Jump to content

The OFFICIAL 2nd Wave Covid19 thread...This winter is going to suck.


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, EMEDPA said:

 

The other hysteria is XYZ pt "might have covid".  Nurse yesterday: He is short of breath, it might be Covid!!!. Me: I think more likely it is all the rib fx he sustained when he was assaulted and hit with a bat...

If he was hit with a bat for either wearing a mask or not wearing one, then put it in the covid column.  Unless it was a bat bat, which I’m sure will be next to killer hornets...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
2 minutes ago, thinkertdm said:

If he was hit with a bat for either wearing a mask or not wearing one, then put it in the covid column.  Unless it was a bat bat, which I’m sure will be next to killer hornets...

No, pretty sure he was hit with a bat by his GF for being an A$$hat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A challenge to those who think this has been minimized by Freedom-loving Trumpists who would rather spread disease to their grandparents rather than wear the damn mask (or however else you view those who are more worried about the economy than this disease):  

What would it take to change your mind about it?  Is there a set of data, an experience, or anything that COULD come to light that COULD change your mind about the severity of this disease to the national or global population?

My personal view has certainly changed.  BTW - I have a MPH and did my graduate thesis on the Spanish Influenza Pandemic, so I have a pretty good understanding of virology, epidemiology, and the inevitability of a black-swan type viral pandemic that kills hundreds of millions of people.

In Jan-Feb I was worried.  I was deepening my pantry, buying ahead anything that I thought we might need for the next year (a major industrial city had been shut down), but wasn't too worried about the virus itself (because in the past there have been several SARS type viruses that originated in China but was contained there, or had small outbreaks). 

Mar-Apr it was here, and seemed to be spreading, and it seemed to be getting BAD.  I told my elderly father to isolate and wear the N-95 masks I got him.  By the end of March I was wearing booties over my shoes at work, and showering/changing after shift before driving home.  It was obvious to me the virus is airborne and I thought what was happening in NY (and previously in Italy) was going to happen everywhere in the US. I was THAT worried about it.

By June my views had started to change.  By now we know a lot more about the virus, and we know not to send mildly-symptomatic infected old folks back to their nursing homes because it will kill a lot of people that way.  We also knew by then that it rarely affects younger people badly.  Meanwhile we are learning how to treat the few that get very ill.

My view today is this is a particularly virulent disease that has been overblown by the media whose goal is to keep us all in a constant state of panic and fear.  Yeah, we should prepare for another surge of it this fall/winter, but I don't think we need to panic about it.

Now I will go back and answer my own question of "What would it take to change my mind?"  If we start overwhelming hospitals like what happened in New York, then I am obviously wrong.  

But I think we will really know the answer in about 2 years when the CDC publishes the national mortality data for 2020.  In 2018 there were 2.75 million deaths in the US, and that included a 1% increase from 2017.  If we use that as a baseline and extrapolate estimated deaths for 2019 to be about 2.775 million, then in 2020 we should have expected about 2.8 million deaths without the influence of Covid-19.

If our 2020 mortality numbers are at 3 million, then I will readily admit that I was wrong.

Is there data out there that could make you change your mind?
 

Edited by Boatswain2PA
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boatswain2PA said:

By now we know a lot more about the virus, and we know not to send mildly-symptomatic infected old folks back to their nursing homes because it will kill a lot of people that way. 
 

Do you have a source for this? There was one SNF/AL that recorded around 30-40 infections that they think MAY have been related to a hospital discharge that I'm aware of. 

And rather than waiting two years do you have an explanation for the CDC's current levels of excess deaths?

As for what it would take to change my mind? Evidence that 200,000 extra people haven't died so far these past 8 months I suppose. Hell. Evidence that an excess 100,000 people haven't died these last 8 months. I don't think I'm going to see a model where you can balance economic repercussions against deaths that I can morally feel good about. 

The things that seem to have changed your mind seem to be the natural course of the disease process. We knew nothing about it, a lot of people died, we learned more, less people have died. The fact that we can treat a disease *better* doesn't make it any less terrible, and shouldn't lead to the downplaying of previous responses.

 

WeeklyExcessDeaths.PNG

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Boatswain2PA said:

Now I will go back and answer my own question of "What would it take to change my mind?"  If we start overwhelming hospitals like what happened in New York, then I am obviously wrong.  

But I think we will really know the answer in about 2 years when the CDC publishes the national mortality data for 2020.  In 2018 there were 2.75 million deaths in the US, and that included a 1% increase from 2017.  If we use that as a baseline and extrapolate estimated deaths for 2019 to be about 2.775 million, then in 2020 we should have expected about 2.8 million deaths without the influence of Covid-19.

If our 2020 mortality numbers are at 3 million, then I will readily admit that I was wrong.

Is there data out there that could make you change your mind?
 

I recognize that this is not data from the CDC or a peer-reviewed study, but just some food for thought directly in response to your request for data that may change your mind. My understanding from reading the comments is that this does not include data or projections for deaths associated with patients delaying care for various reasons due to Covid.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public Health should not be political. Public Health officials should determine what needs to be done and administrations should follow the advice.

Presidents shouldn't threaten to cut off funding to "blue" states or those states with governors who follow science.

Administrations shouldn't influence science departments like the CDC to skew information to "look good" or ignore actual scientific data.

Presidents shouldn't demand people in his/her presence to remove masks.

Presidents are not above the law and shouldn't endorse anarchy and rule breaking for the sake of popularity.

The health of the US depended on solid public health and guidance. Instead we got denial, deflection and stupidity - and now over 200,000 people died. 

We have proof that this number could have been cut by following the data sooner, harder, better and with enforcement.

Science is real.

Politics is BS.

Public Health needs science and reality.

There, that should get this thread shut down.

Sorry, the truth hurts.

 

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reality Check 2 said:

Public Health should not be political. Public Health officials should determine what needs to be done and administrations should follow the advice.

Presidents shouldn't threaten to cut off funding to "blue" states or those states with governors who follow science.

Administrations shouldn't influence science departments like the CDC to skew information to "look good" or ignore actual scientific data.

Presidents shouldn't demand people in his/her presence to remove masks.

Presidents are not above the law and shouldn't endorse anarchy and rule breaking for the sake of popularity.

The health of the US depended on solid public health and guidance. Instead we got denial, deflection and stupidity - and now over 200,000 people died. 

We have proof that this number could have been cut by following the data sooner, harder, better and with enforcement.

Science is real.

Politics is BS.

Public Health needs science and reality.

There, that should get this thread shut down.

Sorry, the truth hurts.

 

Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/24/2020 at 1:20 AM, Cideous said:

and now the dear leader refuses to agree to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses, saying "we will just have to see".

Congrats, he has officially gone full autocrat.  Putin would be proud.

Of course....not really.  The question was win/lose/or draw will he leave.  This is just the media exaggerating what he said to disflect from his point that widespread vote by mail is a terrible thing.

 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, now let's get back to science and those who know science and work in reality of our current situation.

Let medical folks do medical things.

I don't tell my mechanic how to fix my brakes.

Let's move on.

Science is real.

Medicine is an art.

COVID is real.

Flu is real.

Wear a damn mask.

Social distance.

Wash your hands.

Don't be an asshat.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boatswain2PA said:

his point that widespread vote by mail is a terrible thing.

This statement is simply not true, rather categorically false. So I will provide numbers for you.
 

0.0006 of mail in votes have been found fraudulent in the last 20 years. That’s 143 cases total. Delve even deeper, this equates to one case per state every 6-7 years. Hardly enough to swing your 7th grade class president election. 
 

Now, anyone with any amount of resolve can read between the lines here and see the obvious goal which is voter suppression. 
 

I vote by mail. I’ve voted by mail in the last three presidential elections. I vote by mail for midterm elections, as I’m sure you do as well. And will again. Not because I’m scared of getting sick, but because I simply don’t like people and I hate standing in line for 2 hours in a 90’s era strip mall. Have fun with that.

 

Now, let’s get back to the science of the discussion as noted above. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last 20 years we have had ABSENTEE ballots.  This requires a single person to REQUEST a ballot (and often certify they have a justifiable need to have an absentee ballot), then fill out the ballot and return it.  Alternatively people could go and vote in person. 

This is not voter suppression.  Maintaining this status quo is not voter suppression.

Today there is a push amongst Democrats to have mail-in ballots.  While the details vary, some are pushing to have ballots automatically mailed to every person who is registered to vote.  And in some places, like in Pennsylvania, the Democrats have pushed through "voting bins" for people to just drop off their ballots.

This is entirely different from what we have done in the past, and opens the door for rampant fraud.  For example, in LA County there is 20% more people REGISTERED TO VOTE than there are people who live there.  Yet all of those people who are registered will have a ballot mailed to them.  What happens to those ballots?  Depends on who picks them up.

If we can stop the constant anti-Trump tangents we can get back to the OP.

To MediMike:  Thank you for the thoughtful response.  I've read it, but haven't had time to digest and respond yet.  Hopefully the mods won't shut down another thread.

RC2:  Public health is by definition political.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure thing, good conversation to have.

Unfortunately the 20% voter thing doesn't seem to hold up.

https://factcheck.thedispatch.com/p/is-voter-registration-in-los-angeles

In short, there is a 112% registration rate, simply because that includes inactive voters (move, dead etc), and there are no plans to issue them ballots. It seems that this is simply a scare tactic to get people riled up. I'm mkre worried about the press secretary than I am the so called MSM.

One of those has a responsibility to be disseminating the truth.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My state only does mail in ballots. Always have.

No problems identified.

Mail in ballots are real and what we have.

Public Health is still not something to be taken as a political weapon or threat. 

Public Servants should rely on experts in all areas and surround themselves with experts and specialists - not con men and fraudsters who end up in jail.............................

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

I have done mail in ballots for the last 21 years in my state with no issues. Every registered voter is sent ONE to their address of record. 

The military has done voting by mail since the civil war. 

want to vote in person? fine. Do that. 

Want to vote by mail? fine. do that.

Just vote. Or don't complain about the outcome of any election. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Boatswain2PA said:

In the last 20 years we have had ABSENTEE ballots.  This requires a single person to REQUEST a ballot (and often certify they have a justifiable need to have an absentee ballot), then fill out the ballot and return it.  Alternatively people could go and vote in person. 

Once again, false. 
 

There is no meaningful difference between absentee ballets and vote by mail ballots. Both ballots are mailed to registered voters. Both are hand marked by the voter, which is and has been considered the gold standard for election security for decades.

 

The rest of the misleading distinctions appear to have been addressed above. Advise due diligence rather than regurgitation.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, MediMike said:

In short, there is a 112% registration rate, simply because that includes inactive voters (move, dead etc), and there are no plans to issue them ballots.

Three years ago there were 3.5 million MORE registered voters than residents in the United States.  There were 462 counties that had >100% voter registration.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/election-fraud-registered-voters-outnumber-eligible-voters-462-counties/


Little of this is from actual fraud, but rather a combination of the "automatic" registration at the DMV, huge voter-registration drives, states lack of attention to their voter roles, and voter/population incompetence.  With the motor-voter laws most people register to vote when the get their drivers licenses, but then in our highly mobile society folks move and go to an event with a voter registration drive and register again, then move again and get a different state drivers license (and register again), etc ad nauseum until they die but nobody tells the various voter registration areas so remains a registered voter.  And the counties have no incentive to clean up their voter registration roles.  This has led to the massive over-registration problem.

From the article you linked:  Current CA state law requires a "residency confirmation postcard" to be mailed 90 days before the election, and if these are returned as "undeliverable" then that voter is placed in inactive status.  Note that this doesn't mean the voter has to CONFIRM they still live there.  If the voter has moved and the new residents simply discard this postcard then the voter/old resident will still be deemed an actively registered voter and can be mailed a ballot IF ONE IS REQUESTED.

But, again from your article, Newsome's executive order has changed this.  Now EVERY active voter will get a ballot mailed to them.

And BTW - at the bottom off your article it basically says the PresSec was right about the numbers, just "wrong to attribute it to fraud".  I would have to re-listen to it, but I think her point is that it opens up mail-in balloting TO fraud.

 

14 hours ago, Reality Check 2 said:

My state only does mail in ballots. Always have.

 

12 hours ago, EMEDPA said:

I have done mail in ballots for the last 21 years in my state with no issues. Every registered voter is sent ONE to their address of record. 

The military has done voting by mail since the civil war. 

Again, there is a HUGE difference between the ABSENTEE mail-in balloting that has been available for decades and what the Democrat party is pushing through in many states today.

ABSENTEE mail-in balloting has generally required a registered voter to ACTIVELY request a mail-in ballot, and often required a legitimate reason for requesting a mail-in ballot (military/government service requiring to be out of state, etc).  Only then would a ballot be mailed.

Today there is a push to have every registered voter get a mail-in ballot.  There is a HUGE difference between these two voting schemes.  

I know you two are smart enough to see the difference here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2020 at 9:53 AM, MediMike said:

Do you have a source for this?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis-was-not-an-inevitability/

I'm going to take another tangent here:  It has been well-established in the conservative media that NY sending mildly-symptomatic patients back to nursing homes caused significant increase in mortality (I think this article will show that, dont' have time for deep read again).  The far-right media of course blamed Cuomo personally because that's what the far-right media does (just like the far left attacks Trump for everything).  I think Cuomo's State Dept of Health made the rule to send them back to ensure they had enough hospital beds for the very sick (as NY got hit first, and we thought this might be the black-swan event with millions dead).

But as I went to google to find a source....nothing.  Nothing but left wing articles with headlines like "Cuomo not responsible!" and "Cuomo following guidelines" regarding sending covid patients back to nursing homes.  I know there were good articles about it, but Dr. Google wouldn't pull them up.  Had to specifically search for "National Review" + "Covid" + "New York" + "Nursing Homes" to find one.

 

On 9/23/2020 at 9:53 AM, MediMike said:

And rather than waiting two years do you have an explanation for the CDC's current levels of excess deaths?

Yeah, a bunch of very old people (and a small number of young/healthy) died from a novel coronavirus.  I'm not saying this isn't a real thing.  

But I wonder if this knocked off a lot of people who were going to die over the next 6-12 months anyway.  If THAT is the case, then we will see the spike that you show, but we may see no difference when measured over a longer period.  

Again, my perspective is we have to prepare for another wave in the fall/winter, but we don't need to panic like the OP seems to infer.  We know not to send old people back to NHs with the virus, we know who is at greatest risk, we now have (relatively) rapid testing, greater therapeutics, and will likely have a vaccine soon.

But that won't stop the media from ensuring we all live in fear and panic.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ANESMCR said:

And back to the beginning of the circle we land. There have only been 143 cases of vote by mail fraud in 20 years. Rendering the entire premise of vote by mail fraud as a moot talking point. 

I'm sorry that you are unable to understand the difference between ABSENTEE voting and mass vote-by-mail.  I have tried to explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

It is like saying there was only a few people who died of coronavirus in 2019, so we don't need to worry about 2020.  It ignores the HUGE CHANGE that occurred with a NOVEL virus.

Mass vote-by-mail is a NOVEL way of voting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Boatswain2PA said:

I'm sorry that you are unable to understand the difference between ABSENTEE voting and mass vote-by-mail.  I have tried to explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

It is like saying there was only a few people who died of coronavirus in 2019, so we don't need to worry about 2020.  It ignores the HUGE CHANGE that occurred with a NOVEL virus.

Mass vote-by-mail is a NOVEL way of voting.

Unfortunately the difference is moot. Both are just as prone to fraud. The information I’ve published for you includes both data sets. Absentee ballets and vote by mail ballets from states that have sent out automatically for the last 20 years. 
 

It’s like saying only 143 were going to die of coronavirus. And 143 people died of coronavirus. Not 200,000.

Edited by ANESMCR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ANESMCR said:

Unfortunately the difference is moot. Both are just as prone to fraud.

Absentee voting by mail requires an individual (or someone posing as an individual) to actively request an absentee ballot.  That's a lot of work for a fraudster to get one vote.

General voting by mail is sending every registered voter (alive or not) a ballot, and will send out millions of ballots to people who won't get them because they are dead or have moved.  This opens up opportunities for rampant fraud the likes that we have never seen.  Fraudsters from both sides of the political spectrum will be able to find these MILLIONS of ballots that won't make it to their intended voters, fill them out, and affect the elections.  

But I understand that you fail to see that, and nothing will ever change your mind.

NO STATE HAS EVER DONE THIS BEFORE.  This is a game changer that is being advertised by the media as no big deal because we have done mail in absentee voting for years.....but this is NOT the same as "absentee" voting.

If this implemented on a wide scale we will lose control of our elections to whatever party has the greatest ability to perpetrate fraud.  Initially it will be the Democrat party, but who knows what the future will hold.  Seems the Democrat party shoots themselves in the foot every time they change the rules to get what they want (for example Harry Reid's changing of the supermajority requirement for judges).

 

And, before you repeat yourself, there have been 143 convictions of vote-by-mail fraud in the past 20 years.  Of course, that was when people had to REQUEST an absentee ballot to be mailed to them.  Not sending millions of ballots to the wrong address or to dead people.

Edited by Boatswain2PA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to the Physician Assistant Forum! This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn More