God, but the infection rate and rise in hospitalizations.  Whether or not death results, our hospitals , ALL of them within 100 mile, are filling at an alarming rate with COVID patients.  So, regardless of the death rate, the toll on our care systems here in rural Iowa and the people who staff them, is staggering.  This also needs to be considered when talking about things like mask mandates and calls to limit gatherings etc.

[James S. Rustad]

When do the benefits of a death outweigh the loss?

Or, to look at the situation we're in right now; when the does the loss of jobs and businesses or our personal freedom and desires outweigh the loss of lives?

Now you are asking the right questions.

When it comes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I have read interviews with Japanese who believed that the atomic bombings cost fewer Japanese lives than an invasion would have.

As for the current pandemic, each individual has an amount of risk that they are willing to accept.  People who are twenty are at low risk and are much more likely to accept the risk of going to work and other places.  People age sixty are less likely to accept that risk and will avoid going outside their homes when possible.  As the risk rises steeply with age after age sixty, older people are even less likely to go outside their homes.

Unlike some, I don't think we should impose restrictions appropriate to those in their eighties on those in their twenties.

Results Our analysis finds a exponential relationship between age and IFR for COVID-19. The estimated age-specific IFR is very low for children and younger adults (e.g., 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at age 25) but increases progressively to 0.4% at age 55, 1.4% at age 65, 4.6% at age 75, and 15% at age 85. Moreover, our results indicate that about 90% of the variation in population IFR across geographical locations reflects differences in the age composition of the population and the extent to which relatively vulnerable age groups were exposed to the virus.

There are several observations worth noting. First, as we have long known, people of college age and younger are very unlikely to die. The 5-9 and 10-14 age groups are the least likely to die. (Note that an IFR of 0.001% means that one person in that age group will die for every 100,000 infected.) The 0-4 and 15-19 age groups are three times likelier to die than the 5-9 and 10-14 age groups, but the risk is still exceedingly small at 0.003% (or 3 deaths for every 100,000 infected).

Second, the IFR slowly increases with age through the 60-64 age group. But after that, beginning with the 65-69 age group, the IFR rises sharply. This group has an overall IFR just over 1% (or 1 death for every 100 infected). That's a fairly major risk of death. (The red line in the chart marks where the "1% threshold" is crossed.) The IFR then grows substantially and becomes quite scary for people in their 70s and older. People in the 75-79 age group have more than a 3% chance of dying if infected with coronavirus, while people aged 80 and over have more than an 8% chance of dying. That's roughly the same chance as rolling a four with two dice.

Third, the virus discriminates. Beginning with the 20-24 age group, men are about twice as likely to die as women from COVID. This pattern remains in each age group through 80+.

[James S. Rustad]

Charles Austin wrote:
We just cannot avoid the shocking idiocies.
The governor of Michigan announced plans to deal with the soaring infection rates.
They include some shutdowns of restaurants, casinos and theaters.

I respond:
Rev. Austin, what isn’t noted is that the fatality rates are plummeting. Here in Washington state the fatality from this virus was over 4. Now, as the virus has moved into the general, healthier population, the fatality rate is 1.89, which means that it has been even lower these past few months.

Yes, we should protect the most vulnerable, and we should encourage safe practices. Moreover, in our corporate gatherings we should take into account that many parishioners are in vulnerable categories. However, we should also recognize that for the vast majority of people this virus will come and go without causing death or long- term, debilitating consequences and let people engage in their activities.

Jeff

An additional part of the challenge Jeff, at least in our area, has nothing to do with the fatality rate which is indeed sinking Thanks be to God, but the infection rate and rise in hospitalizations.  Whether or not death results, our hospitals , ALL of them within 100 mile, are filling at an alarming rate with COVID patients.  So, regardless of the death rate, the toll on our care systems here in rural Iowa and the people who staff them, is staggering.  This also needs to be considered when talking about things like mask mandates and calls to limit gatherings etc.

Wisconsin DHS reports the State Fair Park Alternate Care Facility patient population is 17 as of 11:00 am today.  The facility has currently has 530 patient spaces and could expand to 754 patient spaces.  The first patient was admitted in October.  Note that this is an overflow facility, so it is clear that some Wisconsin hospitals are full enough to transfer patients to it.  It's not clear how many hospitals are at or near capacity as the number of COVID cases varies by locality.
https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/covid-19/alternate-care-facility.htm

[jebutler]

If your neighbor was illegally or unsafely burning leaves in his backyard (like we all used to do in the 50s when it was legal), wouldn’t you report it?

My neighbor did illegally burn his leaves. No I didn't report them.

Another neighbor had a party with more than the 'legal' amount. I didn't report them either.

Another neighbor had a party with loud music that was still loud past 11:00. I didn't report them.

Are you sure your name isn't Karen?

--
By the way, how would I know if my neighbor is doing something illegal? Do spend your time looking in their windows or something? How strong are your binoculars?

School teachers are required to report it if a child appears to have been abused.

You're seriously equating leaf burning with child abuse? Wow.

[MaddogLutheran]

I've been stewing on this, decided to post it...

Working from home, I typically have the TV on to CNBC (muted).  Yesterday afternoon, they carried the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris press conference.  I didn't unmute the TV, but the chyron text at one point said "150K might die if transition delayed" (words to that effect).

That's just preposterous, and exactly the problem with our political atmosphere and news reporting.  Where does that number come from?  I'm so tired of being lectured by people about "science" and yet these kind of advantageous political talking points get repeated uncritically.  I'm left wondering how anyone is alive to be killed by the virus, after Republican/Trump net neutrality repeal and tax cuts killed millions.

If anyone continues to wonder why people don't care about Trump's brazen lying...this is it.  I think his lies and Biden's lies are equally offensive.  Yet each tribe will defend its own.

[Randy Bosch]

Setting the example for all of us, Governor Gavin Newsome of California, former Mayor of San Francisco who did so much to turn that City into the beautiful place it is today:

https://unherd.com/2020/11/the-great-lockdown-hypocrites/

Lying and bad acting are not the provenance of only Orange Man Bad and those who supported him.
It seems that the progressive royalty also has a code of its own, including oysters and lockdown hypocrisy.
Accountability applies to everyone equally regardless of politics.  It's long past time to quit playing political games with the health of the people, regardless of party affiliation.

[D. Engebretson]

An interesting article on the impact of the pandemic on the younger generations (25 and under), not just in this country but around the world. They may be taking the brunt of this crisis in the long run.  They say the mental health issues will outlast the physical.

https://www.ft.com/content/0dec0291-2f72-4ce9-bd9f-ae2356bd869e?utm_source=pocket-newtab
--Hard to find employment.
--Depression and anxiety.

But there are positives as well. As with any age group it's a mixed bag. 

[Brian Stoffregen]

I've been stewing on this, decided to post it...

Working from home, I typically have the TV on to CNBC (muted).  Yesterday afternoon, they carried the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris press conference.  I didn't unmute the TV, but the chyron text at one point said "150K might die if transition delayed" (words to that effect).

That's just preposterous, and exactly the problem with our political atmosphere and news reporting.  Where does that number come from?  I'm so tired of being lectured by people about "science" and yet these kind of advantageous political talking points get repeated uncritically.  I'm left wondering how anyone is alive to be killed by the virus, after Republican/Trump net neutrality repeal and tax cuts killed millions.

If anyone continues to wonder why people don't care about Trump's brazen lying...this is it.  I think his lies and Biden's lies are equally offensive.  Yet each tribe will defend its own.

Back on March 31, Drs. Fauci and Birx said that deaths could read 100,000 to 240,000 even with following guidelines, and much higher if people don't. What seemed like a huge number back then has proven to be true as we have reached 250,000 deaths from COVID-19.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/us/politics/coronavirus-death-toll-united-states.html


What evidence do you have that Biden is lying by stating that 150,000 might die? Playing a little with math: With about 60 days until January 20, 2021; if we averaged 2500 deaths/day until then, we have 150,000 deaths. There were days back in April when the death rate was more than 2500 deaths/day. Granted, the most deaths in a day we've had in November is about 1900, higher than any day since May 7; but the rate is going up. If there is a repeat of what happened in April, 150,000 deaths is possible. Should it happen, blaming them all on Trump's delay of the transition is far-fetched.


I believe both sides want to do everything possible to curb the spread of the virus and to get a safe vaccine out to the people as quick as possible. Why can't they be working together to achieve this?

[James S. Rustad]

I've been stewing on this, decided to post it...

Working from home, I typically have the TV on to CNBC (muted).  Yesterday afternoon, they carried the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris press conference.  I didn't unmute the TV, but the chyron text at one point said "150K might die if transition delayed" (words to that effect).

That's just preposterous, and exactly the problem with our political atmosphere and news reporting.  Where does that number come from?  I'm so tired of being lectured by people about "science" and yet these kind of advantageous political talking points get repeated uncritically.  I'm left wondering how anyone is alive to be killed by the virus, after Republican/Trump net neutrality repeal and tax cuts killed millions.

If anyone continues to wonder why people don't care about Trump's brazen lying...this is it.  I think his lies and Biden's lies are equally offensive.  Yet each tribe will defend its own.

Back on March 31, Drs. Fauci and Birx said that deaths could read 100,000 to 240,000 even with following guidelines, and much higher if people don't. What seemed like a huge number back then has proven to be true as we have reached 250,000 deaths from COVID-19.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/us/politics/coronavirus-death-toll-united-states.html

What evidence do you have that Biden is lying by stating that 150,000 might die? Playing a little with math: With about 60 days until January 20, 2021; if we averaged 2500 deaths/day until then, we have 150,000 deaths. There were days back in April when the death rate was more than 2500 deaths/day. Granted, the most deaths in a day we've had in November is about 1900, higher than any day since May 7; but the rate is going up. If there is a repeat of what happened in April, 150,000 deaths is possible. Should it happen, blaming them all on Trump's delay of the transition is far-fetched.

I believe both sides want to do everything possible to curb the spread of the virus and to get a safe vaccine out to the people as quick as possible. Why can't they be working together to achieve this?

There's just not that much that could change between now and January 20 that the president can affect.

The transition isn't going to change how the vaccine gets out to people.

The transition isn't going to change how states handle the pandemic.

So how could the transition cause 150,000 deaths as stated in the chyron?

But I note that you defended Biden just as MaddogLutheran predicted.

[jebutler]

What evidence do you have that Biden is lying by stating that 150,000 might die? Playing a little with math: With about 60 days until January 20, 2021; if we averaged 2500 deaths/day until then, we have 150,000 deaths. There were days back in April when the death rate was more than 2500 deaths/day. Granted, the most deaths in a day we've had in November is about 1900, higher than any day since May 7; but the rate is going up. If there is a repeat of what happened in April, 150,000 deaths is possible. Should it happen, blaming them all on Trump's delay of the transition is far-fetched.


I believe both sides want to do everything possible to curb the spread of the virus and to get a safe vaccine out to the people as quick as possible. Why can't they be working together to achieve this?

The problem, Brian, not his guesstimate that 150,000 more might die between now and his inauguration. It's his assertion that will happen "if transition is delayed." As you note, " blaming them all on Trump's delay of the transition is far-fetched." I would argue that blaming *any* of them on a delayed transition would be far fetched.

As for "working together"--President-elect Biden is just that: president-elect. He has no authority to do anything. None of his staff has been nominated and/or confirmed by the Senate. Like it or not, this is Trump's game until January 20.

Should Trump keep the Biden camp informed as to their decisions? Yes. But that's all they should do.