Wisconsin

[wadesworld]

Nobody is claiming that the uptick in positive cases is because the state started to open up. All anyone is saying is that the state decided to open up despite the fact that the virus obviously isn’t really going anywhere.

[pbiflyer]

Fake news.

We saw more cases because we have massively ramped up testing. Corona incubation is usually 3 to 4 days. Then first testing an extra day or two at least for people to go out and get tested. Then another day for tests to be reported.

Thursdays effect won't be seen until at least wednesday

Um, so the spike was caused by testing?
Really what you are saying is that before the opening, the problem was worse than we knew, since we didn’t do enough testing.
Not a ringing endorsement for opening the state up.

[pacearrow02]

Nobody is claiming that the uptick in positive cases is because the state started to open up. All anyone is saying is that the state decided to open up despite the fact that the virus obviously isn’t really going anywhere.

Agree there hasn’t been much of a decline in positive cases since the lockdown started....will be interesting to see the numbers a month from now, if they stay relatively the same or decrease it’d almost seem like shutting everything down was entirely unnecessary and had little effect on the course of the virus

[wadesworld]

Agree there hasn’t been much of a decline in positive cases since the lockdown started....will be interesting to see the numbers a month from now, if they stay relatively the same or decrease it’d almost seem like shutting everything down was entirely unnecessary and had little effect on the course of the virus

I think some sort of shut down was necessary if for no other reason than to give time to come up with some kind of social distance planning. I think if people had went on as if nothing was going on we would’ve seen a lot of NYC type situations throughout the country. Packed arenas full of fans would’ve been devastating.

[Sir Lawrence]

No Covid deaths reported in Wisconsin today.  Please trend.
53215 zip code, a Hispanic neighborhood, is the latest hotspot.

[injuryBug]

No Covid deaths reported in Wisconsin today.  Please trend.

How dare you come on here with any positive news!!

[pacearrow02]

I think some sort of shut down was necessary if for no other reason than to give time to come up with some kind of social distance planning. I think if people had went on as if nothing was going on we would’ve seen a lot of NYC type situations throughout the country. Packed arenas full of fans would’ve been devastating.

Absolutely, agree 100%......I was fully on board the first 2-3 weeks of the shut down to give the experts a chance to figure this thing out and put a plan in place, the good ol days of “15 days to slow the spread“

The time to allow folks to return to work is about 5 weeks past due imo.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Interesting article on the lag time of the virus. Seems germane given the discussion about re-opening. This is from the NY Times morning brief, so no link:

How virus data can mislead
"Life in New York City felt pretty normal in early March. Children were going to school. Restaurants and theaters were packed. On March 9, I recorded a podcast in front of a few hundred people in Times Square.

In hindsight, we know that the coronavirus was then sweeping across the city. Deaths peaked in early to mid-April. And the typical time from contraction to death is from three to five weeks, according to my colleague Apoorva Mandavilli — which suggests early March was near the peak for transmission.

Over the next couple of weeks, it’s going to be important to keep this recent history in mind. Without mass testing — and the United States is not doing mass testing — there is a lag before a virus outbreak becomes apparent. Most people who develop symptoms don’t do so for at least five days, and sometimes longer. The worst symptoms usually take almost three weeks to appear.

With more parts of the U.S. starting to reopen, many people will be tempted to look at the data this week and start proclaiming victory over the virus. But this week’s data won’t tell us much. It will instead reflect the reality from early May and late April, when much of the country was still on lockdown.

“The data are always two or three weeks old,” Ezekiel Emanuel of the University of Pennsylvania told me. “And we have a hard time understanding that things are different from what we’re looking at.” Crystal Watson of Johns Hopkins University told The Associated Press that we wouldn’t really know how reopening had affected the virus’s spread for five to six weeks.

It’s possible that the reopenings won’t cause the outbreaks that many epidemiologists fear — because many people will still stay home, or because they will venture out cautiously, or because the virus may spread more slowly in warmer air. But it’s also possible that the country will find itself suffering through a new wave of outbreaks in June.

Either way, I’d encourage you not to leap to premature conclusions."

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

One good thing is our testing and awareness is way better than early March in NYC.  So maybe not ideal (ie required asymptomatic testing) but should be able to detect much quicker than before. 

[mu03eng]

So now that the NY Times has had the epiphany that death data is extremely problematic with the majority of the media stop breathlessly reporting it every day?

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

So now that the NY Times has had the epiphany that death data is extremely problematic with the majority of the media stop breathlessly reporting it every day?

Problematic?  I read it as being described as a lagging indicator.

[mu03eng]

Problematic?  I read it as being described as a lagging indicator.

It is certainly a lagging indicator but it is also misleading, at least in the context of what data is collected and how its reported.

Take the Texas number that Forgetful cited a couple of days ago where they had record deaths in one day. They reported 58 deaths in that day, but if you dig into that particular day, 17 of those deaths were from a prison where the deaths had occurred over a 3 week period starting 5 weeks before the reporting. A further 10 of those deaths were from West Texas and had occurred the week before. However the headline is Texas has most deaths in a single day.

There is no doubting that deaths per day could be a useful indicator, but the way its constructed and the way it's used make it problematic at best.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

It is certainly a lagging indicator but it is also misleading, at least in the context of what data is collected and how its reported.

Take the Texas number that Forgetful cited a couple of days ago where they had record deaths in one day. They reported 58 deaths in that day, but if you dig into that particular day, 17 of those deaths were from a prison where the deaths had occurred over a 3 week period starting 5 weeks before the reporting. A further 10 of those deaths were from West Texas and had occurred the week before. However the headline is Texas has most deaths in a single day.

There is no doubting that deaths per day could be a useful indicator, but the way its constructed and the way it's used make it problematic at best.

The interpretation is problematic in some instances.  I agree.

[mu_hilltopper]

So now that the NY Times has had the epiphany that death data is extremely problematic with the majority of the media stop breathlessly reporting it every day?

Indeed .. the MJS had an article ~10 days ago about what a typical COVID death was, if there was such a thing, age 70s, in a nursing home, etc.


We spend a gigantic amount of time analyzing the death counts -- and marginalizing them with, well, I'm young, I don't have comorbidities, I should be fine.


But .. death is the outcome in <1% of the cases.   Multiply that by 4x to get the critical cases, respiratory failure, multi-organ failure, septic shock of people damn close to death.


Then there's the severe cases .. 14% with pneumonia, etc.  So many stories of people "thinking they were going to die .. felt like there was glass in my lungs .." but thankfully recovered.


This virus is not a huge killer -- but for a huge chunk of people, it's just brutal.

[Galway Eagle]

Indeed .. the MJS had an article ~10 days ago about what a typical COVID death was, if there was such a thing, age 70s, in a nursing home, etc.


We spend a gigantic amount of time analyzing the death counts -- and marginalizing them with, well, I'm young, I don't have comorbidities, I should be fine.


But .. death is the outcome in <1% of the cases.   Multiply that by 4x to get the critical cases, respiratory failure, multi-organ failure, septic shock of people damn close to death.


Then there's the severe cases .. 14% with pneumonia, etc.  So many stories of people "thinking they were going to die .. felt like there was glass in my lungs .." but thankfully recovered.


This virus is not a huge killer -- but for a huge chunk of people, it's just brutal.

Isn't it a fairly high percentage of people dealing with lasting damage after you get it? Or was that an early falsehood?

[tower912]

Indeed .. the MJS had an article ~10 days ago about what a typical COVID death was, if there was such a thing, age 70s, in a nursing home, etc.


We spend a gigantic amount of time analyzing the death counts -- and marginalizing them with, well, I'm young, I don't have comorbidities, I should be fine.


But .. death is the outcome in <1% of the cases.   Multiply that by 4x to get the critical cases, respiratory failure, multi-organ failure, septic shock of people damn close to death.


Then there's the severe cases .. 14% with pneumonia, etc.  So many stories of people "thinking they were going to die .. felt like there was glass in my lungs .." but thankfully recovered.


This virus is not a huge killer -- but for a huge chunk of people, it's just brutal.

Conversely, in the decade that just ended, Michigan had 2200 deaths from the flu.  5000 COVID deaths in two months.    I agree with your underlying point, topper.   Better testing for antibodies is going to reveal a much higher infection rate and therefore a lower mortality rate.   A treatment for the bad cases and we can all but out this behind us.

edit:    My bad.   Since 2000, not in the last decade.   

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/05/the-flu-has-killed-2200-michiganders-since-2000-coronavirus-topped-that-in-a-month.html

[injuryBug]

Conversely, in the decade that just ended, Michigan had 2200 deaths from the flu.  5000 COVID deaths in two months.    I agree with your underlying point, topper.   Better testing for antibodies is going to reveal a much higher infection rate and therefore a lower mortality rate.   A treatment for the bad cases and we can all but out this behind us.

That is exactly what the stay at home orders were to do buy us some time to save lives and understand the virus better.  now do we understand it better who knows it seems each week new info comes out.  Cannot trust everything you read it will dive you crazy

[tower912]

You and WD make a point that you seem to view as a negative that I view as a positive.     Considering our knowledge of this virus 4 months ago, huge strides have been made.    So much more knowledge and understanding, lots of scientists making progress toward vaccines and treatments.    OF COURSE it changes every week.   We want it too.    If it wasn't changing every week, then science and society would truly be failing.

Who to believe?    I follow and trust scientists.    Data not agenda.   And I want and expect things to change on a daily/weekly/monthly basis.   

I BELIEVE that the only way to know exactly where we are with this is universal antibody testing.   

[jesmu84]

You and WD make a point that you seem to view as a negative that I view as a positive.     Considering our knowledge of this virus 4 months ago, huge strides have been made.    So much more knowledge and understanding, lots of scientists making progress toward vaccines and treatments.    OF COURSE it changes every week.   We want it too.    If it wasn't changing every week, then science and society would truly be failing.

Who to believe?    I follow and trust scientists.    Data not agenda.   And I want and expect things to change on a daily/weekly/monthly basis.   

I BELIEVE that the only way to know exactly where we are with this is universal antibody testing.   

[forgetful]

It is certainly a lagging indicator but it is also misleading, at least in the context of what data is collected and how its reported.

Take the Texas number that Forgetful cited a couple of days ago where they had record deaths in one day. They reported 58 deaths in that day, but if you dig into that particular day, 17 of those deaths were from a prison where the deaths had occurred over a 3 week period starting 5 weeks before the reporting. A further 10 of those deaths were from West Texas and had occurred the week before. However the headline is Texas has most deaths in a single day.

There is no doubting that deaths per day could be a useful indicator, but the way its constructed and the way it's used make it problematic at best.

I don't think I was the one who discussed that.

I agree with you, that due to the date of indexing, fixating on the exact daily trend in deaths/cases can be problematic. Add to it, that many localities don't report on weekends, then lump them all together on monday/tuesday. Usually the 7-day moving average is a bit better.

[forgetful]

The one thing I'll caution regarding the CDC, is that it is controlled by the Whitehouse, and what they publicly post is usually filtered through the Whitehouse editors. Sometimes, that means that the original science is watered down, or altered.

I agree. I trust the CDC, just cautious on the Whitehouse political filter. (see guidelines to reopen).

[injuryBug]

You and WD make a point that you seem to view as a negative that I view as a positive.     Considering our knowledge of this virus 4 months ago, huge strides have been made.    So much more knowledge and understanding, lots of scientists making progress toward vaccines and treatments.    OF COURSE it changes every week.   We want it too.    If it wasn't changing every week, then science and society would truly be failing.

Who to believe?    I follow and trust scientists.    Data not agenda.   And I want and expect things to change on a daily/weekly/monthly basis.   

I BELIEVE that the only way to know exactly where we are with this is universal antibody testing.   

Tower I agree antibody testing for all would be huge.  The part about new things every week was more the garbage that gets thrown out there and puts some in a panic.  Stick to the basics wash your hands, 6 ft apart,  put on a mask and watch your loved ones closely for changes to their bodies/behavior.
I do think the progress by the scientists weekly is great and a huge positive

[tower912]

Tower I agree antibody testing for all would be huge.  The part about new things every week was more the garbage that gets thrown out there and puts some in a panic.  Stick to the basics wash your hands, 6 ft apart,  put on a mask and watch your loved ones closely for changes to their bodies/behavior.
I do think the progress by the scientists weekly is great and a huge positive

I think we are more in agreement than disagreement

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Dane County releases a 14 page, convoluted plan today.  https://publichealthmdc.com/documents/Forward_Dane.pdf

[Hards Alumni]

Dane County releases a 14 page, convoluted plan today.  https://publichealthmdc.com/documents/Forward_Dane.pdf

I get the feeling you'd be calling it comprehensive if this was Waukesha county.