Official BI apolitical COVID-19 Thread

94,486 Views | 980 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by bearister
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
China is currently administering a vaccine

Chinese officials are thinking that Donald Trump might approve a U.S. vaccine before the election," Yiwu He, the chief innovation officer at the University of Hong Kong, who has many years of experience in vaccine development in China, told me recently. "So their goal is to have a vaccine approved before that." He expects that China National Biotec Group, or C.N.B.G., a Beijing-based pharmaceutical company that is the country's largest vaccine manufacturer, will announce some level of approval for a coronavirus vaccine in October. A Beijing-based biotech investor told me that C.N.B.G., having neared the end of Phase III trials with two different versions of its vaccine, is currently filing application materials with China's regulatory commission. In normal times, approval could take between six months and a year, but people in the industry told me that the process will be accelerated because of pressures related to both the pandemic and politics. (C.N.B.G. did not respond to a request for comment.)

In the meantime, many Chinese citizens haven't waited for full approval before getting injected. The state press has reported that hundreds of thousands have already been vaccinated by C.N.B.G., under an emergency-use approval granted by the government. The volunteers include many government officials and pharmaceutical executives who received the two-stage vaccination.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Coronavirus cases rise in 25 states, led by New Mexico and North Carolina - Axios


https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-cases-increasing-america-states-texas-d87186d3-ce1a-415a-b3ac-bec8a8e09df3.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
smh
How long do you want to ignore this user?
> That broad, nationwide increase was offset by continued progress in pockets of the southern U.S. Only eight states saw their new infections decline over the past week, but that group includes the populous states of Arizona, Florida, Texas and Virginia.




muting ~250 handles, turnaround is fair play
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So there are some hospitals trying to get a feel for which employees are willing to take the COVID vaccine because they want to try it on healthcare workers first. Let's just say not many are willing to take the vaccine given the bullshyte Captain Catastrophe and his Minions have tried concerning the trials and approval of the vaccine. Most people I have talked to are not willing to be crash test dummies.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's mid October and COVID isn't showing any signs of giving in. Hopefully California can stay strong because it's not looking good to the East.


bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The coronavirus pandemic is destroying energy efficiency - Axios


https://www.axios.com/pandemic-energy-efficiency-004eaa80-0fc6-4ca7-a212-3c248125f148.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Schools haven't become COVID hotspots - Axios


https://www.axios.com/k-12-reopening-coronavirus-cases-data-6c39ea76-21f5-422a-b99d-20e3914002c4.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?

" Now, in the most updated count to date, researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have found that nearly 300,000 more people in the United States died from late January to early October this year compared the average number of people who died in recent years. Just two-thirds of those deaths were counted as Covid-19 fatalities, highlighting how the official U.S. death count now standing at about 220,000 is not fully inclusive.

To be exact, the researchers reported that 299,028 more people died from Jan. 26 to Oct. 3 this year than on average during the same stretch from 2015 to 2019. Excess deaths also occurred at higher rates among Latinx, Asian, American Indian, and Black people than among white people, mirroring the disparities in official U.S. Covid-19 death counts.

Most likely, the excess deaths account for some otherwise untallied Covid-19 deaths those who may have died without being tested or who died at home and whose deaths were not counted as caused by the coronavirus."

Amid Covid-19 pandemic, U.S. has seen 300,000 'excess deaths'


https://www.statnews.com/2020/10/20/cdc-data-excess-deaths-covid-19/
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Opinion | After the Pandemic, a Revolution in Education and Work Awaits - The New York Times


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/opinion/covid-education-work.html
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The approval process and the interference of Captain Catastrophe and his minions will make it difficult for people to trust a vaccine.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/early-takeaways-from-fdas-covid-19-vaccine-meeting/ar-BB1aiPnq?li=BBnb7Kz
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A study by Columbia on the United States' national response:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/new-columbia-study-blames-the-white-house-for-at-least-130000-avoidable-covid-deaths?scrolla=5eb6d68b7fedc32c19ef33b4
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How the instability of school reopenings is hurting students - Axios


https://www.axios.com/school-reopenings-instability-students-6bb7fb54-d055-46a6-a2e9-c24ded5b2ee3.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
smh
How long do you want to ignore this user?
5 nov.. /* restarting weeklong dead thread */
https://sfist.com/2020/11/05/bay-area-may-tell-inbound-travelers-to-quarantine-for-14-days
Quote:

Health officers in the nine Bay Area counties will be meeting Thursday to discuss possibly instituting a 14-day quarantine rule for all those traveling here from parts of the country that are experiencing surges in COVID-19 cases similar to one instituted in New York State.

San Francisco's COVID command center issued a statement Wednesday saying, "The Bay Area health directors have been communicating and working together since the onset of the pandemic, including coordination of the shelter in place announcement. During the course of these discussions, many policies and protocols are discussed, including upcoming travel during the holiday season."
.. .. ..
cal sport implications tbd.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Finally some good news on the COVID front. Hopefully the remaining trials prove this to be 90% or more effective for everyone and we can quickly mass produce and distribute this to the world. They are saying they could receive early authorization from the FDA within weeks so I am eager to see what the timeline is for mass innoculation.

Cal84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

Finally some good news on the COVID front. Hopefully the remaining trials prove this to be 90% or more effective for everyone and we can quickly mass produce and distribute this to the world. They are saying they could receive early authorization from the FDA within weeks so I am eager to see what the timeline is for mass innoculation.


Pfizer/BioNTech say they can manufacture 50 million doses by the end of 2020 and 1+ billion by the end of 2021. Now keep in mind that each patient requires two doses (three weeks apart). So it is unlikely that more than a million or so patients would have completed their two dose regime by the end of 2020 even if expedited approval is given by the end of Nov. It is possible for all those in the US who are willing to take the vaccine to be vaccinated by the end of 2021. If....

....the vaccine is approved. Keep in mind these are preliminary results. What we know is that the preliminary results include 94 patients who tested positive for COVID. Among that 94, if one assumes 86 were given a placebo and 8 were given the vaccine (to generate a ~90% efficacy), then the total test group is probably under 2,000. Half placebo and half vaccinated, with am ~8% infection ratio amongs the placebo group. To put that in perspective total Phase III test group size for these vaccines is targeted at 30-40k. So this is a preliminary result of probably about 5% of the test subjects.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

All other considerations being equal, I think Americans who have "behaved better" so far, in terms of personal mitigation efforts, should be able to get in line ahead of those who behaved worse.

How to know who's behaved better? Santa has been watching...
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Moderna reported results on their vaccine today and the are very good. They are reporting 94.5% effectiveness and no fancy freezer needed. Of the 15k who took the vaccine, only 11 got sick and none were serious. Of the 15k who got placebo, 90 got sick and 15 were serious. No significant side effects reported either.

This plus the news from Pfizer would lead one to believe that vaccines really are going to be safe and effective which is great news.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

Moderna reported results on their vaccine today and the are very good. They are reporting 94.5% effectiveness and no fancy freezer needed. Of the 15k who took the vaccine, only 11 got sick and none were serious. Of the 15k who got placebo, 90 got sick and 15 were serious. No significant side effects reported either.

This plus the news from Pfizer would lead one to believe that vaccines really are going to be safe and effective which is great news.
This is a total distortion of what actually happened:

1) 95 people in the total trial got covid. They unblinded the 95 and 5 got the actual vaccine and 90 were on the placebo, hence 94.5% effectiveness. The reason why it is only 95 is because is it very early data.

2) This effectiveness is taken at peak autobody level (~14 days after second dose). It is not known how long the vaccine will last.

3) 11 of the 95 had a serious illness. All were in the placebo group.

4) There have been a considerable amount (1000s) of adverse events related to vaccination. Many were of the grade 3 variety. However, none lasted more than a few days.

***

Despite all of the facts above, the vaccine is a success and should help us return back to normal. A better vaccine will likely be needed down the road as a booster.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks for the clarification oski003. I saw a report on TV this morning and apparently got the details wrong. Still good news, assuming we can roll out the vaccines in mass of course.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:


I see a big potential hornet's nest on this if people figure it out.

I saw this and as I track the numbers consistently, I was wondering what the hell happened to move Alameda to purple. Red wouldn't have been surprising, but purple?

Here is the issue. When they announced the new yellow, orange, red, purple rating system I noticed the criteria they added and thought "that might be a problem". There are 3 criteria. 1. Case positivity rate - clear, makes sense. New case rate - clear, makes sense. Health equity index - what the hell is that? Looked around. It is not easy to find an explanation for how that is measured. But basically it measures how much worse low socioeconomic people have it vs. high socioeconomic people. IMO, there is no way this metric should overturn what the actual case rates are showing. But, basically if your ratio of cases among the poor vs. rich is bad, even if your overall rates are good, you move into a worse tier. I can't tell for sure, but it sounds like if rich people are in low yellow, and poor people are in high orange, the whole county can be put in purple.

So looking at Alameda County, its positivity rate puts it in the yellow. Its daily case rate puts it in orange. The health equity index puts it in purple. Frankly all this means is that there is a big socioeconomic division in Alameda. Poor people get diseases more because it sucks to be poor. They live in high population density and often in close quarters. They have to do the crap work. The health equity index is probably a valid data point, but not for opening or closing due to Covid.

The health equity index is moving a lot of counties into a worse tier. Sometimes 2 tiers worse than they otherwise would be. 1. I think there is going to be hell to pay if people figure this out. 2. Numbers are going south. Counties are going to be downgraded soon based on real numbers. When you have essentially a political criteria like this, people are not going to follow the guidance when the real numbers justify it.

Bad move, IMO.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear said:

bearister said:


I see a big potential hornet's nest on this if people figure it out.

I saw this and as I track the numbers consistently, I was wondering what the hell happened to move Alameda to purple. Red wouldn't have been surprising, but purple?

Here is the issue. When they announced the new yellow, orange, red, purple rating system I noticed the criteria they added and thought "that might be a problem". There are 3 criteria. 1. Case positivity rate - clear, makes sense. New case rate - clear, makes sense. Health equity index - what the hell is that? Looked around. It is not easy to find an explanation for how that is measured. But basically it measures how much worse low socioeconomic people have it vs. high socioeconomic people. IMO, there is no way this metric should overturn what the actual case rates are showing. But, basically if your ratio of cases among the poor vs. rich is bad, even if your overall rates are good, you move into a worse tier. I can't tell for sure, but it sounds like if rich people are in low yellow, and poor people are in high orange, the whole county can be put in purple.

So looking at Alameda County, its positivity rate puts it in the yellow. Its daily case rate puts it in orange. The health equity index puts it in purple. Frankly all this means is that there is a big socioeconomic division in Alameda. Poor people get diseases more because it sucks to be poor. They live in high population density and often in close quarters. They have to do the crap work. The health equity index is probably a valid data point, but not for opening or closing due to Covid.

The health equity index is moving a lot of counties into a worse tier. Sometimes 2 tiers worse than they otherwise would be. 1. I think there is going to be hell to pay if people figure this out. 2. Numbers are going south. Counties are going to be downgraded soon based on real numbers. When you have essentially a political criteria like this, people are not going to follow the guidance when the real numbers justify it.

Bad move, IMO.
Yikes, is that really a thing? That's a terrible metric.

It's not even politically smart, as it just allows California's numbers to look worse and creates a way for people who wish to grind their own political axes to keep demonizing the state's leadership.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rep. Jim Jordan on Twitter: "Don't cancel Thanksgiving. Don't cancel Christmas. Cancel lockdowns." / Twitter


https://twitter.com/home


* Fantasies of kicking his a$$ always derail when I remember that he is an elite fighter
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sweden's plan going great.

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?








COVID cases are peaking now in most of the country - Axios


https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-cases-peak-infections-pandemic-outbreak-f6d315f2-9052-401a-95e4-bbfe99e2771f.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top


Axios-Ipsos poll: More Republicans acknowledging risk of COVID-19 - Axios


https://www.axios.com/axios-ipsos-coronavirus-risk-dining-thanksgiving-30e8195f-f985-412b-9028-86a6f4a444e2.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top


My hunch is you can thank Fox News for this almost (but not quite) unbelievable differential:

"Republicans and independents are beginning to come around on the risk of indoor dining and socializing:

Over 80% of Democrats already thought those activities were high-risk in our last survey.
52% of Republicans now see in-person gatherings as risky, up from 40% in late October."
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
New record set in last 24 hrs +180,000 positive COVID cases.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

OaktownBear said:

bearister said:


I see a big potential hornet's nest on this if people figure it out.

I saw this and as I track the numbers consistently, I was wondering what the hell happened to move Alameda to purple. Red wouldn't have been surprising, but purple?

Here is the issue. When they announced the new yellow, orange, red, purple rating system I noticed the criteria they added and thought "that might be a problem". There are 3 criteria. 1. Case positivity rate - clear, makes sense. New case rate - clear, makes sense. Health equity index - what the hell is that? Looked around. It is not easy to find an explanation for how that is measured. But basically it measures how much worse low socioeconomic people have it vs. high socioeconomic people. IMO, there is no way this metric should overturn what the actual case rates are showing. But, basically if your ratio of cases among the poor vs. rich is bad, even if your overall rates are good, you move into a worse tier. I can't tell for sure, but it sounds like if rich people are in low yellow, and poor people are in high orange, the whole county can be put in purple.

So looking at Alameda County, its positivity rate puts it in the yellow. Its daily case rate puts it in orange. The health equity index puts it in purple. Frankly all this means is that there is a big socioeconomic division in Alameda. Poor people get diseases more because it sucks to be poor. They live in high population density and often in close quarters. They have to do the crap work. The health equity index is probably a valid data point, but not for opening or closing due to Covid.

The health equity index is moving a lot of counties into a worse tier. Sometimes 2 tiers worse than they otherwise would be. 1. I think there is going to be hell to pay if people figure this out. 2. Numbers are going south. Counties are going to be downgraded soon based on real numbers. When you have essentially a political criteria like this, people are not going to follow the guidance when the real numbers justify it.

Bad move, IMO.
Yikes, is that really a thing? That's a terrible metric.

It's not even politically smart, as it just allows California's numbers to look worse and creates a way for people who wish to grind their own political axes to keep demonizing the state's leadership.
I have to rescind. The source I read was incorrect about how the health equity index is being used, though it is a criteria for classification. It did not move Alameda into purple.

However, it appears that moving these counties into more restrictive categories is based on the concern that the numbers are going in the wrong direction not on the criteria set out for classification. I'm guessing they are also concerned about that happening while Thanksgiving is coming up and people might be going out to shop for it and I know they are panicked about everybody having family gatherings and the impact of that. That being said, Alameda's numbers qualify it for Orange based on the standard. I support the action. (In fact, Alameda had already slowed down reopening saying they were concerned about trendlines) We are in a dangerous point in the curve and Thanksgiving could be adding gasoline. But they need to be transparent on messaging. Alameda is not purple. Should Alameda take all the precautions that are in the purple category? I believe so, at least for a few weeks. But it isn't purple.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

Rep. Jim Jordan on Twitter: "Don't cancel Thanksgiving. Don't cancel Christmas. Cancel lockdowns." / Twitter


https://twitter.com/home


* Fantasies of kicking his a$$ always derail when I remember that he is an elite fighter

Doesn't Jordan care that we beat Texas twice in football with a not-so-hot, Texas-raised coach and are now beating them again in COVID case numbers and fatalities (beating them, as in fewer), despite having a larger population?

I guess not. Afraid to compete, maybe? Happy Thanksgiving, Texas!
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hoping this works well...

Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

Hoping this works well...


I've never been tested for COVID-19, but everything I've read says the swab has to reach deep into your nasal passages and it's uncomfortable. How likely is it that people at home will get a good sample?
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

Hoping this works well...


I've never been tested for COVID-19, but everything I've read says the swab has to reach deep into your nasal passages and it's uncomfortable. How likely is it that people at home will get a good sample?


I've had a covid test and the swabbing was barely noticeable.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanksgiving travel creates a time bomb with the coronavirus - Axios


https://www.axios.com/thanksgiving-travel-coronavirus-30e72651-f00d-432a-8068-4f70ef557b5b.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top




Infections are rising in 83% of counties - Axios


https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-cases-counties-prison-outbreaks-920e9b50-3cc0-47ca-ac50-c64700a65321.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82gradDLSdad said:

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

Hoping this works well...


I've never been tested for COVID-19, but everything I've read says the swab has to reach deep into your nasal passages and it's uncomfortable. How likely is it that people at home will get a good sample?


I've had a covid test and the swabbing was barely noticeable.
That's good to know. Thanks for setting me straight on that.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.