Governor Cuomo Pandemic Update July 8 2020

[ancianita]

Day 130

The two-state problem: COVID sick states, COVID controlled states

-- 36 states = increase in COVID infection rate, which is NOT due to increased testing, but because of increased hospitalizations; e.g.s, TX, FL;
-- NY has offered assistance to other states
-- The two-state problem is that sick states can re-infect well states -- 19 sick state travelers to NY must quarantine
-- To sick states: base your reopening on the numbers; stay disciplined, diligent and vigilant; NY's methods are what work
-- large indoor enclosures can open only with MERV-11to MERV-13 air filters and ventilation protocols in place
-- school districts will open subject to consultation with state officials, and district plans due July 31; afterward, NY will confirm whether they may open by the first week in August
-- re public schools, the federal govt has no authority; school reopenings are solely state decisions, as with state reopening of their economies -- COVID science, data, public responsibility must guide school and economy reopenings
-- infection rate increases don't predict spikes, and are faulty data for deciding reopening
-- varied mask policies cause varied death numbers

Never has there been a time when government decisions are life and death decisions.
-- 12,000 people/day are entering NY from uncontrolled COVID areas; quarantining methods are being implemented, which use 250 state labs to keep their testing up-to-date

Cuomo re Trump's threat:
You can't threaten when there's nothing that you have done that is positive in the first place.
Everything he's done to NY is negative, gratuitous, illegal and unconstitutional.
The death rate is going up in other states that will not learn from the methods and solutions used in NY months ago.

[soothsayer]

1. Thank you

[Stuart G]

2. Thank You for posting.. K and R

[hedda_foil]

3. Infection rate increases don't predict spikes??? WTF?

[ancianita]

4. It does sound counterintuitive.

Last edited Fri Jul 10, 2020, 03:08 PM - Edit history (5)

Tell me if this makes sense:
After reopening it depends on the number of tests, fast test results and timing: tests that are done after increased hospitalizations are more probably reflecting an existing spike rather than predicting one.

But the idea of a spike is relative. The more a population is completely tested, the more infections are mapped in total numbers; then later, after a two week baseline, one can get rates, which means infections per day.

Relatively speaking, before infection rates are known, spikes are often what increased hospitalizations seem to indicate. But who really knows. Everyone complains about predicting spikes but no one, except maybe NY, is doing enough testing and contact tracing to predict them. An infection increase isn't a spike until it goes over the 1.1 infection rate per 100,000, and even then, it's just an increase and not necessarily a spike. A spike implies unexpected rates. But you have to have a two-week baseline first.

(If quicker turnaround of testing results can result in earlier medical care, with or without hospitalization, then a spike in infection rates might not result in a spike in deaths. So spikes can't be predicted for other reasons, as well. )

If testing is not done before increases in hospitalization, increases in testing might still only count existing infections; it's contact tracing that likely maps probable rates and spikes. Rates have to be counted in a certain time frame -- daily, usually -- and so, if the testing numbers aren't high enough to represent a state's population, as in the current case of Florida, then a rate can't be clearly determined, and a "spike" is what increased hospitalizations and deaths are called when inadequate testing and contract tracing have been done. Even then, deaths are named something else on order from some states' health departments. So the words "predict" and "spike" are pretty much meaningless.

Also, some people use "rate" and "numbers" and "spike" interchangeably and with little understanding, which compounds confusion and doubt about the extent of the pandemic in their state.