Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Wes21 said:

They screwed up but they also have a unique situation that make it its own special little hell hole.  What's frustrating is that they are a media mecca so whatever is happening in NYC tends to be portrayed to the masses as if its happening all over the country instead of in one small super densely populated pocket. 

Yup, filtered and sanitized to fit a narrative.   Why is De Blasio forbidding trace workers from asking people if they had recently attended protests?  Initial reports from Missouri protest tracing, only 1.4% have tested positive so far.

Edited by 45catfan
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Wes21 said:

They screwed up but they also have a unique situation that make it its own special little hell hole.  What's frustrating is that they are a media mecca so whatever is happening in NYC tends to be portrayed to the masses as if its happening all over the country instead of in one small super densely populated pocket. 


Exactly. If there was a huge outbreak in Nashville or Dallas or CLT and nyc was untouched, the narrative would have been very different.

The northeast centric bias in the news has always driven me nuts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, CaliPanthers said:

 

I had been seeing stuff floating around about NYC's pols involvement before this video, but it was always second hand as sources were too afraid to come out directly (mostly nurses afraid of losing their jobs).  Two camps here, this lady is a freaking kook or she's telling the truth.  Even if she is being honest, she's going up against the NYC establishment so it's just going to get swept under the rug.  Shouldn't the NYC media at least do their due diligence to debunk it?  I mean, it's a very powerful accusation.  If it were a complete fabrication it should be easily and quickly debunked, correct?  Why completely ignore it as I'm sure someone, somewhere in the mega NYC media has seen this video.  Could it be they have no interest in seeing if there is any truth behind this and possibly bring further light to the situation?   Could it be they are willfully ignoring it in hopes it will just fade away?

Accusations and allegations (this video and other sources): 

-Admitting patients that tested positive with minor symptoms--$10,000 for admitting COVID-19 patients

-Prematurely putting patients on vents; most died.  Hospitals got $36,000 from insurers for vent patients  

-Coding non-coronavirus deaths as such to get earmarked money for having "treated COVID-19 patients"

-Putting COVID-19 patients in nursing homes with the most vulnerable populations

-Line item put in a budgetary bill eliminating culpability of nursing homes in coronavirus deaths, limiting litigation.

I mean, I could understand how this is a complete non-story...nothing serious at all about this, but Trump tripping down a walkway ramp is front page news.  The NYC media is either being very lazy digging into this or being tow-the-line accomplices by willfully turning a blind eye.  Which one is it?  

Edited by 45catfan
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Meck county now has active outbreaks at 21 elderly and congregant living facilities. 
 

Seriously, why is it so hard to protect people in these places? It’s not like these folks are out in the streets riding public transport all day.

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tbe said:

Meck county now has active outbreaks at 21 elderly and congregant living facilities. 
 

Seriously, why is it so hard to protect people in these places? It’s not like these folks are out in the streets riding public transport all day.

they have lots of staff on multiple shifts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, CBDellinger said:

they have lots of staff on multiple shifts.

Sure, but given the risks you would think daily testing for staff would be required. It’s not that many people. 
 

Also, if a resident tests positive move them out. Lots of empty hotels out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

daily death projections for SC and NC don't really look promising.    SC shows a steady rise going to Oct 1 and NC really has more of a plateau going w/ a rise near Oct. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CRA said:

daily death projections for SC and NC don't really look promising.    SC shows a steady rise going to Oct 1 and NC really has more of a plateau going w/ a rise near Oct. 

Things will have to get really, REALLY bad for SC to start losing 25 people a day by October as the projections are estimating.  A typical day is about 6 deaths and a very bad day is 10-12.  These models are based off recent trends and lags several days.  Late last week SC had a couple of really bad days with a spike in deaths and record number of cases, but things have calmed back down for the time being.  Give it a few more days and if things stay at the current levels with no more spikes, those projections will trend back down some and not look quite as ominous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Things will have to get really, REALLY bad for SC to start losing 25 people a day by October as the projections are estimating.  A typical day is about 6 deaths and a very bad day is 10-12.  These models are based off recent trends and lags several days.  Late last week SC had a couple of really bad days with a spike in deaths and record number of cases, but things have calmed back down for the time being.  Give it a few more days and if things stay at the current levels with no more spikes, those projections will trend back down some and not look quite as ominous.

SC was last at the 6 deaths per day back in mid April. 

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/south-carolina

at least per the site the government continues to use (2nd chart)

hope it does go down but with the cases trending up, positivity rate (more importantly) trending up....I would assume the death will go that way too in the upcoming weeks.  I agree 25 seems too high but I think the overall trend of the graph is likely right. 

wish people would stop calling this a second wave though.   this is still the first wave IMO. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, CRA said:

SC was last at the 6 deaths per day back in mid April. 

https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/south-carolina

at least per the site the government continues to use (2nd chart)

Averaging figures, thus the decimal in deaths.  Can't have a .4 of a death for example.   Trend lines typically work on gradual curves.  That's the reason I prefer bar graphs.  We have been averaging 8-9 daily deaths per week for a while, but you know how averages work.  So yes, some days we have as low as 6 deaths and some days as high as 12...generally speaking.

https://www.scdhec.gov/infectious-diseases/viruses/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/sc-demographic-data-covid-19

Edit: Weird, so you have to toggle from Reported Cases to Reported Deaths--it's the first bar graph once on the Reported Deaths page.  For some reason, the link reverts to reported cases.

Edited by 45catfan
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 45catfan said:

Averaging figures, thus the decimal in deaths.  Can't have a .4 of a death for example.   Trend lines typically work on gradual curves.  That's the reason I prefer bar graphs.  We have been averaging 8-9 deaths a week for a while, but you know how averages work.  So yes, some days we have as low as 6 deaths and some days as high as 12...generally speaking.

https://www.scdhec.gov/infectious-diseases/viruses/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/sc-demographic-data-covid-19

 

yeah, bar graphs are much neater IMO.  

Hopefully SC trends back down.   I suspect schools will be making more concrete decisions first of July and would prefer the numbers look much better than today when they make their decision.   

I take COVID very serious. But we have to take into account the kids are largely not impacted at all (well we don't know the long term aspect if it has an impact).   But staying home especially for the younger ones isn't healthy.   We as a society need to put an emphasis on protecting the vulnerable population.  But that does get tricky and hard for those that live in multigenerational homes when the kids go back.  

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

kids stayed "at home" for like 99% of human existence

even if we don't know the true threat to adolescents yet, we know the number 1 place covid is transmitted has been in the home, and who the fug knows about their parents/grandparents

especially in places like tennessee where all the parents are 28 going on 60.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...