Octopus Overlords

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:07 pm

coopasonic wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:25 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:26 am We're about to roll 13,000 here, btw.

Rookies!

-An Annoyed Texan (whose 14yo is getting tested this afternoon)

edit: On closer analysis it seems you are way ahead on a deaths per capita basis.

Looking at Statista.com looks like we are 3rd per capita by state in COVID deaths, while being far lower (~37th by state per capita) in cases. Curious why that would be, especially when it seems like mask compliance and general safety precautions here are better than what I hear about most other states.

Wiki says "More than half of the deaths in the state have been among residents of long-term care facilities." We did a poor job of protecting the elderly in the spring, when the science was still sketchy.

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:22 pm

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:07 pm

coopasonic wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:25 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:26 am We're about to roll 13,000 here, btw.

Rookies!

-An Annoyed Texan (whose 14yo is getting tested this afternoon)

edit: On closer analysis it seems you are way ahead on a deaths per capita basis.

Looking at Statista.com looks like we are 3rd per capita by state in COVID deaths, while being far lower (~37th by state per capita) in cases. Curious why that would be, especially when it seems like mask compliance and general safety precautions here are better than what I hear about most other states.

Wiki says "More than half of the deaths in the state have been among residents of long-term care facilities." We did a poor job of protecting the elderly in the spring, when the science was still sketchy.

Ah, that makes sense. Also consistent with NJ being at the top of the list, from what I understand.

My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

Well... It says they need to go door to door. Does it say they need to knock/ring the bell?

TheMix wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:19 am

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

Well... It says they need to go door to door. Does it say they need to knock/ring the bell?

Or does it specify which doors? As long as you have two doors in your home, you're set.

I'm not that subtle with stupidity. I'm more the 'He went to zero doors because you're an idiot' type.

Could go to the garage door.

Thats like having a bake sale where some of the food is contaminated with ecoli and salmonella but you dont know which. Someones gonna get sick or die.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:25 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:22 pm

El Guapo wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:07 pm

coopasonic wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:25 pm

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 1:26 am We're about to roll 13,000 here, btw.

Rookies!

-An Annoyed Texan (whose 14yo is getting tested this afternoon)

edit: On closer analysis it seems you are way ahead on a deaths per capita basis.

Looking at Statista.com looks like we are 3rd per capita by state in COVID deaths, while being far lower (~37th by state per capita) in cases. Curious why that would be, especially when it seems like mask compliance and general safety precautions here are better than what I hear about most other states.

Wiki says "More than half of the deaths in the state have been among residents of long-term care facilities." We did a poor job of protecting the elderly in the spring, when the science was still sketchy.

Ah, that makes sense. Also consistent with NJ being at the top of the list, from what I understand.

Yes. In a worst case State supervision was so poor one place stuffed at least one body in a shed at a long-term care facility while it rampaged through the population there.

Our school system just backed off their plan to go back to 100% in class attendance....again. While I 100% agree with that, it's frustrating that they keep setting dates to resume 100% attendance then acting surprised when numbers are out of control and they have to back off again. The end result is parents constantly having to scramble every other week to figure out new childcare plans, etc.

My wife does all the student placement for her elementary school, and every whiplash decision the school board makes results in hours of work she has to undo or redo. She was almost in tears this week as she found out all the work she did in prep for the upcoming schedule change was invalidated and has to be completely rolled back.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

There is no evidence that this would cause increased spreading of COVID. The current CDC guidance is you need to spend 15 minutes cumulative with someone who has COVID.

Honestly, the schools would have been so much better off if they'd just said early on, "This year is a wash. Let's accept that, and find a way to make the worst situation work as well as it possibly can." Instead, they change the entire system every week or two, and nobody - students, parents, or teachers - can make plans or put systems into place to deal with what actually ends up happening. I can understand not doing that in August/September, but now that we're past the halfway point, it's insane. It's like you took 13,000 individual systems with a different person in charge of each and achieved a 100% incompetence rate.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:11 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

There is no evidence that this would cause increased spreading of COVID. The current CDC guidance is you need to spend 15 minutes cumulative with someone who has COVID.

That's the definition of 'close contact', mostly relevant if you're simply sharing air. It doesn't take 15 minutes to catch COVID. You have to potential to contract it in seconds face-to-face. All it takes is one close-range cough or sneeze - or spit-talker.

Yeah, my understanding of the 15-minute close-contact threshold is that it's the arbitrary dividing line between being possibly infected and being probably infected.

And the school just went full remote for one week. Not because they're concerned with safety, but because they ran out of teachers who aren't sick.

Sports practice continues as normal.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:11 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 amThe kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

There is no evidence that this would cause increased spreading of COVID. The current CDC guidance is you need to spend 15 minutes cumulative with someone who has COVID.

Are you being serious Nox? You're probably correct in that there are not studies ("evidence") for door-to-door exposure threat levels, but I don't expect that particular wordplay is going to put parents at ease. Nor should it based on my understanding about how the virus finds a new host in which to replicate.

Less time of exposure, outdoor exposure, masked exposure—these things have a cumulative effect. It'll be years before the science is in for how quantifiable these effects are, but I don't think you'll find anyone who runs reputable experimentation who'd tell you they are all-or-nothing preventative measures.

(Sorry to pick your post, Nox. I can think of a handful of other posts by folks who've insinuated the same, and this is the time I chose to actually respond.)

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:39 pm And the school just went full remote for one week. Not because they're concerned with safety, but because they ran out of teachers who aren't sick.

That's been our local experience as well. I doubt it's unique.

I won't pretend to understand physics or judge risk tolerances of people not putting others at risk but from where I sit, here is what I see...

During winter months people cooped up together where virii build sees disease spread going up.
The wisdom being passed is that if you must gather indoor vent the house.

If I spend three minutes at your house door outside while your house is venting, it is venting into me, making it potentially a worse three minutes than actually being in your house at a socially distant safe zone.
If I spend three minutes at five diseased houses over the course of 30 houses in a day then I hit 15 minutes of cumulative exposure.

So none for me, thanks. I'm driving. Enjoy yourselves. I do think it's irresponsible of the people asking you to go door to door. See my note about behaviors putting others at risk.

Hit NextDoor and canvass the 21st century way!

I recall earlier last year reading some speculation about whether amount of viral exposure might be linked to severity of the illness (e.g., if you spend all day with Trump and Republicans without masks at a coronavirus party vs. stopping to chat with someone infectious for a few minutes), which would make some sense.

Has there been any more research on that? Do we have any more information about whether that's a factor in terms of who gets severe / fatal infections and who gets asymptomatic or mild cases?

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

Presumably with the fundraiser the band teacher just cares about the bottom line, no? So whatever form you have will only track people who bought stuff? If that's the case, and if you're willing to accept paypal I can send some money and you can put down my address

I was in high-school band, so I'm sympathetic with the whole fundraising thing.

raydude wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 1:38 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 am My school just keeps on giving. Today we got an email from the band teacher. The kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

Um, how about no?

Presumably with the fundraiser the band teacher just cares about the bottom line, no? So whatever form you have will only track people who bought stuff? If that's the case, and if you're willing to accept paypal I can send some money and you can put down my address

I was in high-school band, so I'm sympathetic with the whole fundraising thing.

Indeed, me too! I'm happy to help.

I appreciate the offer, but no thank you. I'm honestly considering just writing an email, telling him I won't be going door-to-door, and offering to just donate some money directly instead. A community Go Fund Me would be a much better idea this year.

Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 12:25 am

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:38 pm Hmmm..the numbers I saw suggested we were just shy of 390K today. We'll hit 400K by the weekend.

By "today" I meant this morning's newspaper, which really means yesterday. I haven't seen 390k...maybe you got next week's newspaper.

Turns out the Globe uses Johns Hopkins, which rolled 380k yesterday. At the rate we're going (>4,000 deaths per day) we have a shot at hitting 407,000 by Inauguration Day. That's the number of Americans killed in WW2.

The Meal wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:43 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:11 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 11:17 amThe kids are expected to go door-to-door with a brochure for a fundraiser. During a pandemic. In 'Red' status counties.

There is no evidence that this would cause increased spreading of COVID. The current CDC guidance is you need to spend 15 minutes cumulative with someone who has COVID.

Are you being serious Nox? You're probably correct in that there are not studies ("evidence") for door-to-door exposure threat levels, but I don't expect that particular wordplay is going to put parents at ease. Nor should it based on my understanding about how the virus finds a new host in which to replicate.

Less time of exposure, outdoor exposure, masked exposure—these things have a cumulative effect. It'll be years before the science is in for how quantifiable these effects are, but I don't think you'll find anyone who runs reputable experimentation who'd tell you they are all-or-nothing preventative measures.

(Sorry to pick your post, Nox. I can think of a handful of other posts by folks who've insinuated the same, and this is the time I chose to actually respond.)

Yes, I'm serious.

If you can find evidence of door-to-door exposure, I'm all ears. But the "the only acceptable risk is no-risk" is faulty and is a non-insignificant reason why there is so much push back. We all roll our eyes and anti-vaxxers but it's the same issue. Non-fact-based science is non-fact-based science.

There was no significant uptick during the BLM protests last summer. We have tons of data. Why? The only reasonable answer I've heard is that outdoor transmission is extremely difficult.

Now, would I limit my exposure going door-to-door? You betcha. I'd wear a mask. I'd stay 6 feet away. But there's no reason to believe it would put anyone at significant risk other than extreme risk aversion. Everyone has to determine their own level of risk acceptance, so I'd have no problem telling the band teacher (and I had similar conversations in December with daughter 2's digital art teacher) that due to my particular situation this risk is too high and I will not be participating. But a blanket "terrible idea" is just not accurate.

edit: on non vaxxers I mean that risk assessment is faulty and greatly exaggerated. Vaccines are non-zero risk, but obviously you can't get autism or mercury poisoning from them.

Thank you for responding. It is appreciated.

But the "the only acceptable risk is no-risk" is faulty and is a non-insignificant reason why there is so much push back.

Agreed. Also agreed that folks determine their own level of risk tolerance (I snipped your related quote). However, this is more "secondhand smoke" than it is "motorcycle helmet requirements," in terms of how it affects genpop. I'm (not even remotely) guessing we'd have similar disagreements on that/those topics as well.

If you can find evidence of door-to-door exposure, I'm all ears. Non-fact-based science is non-fact-based science.

I don't have that evidence. I do have a first principles understanding of the physics behind virus transmission.

However, you won't find me asserting (or believing an assertion) that a lack of evidence is the evidence of a negative. That's grade-A prime bullshit and the sort of insincere argumentative wordplay that makes me peace-out of discussions.

Now, would I limit my exposure going door-to-door? You betcha.

I'm pretty sure we don't disagree. Does one need to quantify a level of risk to determine whether or not an activity is too risky? (That's a hilarious question, of course, because the quantification of the various methods of affecting factors for this virus will be further refined for the next decade. And they will be shifting as they are affected by mutations, vaccines, cohort considerations, etc.) Maybe the crux of our disagreement stems from the better question: to what extent must one quantify behavior to judge its riskiness for a population?

I'd error on the side of caution.

There was no significant uptick during the BLM protests last summer. We have tons of data. Why? The only reasonable answer I've heard is that outdoor transmission is extremely difficult.

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

Now, would I limit my exposure going door-to-door? You betcha. I'd wear a mask. I'd stay 6 feet away. But there's no reason to believe it would put anyone at significant risk other than extreme risk aversion.

"There is no evidence that [door-to-door sales] would cause increased spreading of COVID."

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

And yet, the Sturgis motorcycle rally was a super-spreader event. While the age demographic is different, it's not nearly enough to account for the difference in spread.

Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

And yet, the Sturgis motorcycle rally was a super-spreader event. While the age demographic is different, it's not nearly enough to account for the difference in spread.

Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

I would also hazard a guess that mask compliance rates were higher at BLM protests than at Sturgis.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

And yet, the Sturgis motorcycle rally was a super-spreader event. While the age demographic is different, it's not nearly enough to account for the difference in spread.

Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

Alternative hypothesis: Republicans (esp. trumpsters) spread disease. NYT: "At least 61 sitting members of Congress — more than one in 10 — have tested positive for the coronavirus or are believed to have had Covid-19 at some point since the pandemic began. The list includes 44 Republicans and 17 Democrats."

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

That is my assumption with no claim to knowledge.

As that assumption translates to door to door, unless the door remains closed, you have a stagnant indoor warm exposure suddenly having an escape pipe taking the particles in the air with it with a tiny tiny kick of pressure.

For me, that's beyond my tolerance for an optional behavior.

Before delivery went "no contact" was there any evidence of increased transmission to delivery drivers? If there is no evidence of transmission, have they dropped "no contact" delivery or do they keep it around to assuage the paranoia of people like me? (I don't do delivery. I do what amounts to semi-monthly masked up grocery shops)

El Guapo wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:27 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

And yet, the Sturgis motorcycle rally was a super-spreader event. While the age demographic is different, it's not nearly enough to account for the difference in spread.

Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

I would also hazard a guess that mask compliance rates were higher at BLM protests than at Sturgis.

While true, not enough to account for the difference. The protests were counted in the millions. Sturgis is less than 400k.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 3:17 pm We all roll our eyes and anti-vaxxers but it's the same issue.

While I agree that it's important to listen to science (to the extent where information is available and clear - it frequently hasn't been when it comes to covid and it's spread, whereas (historically) vaccines have been.).

But people either not doing fundraising or using alternative methods to fundraise (eg, fundraising online) out of (possibly unscientific) fear don't put others at risk the way anti-vaxxers do.

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:28 pm

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm

My take: outdoor transmission is more difficult, the youth exhibit symptoms at a much lesser rate than the general population.

And yet, the Sturgis motorcycle rally was a super-spreader event. While the age demographic is different, it's not nearly enough to account for the difference in spread.

Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

Alternative hypothesis: Republicans (esp. trumpsters) spread disease. NYT: "At least 61 sitting members of Congress — more than one in 10 — have tested positive for the coronavirus or are believed to have had Covid-19 at some point since the pandemic began. The list includes 44 Republicans and 17 Democrats."

Ha. That is about as scientific a take as everything else.

I'm kinda of late to the party and I'm not going to jump into the science stuff (because I'm squarely in the group that believes we still have quite a bit to learn), but I did want to add a bit on risk management.

In short, forcing someone to engage in unnecessary activity of unknown risk is the core issue. I can fully appreciate everyone has their own risk tolerance, but to force a high school student to engage in a behavior that is (1) fundamentally unnecessary and (2) increases risk by some unknown (but definitely a non-zero amount) is highly problematic, imho.

Honestly, my entire existence since March of 2020 has been framed around my personal desire to risk [X] to get [Y}. Unfortunately as many in my circle have learned, my willingness to avoid just about everything and take on unnecessary risk is unparalleled. I'm fully aware that's a privilege and I don't begrudge others that need to take risks to get through this; I can only speak for myself.

Right - I guess my issue falls in the same category. I understand taking reasonable risks for important things. Band fundraising is not an important thing, certainly not now. I'd lose my shit if the school required it of my son because we are trying to mitigate risk.

noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:12 pm Hypothesis: BLM protests were [mostly] restricted to locals, outdoors. Sturgis had significant indoor contact at hotels and parties.

Pretty much. BLM protests didn't involve petri dish locations like jam-packed bars and restaurants.

A new take from Vox:

While these variants haven’t been shown to be more deadly, a more transmissible virus is actually worse in many ways than a more lethal one. Cases snowball at a faster rate, Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch said on a recent press call. With a 50 percent rise in infectiousness, for example, “in less than two weeks, you get twice the number of cases,” Lipsitch said. “And in a month or so, you have four, five times as many cases. But that’s very approximate.” The case growth could be even more dramatic, as Vox’s Brian Resnick reported.

...

The implication is clear: If we want the pandemic to end as fast as possible, we need to pump the brakes right now. And we don’t have to wait for the vaccines to slow the spread of the virus. We simply need to do what we’ve been doing all along to prevent infections, just much, much better. At an individual level, that means avoiding optional gatherings with other people — even grocery trips — whenever possible, or cutting them very short.

“Shopping for five minutes in the grocery store is a lot better — six times better — than shopping for 30 minutes,” said Tom Frieden, the former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, since the odds of becoming infected rise the longer you’re exposed. “Picking up groceries at the curbside is even better, and having them delivered is even better still.” (If you’re able to get groceries delivered or pick up curbside, it will also help reduce the risk for those who aren’t able to take advantage of those options.)

Indoor vs outdoor risk is mentioned in the article, for those that care.

With the new variant, I can echo that I'm seeing additional recommendations that masking is better:

When you do have to be around other people, use a mask — but not just any mask. The other lesson of the new variants, Frieden told Vox, is that we need to get better at masking.

“The fact that [the variants] are so infectious suggests to me having a better mask is a good idea,” Frieden said. When it comes to avoiding an infection, “a surgical mask is better than a cloth mask, a tight-fitting surgical mask is better than a loose-fitting mask, and an N95 is better than a surgical mask.”

....

If you can’t afford or access a higher-quality mask, Swann said, tight, well-fitting (cover that nose and mouth!) homemade masks with multiple layers are better than single-layer cloth masks. Similarly, double masking is better than single masking. And, of course, any mask is still better than no mask.

“But the best protection still remains avoiding contact with other people indoors, especially for a sustained period of time,” Goldstein added. “Masks are not 100 percent effective. Staying away from people is 100 percent effective.”

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:04 pm

When you do have to be around other people, use a mask — but not just any mask. The other lesson of the new variants, Frieden told Vox, is that we need to get better at masking.

like that's going to happen any more now than it has before

And don't forget San Diego's contact tracing.

hitbyambulance wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 9:13 pm

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:04 pm

When you do have to be around other people, use a mask — but not just any mask. The other lesson of the new variants, Frieden told Vox, is that we need to get better at masking.

like that's going to happen any more now than it has before

My Costco is in the heart of Trump's rabid suburban entitlement and denial. My last run was in early December and I was very pleasantly surprised at how draconian their mask mandating was and limiting of store occupancy was. I went yesterday. Well, that didn't last long. They were checking people and forbidding entry to those without masks but throughout the store below the nose wearing was ubiquitous, one person had their mask around their neck, all of the barriers put up to keep the flow of traffic from bouncing off each other were removed and so things were looking like they did during the summer again, when people showed no consideration and stores acted defeated.

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:53 pm In short, forcing someone to engage in unnecessary activity of unknown risk is the core issue. I can fully appreciate everyone has their own risk tolerance, but to force a high school student to engage in a behavior that is (1) fundamentally unnecessary and (2) increases risk by some unknown (but definitely a non-zero amount) is highly problematic, imho.

It isn't just risk tolerance for myself or my kid, either. My son goes to school in-person in a red rated county, and we live and would be selling in a different red rated county (close to 18% positivity and ~750 cases/100k.) Michelle works in a hospital that is packed to the gills with COVID patients, and is in the COVID rooms nightly. Our family is at high risk to be spreaders. I go shopping because if I don't have food, bad things happen (we fall over and stay that way.) That's creating a risk out of necessity. At what point is fundraising for a band worth risking other human lives, even if that risk is relatively small? All to raise funds for a band that A) just got new uniforms this year, already paid off, and B) had every competition, plus almost every concert and sports event canceled (IE - costs this year were especially low.)

There are things worth risking lives for. This isn't one of them, especially when there is a perfectly viable alternative (GoFundMe would have been perfectly adequate.)