Coronavirus prep

I should have waited to this afternoon to update but I forgot it was Wednesday and that is when everything gets updated and the Governor makes his weekly statement.

5,853 new cases
98 new deaths
36 counties in red (highest we have)

https://fox59.com/news/coronavirus/indiana-had-highest-covid-19-infection-rate-in-us-after-thanksgiving/

So what changes are our wonderful Governor making? /s

- Hospitals are to cancel any non emergency procedures
- Lowered maximum number of people allowed to gather (a whole 50 people allowed at orange and 25 at red)
- Some limiting of sports at the high school and college level, but they are still allowed to play WITH people watching

Yea... that is it. We have the highest rate in the US after Thanksgiving, but no real restrictions.

Athijade wrote: »

I should have waited to this afternoon to update but I forgot it was Wednesday and that is when everything gets updated and the Governor makes his weekly statement.

5,853 new cases
98 new deaths
36 counties in red (highest we have)

https://fox59.com/news/coronavirus/indiana-had-highest-covid-19-infection-rate-in-us-after-thanksgiving/

So what changes are our wonderful Governor making? /s

- Hospitals are to cancel any non emergency procedures
- Lowered maximum number of people allowed to gather (a whole 50 people allowed at orange and 25 at red)
- Some limiting of sports at the high school and college level, but they are still allowed to play WITH people watching

Yea... that is it. We have the highest rate in the US after Thanksgiving, but no real restrictions.

And here in South Australia where we have no active cases: private gatherings just getting lifted from 10 to 50, sports still limited and spectators capacity limited, limits on numbers for weddings, funerals, restaurants, clubs , shops etc, every organisation must have a covid safe plan ( how they will provide sanitiser, enforce social distancing etc) masks must be worn in all health care settings by everyone over 12 years ( some exceptions eg people with dementia) everyone going to any organised place eg clubs, cafes, dr's surgeries etc - basically anywhere beyond quick in and out purchases and private homes, must sign in with smart phone code or manual handwriting.
Elective surgery is continuing

Such a contrast.

paperpudding wrote: »

I feel almost guilty posting this and hope it doesnt come across as smug and I know things can change quickly - but South Australia now has zero active cases.
Several other states of Australia also at zero and all are low numbers and improving.

Many US states have restrictions in place. Whether or not their being strictly enforced, is questionable. A handful of US states still don’t have face covering edicts.

No need for you to feel guilt. It’s a very important contrast that should be pointed out. It may convince others to come to realize how covid policies can, and have, affected the spread.

The striking contrasts between our two countries, how this was handled by leaders from the beginning, are clear, and the resulting repercussions of policies obvious.

To me, the scariest thing about COVID-19 is the continuing denial of the seriousness of this.

While I am thrilled for australia that all is going well for that country and I sincerely hope that continues. But to those who feel that applying those same policies to the US would have been appropriate, I need to point out that the worldwide ramifications of shutting down Australia and the US are not comparable. The US is much more significant in the world economy and therefore shutting the US down impacts much more than itself. I do not, and never will, envy those that have to balance all the factors and make the decisions.

Comes now a story from Johnson City, TN -- not too far from me -- about at least one severely ill patient who still did not believe in COVID-19. That's one step beyond "I didn't think leopards would eat my face." No, it's "I don't believe in leopards" whilst leopards eat your face. I can't grok it.

SModa61 wrote: »

T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »

I've seen plenty of articles about the questions healthcare workers must consider when they decide which patients they don't treat... which patients they are going to send home to die. That's not something I've seen before from any flu season.

Curious. Do we know that those patients being sent home are being triaged in such a way that they are being sent home to die? Or could it be that they are the most mild cases? Or that it is just bad luck that they are arriving when no beds are available?

The governor of New Mexico this week authorized hospitals to start exercising crisis care. From what I understand, this means rationing of care towards those individuals with a higher chance of survival. I don't know that it necessarily means they're sending the 85 year old home to die...just that they won't be as aggressively treated to try to keep them alive in the hospital for weeks. From what I also understand it means that some people will be sent home who would otherwise be treated in the hospital, but are deemed reasonable candidates for home recovery.

My step brother is an ICU nurse and he says they're still doing everything in their power to the extent possible, including contacting neighboring states for possible open beds...but it's all pretty dire right now. On top of that, NM doesn't really hit it's flu season until January or so as winter doesn't really set in here until mid December.

SModa61 wrote: »

While I am thrilled for australia that all is going well for that country and I sincerely hope that continues. But to those who feel that applying those same policies to the US would have been appropriate, I need to point out that the worldwide ramifications of shutting down Australia and the US are not comparable. The US is much more significant in the world economy and therefore shutting the US down impacts much more than itself. I do not, and never will, envy those that have to balance all the factors and make the decisions.

Even if the US does have a bigger impact on the world economy, (and I’m not totally convinced that it does) it doesn’t change the fact that basic preventative measures have never been endorsed at the highest level in the US. Australia isn’t the only country that has this simple measure in place, and it works.

The US isn’t shut down, nor does it need to be to control spread of covid. If EVERYONE followed the guidelines set by professionals that are well qualified and well informed about how covid is spread, and how to lessen the spread, there would be a different scenario right now. Would it be eradicated? Definitely not, but it would be more manageable, less people contracting it, and less people dying from it. Isn’t that preferable to what we have.

SModa61 wrote: »

While I am thrilled for australia that all is going well for that country and I sincerely hope that continues. But to those who feel that applying those same policies to the US would have been appropriate, I need to point out that the worldwide ramifications of shutting down Australia and the US are not comparable. The US is much more significant in the world economy and therefore shutting the US down impacts much more than itself. I do not, and never will, envy those that have to balance all the factors and make the decisions.

For a moment, I'll accept the premise that the "US is much more significant in the world economy".

If so, in my opinion, that increases the need for the US to be exemplary in its management of the pandemic . . . which it has emphatically not been.

An unpredictable, extreme rolling shutdown of various functions at various times, riding the peaks and valleys of transmission, is probably more disruptive economically than a planned, managed process during which remedial measures can be thoughtfully employed. (By "remedial measures" I don't just mean "government action". It also includes businesses' and individuals' actions in a context of known problems (regulatory shutdowns for defined periods) vs. random ones (waves of illness among employees, reactive behavior of consumers).

"Mandates" are not the only thing that shut down companies, businesses, or supply chains.

Having massive waves of contagion (as in some of the meat-packing plants earlier on) shuts down companies in less predictable, less manageable ways than "mandates".

Having consumers fearful of going to businesses harms businesses in less predictable, less manageable ways than "mandates". (Reference the reduced business in some businesses like restaurants after the contagion pathways became widely known, but before protective measures began to be put in place.)

Supply chains - as we saw in early phases - are particularly vulnerable. A factory or transport system that's crucial to a supply chain, if shut down by something like a wave of sick employees, can disrupt businesses far away that aren't experiencing local problems.

I'd also second the observation that the US has not been "shut down", and (in a comprehensive sense) neither has Australia. Some things have been restricted, sometimes severely restricted, of course.

P.S. Couldn't agree more with the bolded. People like me, second-guessing them when they have more data and consultation options than I have, may be part of their burden, especially if the criticism gets extreme. No one deserves death threats for doing their best at this, or even their barely-adequate-est at this.

MikePfirrman wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

SModa61 wrote: »

T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »

I've seen plenty of articles about the questions healthcare workers must consider when they decide which patients they don't treat... which patients they are going to send home to die. That's not something I've seen before from any flu season.

Curious. Do we know that those patients being sent home are being triaged in such a way that they are being sent home to die? Or could it be that they are the most mild cases? Or that it is just bad luck that they are arriving when no beds are available?

If you're being sent home and dying of Covid, it seems reasonable to assume that you are not one of the "most mild" cases unless "mild case" has taken on a whole new meaning of which I'm unaware.

@janejellyroll My comment was referencing the specific phrase of "send home to die". My interpretation of that phrase is an intentional act like the person is being deemed too much work to warrant the effort and therefore being sent home where they are expected to die. Your comment is along the alternate interpretation of "send them home where they happen to die" and of course the subset of people sent home that end up dying are of course not the mild cases but it could be that they were sent home because they were not expected to die, but did. I was trying to find our from @T1DCarnivoreRunner whether his phrasing was the intentional act, as it reads, and that hopeless cases are being triaged to be sent home to die, or are they mild cases with unexpected deaths.

These are from earlier in the year, but it does appear that at least two cities had instances where hard-hit hospitals were sending non-mild cases home to die, specifically because it was determined they would die: https://www.propublica.org/article/sent-home-to-die#:~:text=In New Orleans, hospitals sent,begged them to keep trying.&text=ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power.

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/coronavirus/article244443257.html

The most vivid terrible media memory I've had from this whole thing was when the young man from Italy had to wait three days for someone to pick up his dead sister (in his small home) because the entire system was so overwhelmed. I don't like to think we are close to that here, but we're not far off, unfortunately.

And I'm sorry if this "tone" isn't pleasant to hear. But it sucks a lot worse for the healthcare workers than it does us.

I remember seeing a story from a European country, might have been Spain but not sure now. The father died from Covid in his own home since no hospital beds for him. The mother and daughters were sleeping on the front balcony since the house was smelling so bad from the dead body. No room at the morgue either. That is really bad and so very very sad.

Another thing too. I have a friend in USA that has had Covid twice now. She was sent home recently hardly able to take a breath. Guess there wasn't enough beds there.

SModa61 wrote: »

While I am thrilled for australia that all is going well for that country and I sincerely hope that continues. But to those who feel that applying those same policies to the US would have been appropriate, I need to point out that the worldwide ramifications of shutting down Australia and the US are not comparable. The US is much more significant in the world economy and therefore shutting the US down impacts much more than itself. I do not, and never will, envy those that have to balance all the factors and make the decisions.

Except that with something as simple as masking, which apparently some people seem to think is akin to a human rights violation...if we would ALL just do that, we might not need more drastic measures. Wearing a mask does NOT equal shutting the country down. So many drama queens in this country. It's hard to take people seriously anymore they are so full of B.S.