61 New COVID-19 Cases and 2 Deaths

The blame lies with the people, wherever they are, that don't adhere to the masking and distancing guidelines. It's really simple.

VOICE - although i agree completely about the SB needing to tailor its own plan, the blame for high numbers in IV rests SOLELY on the individuals who are out partying without masks and not social distancing. Regardless of the tiers or anything else, they should know better than to ignore a global pandemic. Their actions not only cause our kids to be stuck at home longer (since the districts are relying on arbitrary color tiers), but in the bigger picture, they are putting the at-risk people in their community in jeopardy. Remember, IV is not 100% partying students. Lots of families and elderly live and work there.

If any those students are around families and the elderly they should be wearing masks (because they work right?) and social distancing from them. I know for a fact those families and elderly aren't strolling DP on a Saturday night. Covid spreading amongst the young and healthy, who get it and just require rest at home, is a good thing. As an effective vaccine is far from certain, the more young and healthy get it now, the more they'll serve as rood blocks to future outbreaks. Don't give me these old people might catch it because they should be isolating themselves right? (unless they choose to accept the risks and live their life) nor any of this reinfection is possible because that is a big IF and very rare; prior scientific evidence shows much greater odds of having some lasting immunity than quickly developing an effective vaccine. What so many are forgetting is living with these governmental restrictions until there is a vaccine is flat our wrong and not a viable option (by all means people can choose on their own to stay isolated until there is vaccine but that should never be a government mandate).

VOICE - again, why is this so difficult for you? Wait, you've never been in Isla Vista, have you? See, there's stores and businesses there too. People work in those stores and have other businesses (hundreds actually) where they may interact with potentially infected students unknowingly. That's how this works. Again, it's not only students who live and work there. The students are out partying, catching the virus and spreading it to all those they contact. Are you suggesting ALL those who might interact with people from IV should be on lockdown? Shut down ALL businesses in IV? And no, don't give me the whole "only old and at risk people should lockdown." Remember, some of those people have businesses too - should they suffer just so young people can run around mask-less partying and spreading the pandemic?

EVERYONE should be wearing masks when they can't distance properly. Putting the onus solely on the elderly and at-risk is shortsighted and irresponsible.

VOICE: First, as far as young and healthy people go, CV is not always a walk in the park. In a recent study from JAMA (see reference below), using a very large sample set from across the nation, 5% of young people end up hospitalized. IV has a population of around 20,000, so that's 1000 beds required. The county has about 700 total beds, half of which are currently occupied. Of these young hospitalized patients, 21% required the ICU, 10% needed ventilation, and 2.7% died. We have between 99 and 150 ICU beds, and between 106 and 148 ventilators. You can do that math on that to see if SB County can handle this, but I assure you it can not. Recognize that IV has the potential to be a powder keg. Second, as far as herd immunity, I'm all for it. The main problem is that we don't have nearly enough positive cases to get close to the theoretical lower limit, even if all the kids go wild and catch this. The combined population of Gen-Z and Millennials is 169 million, and out of 330 million they are only 51%. The lower limit for HIT is 60%. Another problem is that no one knows how long immunity lasts, or how quickly viral epitopes mutate. A potential vaccines suffers from the exact same immunological concerns---namely you may need boosters and the virus may end up evading the antibodies by changing the epitope.

Reference:
Jonathan W. Cunningham, MD, "Clinical Outcomes in Young US Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19", JAMA Internal Medicine, September 9, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5313

Instead of a fringe alternative health advocate, why not read from a reliable, research based source. While people wearing masks can catch COVID-19, it appears that the viral load is greatly reduced for the patients and their prognosis is better. https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp2026913?articleTools=true&fbclid=IwAR0-W8zZzTnsQj1E_bM6cnpiWv-ibE-ZKCELGwAXAmN8rYl9ZnLGlzL7r5s

The CDC is not a fringe alternative health advocate: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6936a5.htm

8:59 - The article you linked to presents a hypothesis. It says that universal face masking MIGHT reduce the severity of disease. It might not. The article concludes by saying “to test our hypothesis...” and describes the additional work that would be required to test their hypothesis that masks reduce the severity of infection. Since this article does nothing more than explore a hypothetical possibility, I don’t think relying on it as a basis for public health policy would be justifiable.

Since almost anything about this new virus is a hypothesis, let's not do even obvious things that might help.

12:20, if we are going to insist on compulsory mask wearing policies, then we should say these policies are “hypothetical possibility based” and not “science based.” Until the necessary studies are completed to verify a hypothesis, it remains hypothetical. Many scientists hypothesize that mask wearing increases transmission of the virus due to improper mask use. In addition, if a mask absorbs virus particles as intended, exhaling through the mask blows these accumulated particles all over the place, increasing virus transmission. Kind of like running your vacuum cleaner in reverse, what would happen to all that dust caught on the filter? Of course, additional research would be required to confirm this hypothesis.

Take everything you read on mercola with a chunk of salt.

At this point, anyone who thinks that masks are not a vital part of controlling this pandemic is either a complete fool or a propagandist for an even bigger fool.

Shame, Try reading the original CDC article, not the Mercola analysis. The CDC article says 70% of both the control and infected group reported wearing face masks most or all the time IN PUBLIC--not in private settings. 42% of those who were infected had close contact with other people (mostly family members) as opposed to only 14% of those who didn't get sick. Close contact, family members, no mask. People who had been to restaurants, bars or cafes were twice as likely to be infected. No masks while eating or drinking.... What the article was pointing to is that venues where masks are not warn are more risky for people. And this article was from July, just reprinted to correct an email error. Also very limited, only 314 people ended up being in the study, and mask usage self-reported. Three months old; there is more evidence now that masks are the best protection.

Masks policies are "science based". I've already posted numerous peer-reviewed articles on this. The short answer is they are only about 90-95% effective, which is why over 500 of our local health care workers tested positive for COVID despite wearing PPE. Masks lower the risk, but do not eliminate it.

Wearing a mask does not protect you against contracting the virus; it protects others from being infected by you.

When worn AND used appropriately, it does reduce transmission in a population. What all the studies that support mask use don't take into account, is that very few adults and nearly all children don't use masks appropriately. I believe as a result of the mask misuse we'll see that they end up increasing transmission in a population, specifically to those wearing a mask (you touch something, then your mask, you've potentially put the virus on a filter in front of your nose you'll then be inhaling through for the rest of the day). Thus the CDC cited report showing 70% of the covid patients in the study "always" wore a mask, another 15% "often" wore a mask.

Whatever we're doing is working! Quick, let's stop doing it!

3% fatality rate on average, higher for people over 60. Quick, list the 3 people out of the 100 you know that you would like to die. And then send them a fat check for their medical care so I don't have to pay for it.

Seems like PitMix is, well, closer to the truth than some of our more prolix protagonists for letting the virus spread.

The case fatality ratios vary by country (data from Johns Hopkins):
Highest is Mexico at 10%
USA is 2.6%
Lowest is Czechia at 0.9 %

The CDC also gets 2.6% for the US case fatality ratio.

Fatality to infected ratio is not a valid number because of the limits on testing.

With such a large number of asymptomatic people (up to several times the number of people who received positive tests) infection fatality rate not case fatality rate is the metric you should be looking at.

We don't know how many people are infected, because of limits on testing, so you can only compute the case fatality ratio at this point. Even asymptomatic people test positive, and become cases used in that computation. Once again, you fail to understand the situation.

I fully understand the situation, thank you for making sure. The CDC and WHO have a good handle on the estimated number of total infections.

No... that’s just simply not true and not what the cdc says (is that you Pitmix going anonymous???). As per the cdc

“As of September 2020, the United States had similar COVID-19 mortality rates (60.3 per 100,000) as other high mortality countries”

Again, the scientific consensus is .6%... which is a huge number !!! But it’s not pitmix’s 3% or pitmix’s anonymous accounts 2.6%. USE THE HONEST AND REAL NUMBERS!!! It’s absolutely maddening to talk with the Covid deniers who say it’s the flu... but it’s just as maddening to deal with the crazies on the other side who just use wildly inflated numbers on purpose. COVID IS MUCH WORSE THAN THE FLU!!! The flu has a fatality rate of .1%... but stop with the BS of 3%... that’s just obvious and ridiculous lying.

You're not looking at the case fatality ratio. You're looking at deaths per 100,000 population.

Deaths per 100,000 tells you more about how widespread it is than how deadly it is, since most people are uninfected at this point.

We know that quite a few people that are infected are never tested.. the asymptotic 95%. As such, to take the total number and divide by deaths is silly. Using that method I can Make all kinds of dumb anecdotal arguments or points because it’s completely ignoring actual factual reality. Numbers matter... not perhaps to Pitmix... but to actual people that like the Edhat but get annoyed with the constant distortion of reality. Covid is real and scary... exaggerations and lies though are contemptible and should be called out

And the number you are using is more imaginary than most with regard to mortality, especially since the percent of the population that has been infected is small, and since not everyone has been tested, you have to guess how many that is. To reduce your argument to its essentials: At a given time, if a disease X infects 5 people and kills them all, in a country of 100,000 people, you would give the number 5/100,000, or 0.005% for your mortality measure. Yet everyone who gets X dies. Seems a bit silly, doesn't it? Case fatality for X would be the correct 100%.

We’re at 9 million confirmed cases and 230k deaths. Everyone knows and agrees that quite a few people that have/had it were never tested. As such, the cdc and all scientific bodies at this point are putting the fatality rate at between .55% and .65%. Obviously this includes all people, so if you are 85 then that 3% number is probably right... an of you are 5 years old it’s more like .00005%. This tracks with all other countries. Again... it’s a crappy sickness that one shouldn’t take lightly... wear a mask!!! But stop using fake numbers to inflate it... that does a disservice to all. We are in a real pandemic... and it’s scary... lying to scare people further is wrong...

Amazing the VOR and DM want to contest the numbers. CDC website says 227000 deaths, 8.85M cases. That's 2.56%, down from about 2.7% last time I did the calc. This is a pretty simple calc using official numbers. If you don't want to accept the facts, I guess that is your right. Doesn't make sense to me, but people have died to protect your right to believe whatever you want.

GO TO The CDC WEBSITE! It says the current estimate fatality rate is .6%!! This is because, unlike Pitmix, it can use logic beyond that of a 6 year old. The CDC, the WHO and all other scientific boards understand that not everyone has been tested. So to take just the number of positives and divide by death, is... well it’s dumb... it doesn’t tell you much. It’s like catching two fishing he ocean and since one is a halibut, saying 1/2 the fish in the ocean are Halibut. This is especially true in America as we completely bungled the Testing. So we know exponentially more people had/have it. I think you realize that too but you are all in on your “twist the numbers” for effect persona that you can’t stop yourself. But it’s dumb and wrong, and it lends all your posts as at best questionable and at worst as intentional misinformation. The sickness is real... wear a mask and let’s hope the next administration can get a handle on testing so we don’t lose .6% of too much more of our population...

Asymptomatics are not 95%, or we'd have herd immunity by now. Also, they've done random sampling of healthy individuals and do not see this 95%. Lastly, SB County asymptomatics are only at 10% right now.

DM, I notice you never post a link to your very low numbers. Here is a direct quote from the CDC website "Since the week ending September 26 (MMWR week 39), overall weekly hospitalization rates have increased, driven primarily by an increase in rates among adults aged 50 years and older. Based on death certificate data, the percentage of deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza, or COVID-19 (PIC) for week 42 was 7.6% and, while declining, remains above the epidemic threshold. Hospitalization rates and PIC mortality for the most recent weeks are anticipated to increase as additional data are reported. www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/index.html But I bet you don't believe them either.

Links Links Links for the poet Pitmix:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2020/09/26/what-is-the-death-rate-for-covid-19-coronavirus-what-this-study-found/#3e3870de5c46

Via Forbes: The calculated IFR increased with age. It was 0.01 percent for those 12 to 40 years old, 0.12 percent for those 40 to 59 years old, and 1.71 percent for those 60 years and older. Men had a higher IFR than women (0.28 percent versus 0.21 percent).

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/estimating-mortality-from-covid-19

Via the lesser of the two WHO's (can't speak or quote Roger Daltrey's findings at this point) - Serological testing of a representative random sample of the population to detect evidence of exposure to a pathogen is an important method to estimate the true number of infected individuals [7,8,9]. Many such serological surveys are currently being undertaken worldwide [10], and some have thus far suggested substantial under-ascertainment of cases, with estimates of IFR converging at approximately 0.5 - 1%

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/06/donald-trump/donald-trumps-false-claim-covid-19-less-deadly-flu/

Via the CDC (ok via PolitiFACT...but they are quoting the CDC). the infection death rate for COVID-19 is about 0.7%. That’s in the ballpark of other estimates, and would make the coronavirus more than 10 times more deadly than the flu. U.S. COVID-19 mortality by age

Estimated infection fatality rates

Chart
Age Rate
0-19 0.003%
20-49 0.02%
50-69 0.5%
70+ 5.4%

DM, did you even read the Forbes link? More caveats than a pre-nup, and they are basing most of their conclusions on Indiana data from April . (Note to self, stop interacting with people that post links that don't support their arguments. ) . I know you love to say IFR but I don't see how you can put any stock in those numbers as the number of asymptomatic infections are just wild a$$ guesses (WAGs). They sample a few people, and extrapolate out to the entire population. WAG.

What about the cdc’s .7%? Did you not like that link so just ignore it... pretend like it didn’t happen? CDC... Are they fringe or crazy or can we trust that...?

You were anti CDC on your last post... common Pitmix... at least be consistent in your misinformation... err wait that might defeat some of your purpose..

Yes your right, every single Covid positive person has been tested and accounted for. That just holds to reason... I mean obviously...

227000 people dead. 8.2M infected (CFR). 2.6% fatality rate. Data from Oct 27, not April like DM's link. Cannot find any reliable data on DM's beloved IFR numbers or the death undercount. Probably both factors cancel each other out.

DM - all of your points in this thread track and have been completely logical. Not sure why anyone would want to lie/embellish in order to make things seem worse than they are. Nobody here is denying covid...