New York contact Tracing: 46000 Data Points

2,392 Views | 8 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by nortex97
NASAg03
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:14a, 12/14/20
Home spread and healthcare services account for 82% of covid spread.

Bar and restaurants close where people can gather in larger, spread-out settings for finite periods of time.
People then gather in smaller settings, closer proximity, for longer periods of time.
I obviously don't agree with a governor blaming people for being human and socializing after 9 months of restrictions, or continuing to close and restrict businesses over 1-2% spread.

Yes I realize that if gyms, stadiums, and restaurants were fully open at 100%, those numbers would be different. But I think it's up to policy makers to determine how much spread at various businesses is acceptable to justify legal restrictions in businesses.


https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/central-ny/ny-state-of-politics/2020/12/11/what-new-york-s-contact-tracing-data-show

Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Aston94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:20a, 12/14/20
AG
Basically, shutting down schools, restaurants, gyms, businesses, has minimal effect, yet we continue to do so.
Reply Quote
30
ORAggieFan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:27a, 12/14/20
So, you're saying that closing safe things like outdoor dining and driving people into houses isn't smart?
Reply Quote
9
cone
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:33a, 12/14/20
AG
what's the definition of social gatherings?

it's useless to not break that +70% out further

how is the virus getting from household to household? are the social gatherings intimate or large?

how many people do you know outside of your immediate family that come into your apartment or house on a regular basis? is the spread largely as a result of one-off events? is it being seeded in low transmission high volume events like the grocery store and force multiplied in the households?
Reply Quote
5
Gordo14
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aston94 • 10:47a, 12/14/20
Aston94 said:
Basically, shutting down schools, restaurants, gyms, businesses, has minimal effect, yet we continue to do so.


It often transmits in public first, then to your family. If you prevent the transmission between strangers you prevent families from getting sick.

I'm not saying I agree with NY's strategy... but it doesn't have a minimal effect. Even if it's a minority of the spread, it's often how it starts.
Reply Quote
4
Capitol Ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aston94 • 10:56a, 12/14/20
AG
Aston94 said:
Basically, shutting down schools, restaurants, gyms, businesses, has minimal effect, yet we continue to do so.
I think the effect would be higher for these individual data points if all of these were open, BUT its a question of by how much more. In TX, schools are open and while there is spread, its minimal overall and for the health and education of our youth, I feel, worth the price. And I am not trying to be cold here as at home learning is proven just not to work. Kids need to be with other kids and in an environment that fosters learning. Being home doesn't do that.

As for the rest, it's a question of our values as a society. There are other major health implications by shutting down. And people need to be able to go out and socialize. They'll do it no matter what as we see, so we might as well accept that fact and try to come up with a different strategy where we do the best we can with hospitals and overflow while realizing that trying to stop the spread by shutting down is like trying to build a wall of sand to stop the tide.

And gyms should be essential. After a few weeks, even novices and those not normally used to training will lose any ability to adapt further with walking and body weight exercises outside of pullups. One needs free weights to get stronger. Period. And stronger means a better immune system. Instead of discouraging healthy behaviors, those behaviors must be encouraged. Combined with a healthy balanced nutrition plan, it really ups your chances of surviving Covid, which is a virus most will survive anyway. If a larger effort was put fourth to encourage more intense training and eating, while a lot of folks would ignore it (lets be real) there would be enough to listen to hopefully mitigate the amount of those hospitalized if they do in fact get the virus.

It seems that while there is risk in opening up, there is still risk in staying shut down and at some point experts should be witnessing that the shutdowns just do not work that well either.
Reply Quote
8
1 edit
Capitol Ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to cone • 11:16a, 12/14/20
AG
cone said:
what's the definition of social gatherings?

it's useless to not break that +70% out further

how is the virus getting from household to household? are the social gatherings intimate or large?

how many people do you know outside of your immediate family that come into your apartment or house on a regular basis? is the spread largely as a result of one-off events? is it being seeded in low transmission high volume events like the grocery store and force multiplied in the households?
I think that's just it. People, even in small groups, are individually going out gathering and it only takes one person. But at some point, it has to become obvious that there just is not a way to stop this and there never will be. I'd like to see a much better and more imaginative approach to things. I think it's time leadership get together and take a real look, politics aside, at everything we've tried to date and what has and hasn't worked and try to come up with a better strategy that accounts for this being a free society that expects its freedoms ton be respected while also understanding that there is a pandemic and cases are spiking at a high rate. Pipe dream I know but if we could, maybe we could lower the numbers a little while also allowing our society to still choose freely the actions that they want to take given their own individual values and freedoms especially now that it's the holidays. It's interesting that the strictest states are seeing an explosion of cases not much different than the most open states. Being strict obviously doesn't work in practice as there is just no way to enforce things to the level there needs to be to lower cases.

I think for a lot of stricker/more shut down states, their goals are too high. They want to see no growth in positive cases. That just isn't realistic. It seems better to set the sights a little lower. There will be new cases regardless of the rules until there is a vaccine that been used enough around the country and world. SO instead, work towards lowering rates more realistically, in much smaller amounts. Don't try to go for a home run here. Play small ball. People will get covid. So maybe be ok with a higher % of new positive cases but at a lower rate than what there is today. Its a tough situation and so its no doubt going to be hard to do.
Reply Quote
1
HotardAg07
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:16a, 12/14/20
AG
As others in the epi community have pointed out, this data is highly flawed. It is limited to contact tracers ability to connect a person who infected them. If that infection came from within the household, that's easy to trace and record. If someone got infected from, say, a gym, with our current methods it's nearly impossible.

This data only shows the sources of infection where the tracers were able to determine the source. However, from what I understand, more than half of all cases are never attributed a source.

Candidly, I believe this data was floated out without context in order to discourage people from seeing their families and nothing more. It's pretty disgusting imo.



Also disingenuous -- how they lump social gatherings and households. Those are two different things that tell two different stories, but they're lumped together to prove a point -- to discourage people from having social gatherings. It makes sense that households would be a significant source of spread, but there's little we can do to prevent that. And again -- if you have social gatherings with people you know, it's easier to trace than random interactions in public, therefore easier to add to the dataset.



Reply Quote
8
NASAg03
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Capitol Ag • 12:40p, 12/14/20
Capitol Ag said:
cone said:
what's the definition of social gatherings?

it's useless to not break that +70% out further

how is the virus getting from household to household? are the social gatherings intimate or large?

how many people do you know outside of your immediate family that come into your apartment or house on a regular basis? is the spread largely as a result of one-off events? is it being seeded in low transmission high volume events like the grocery store and force multiplied in the households?
I think that's just it. People, even in small groups, are individually going out gathering and it only takes one person. But at some point, it has to become obvious that there just is not a way to stop this and there never will be. I'd like to see a much better and more imaginative approach to things. I think it's time leadership get together and take a real look, politics aside, at everything we've tried to date and what has and hasn't worked and try to come up with a better strategy that accounts for this being a free society that expects its freedoms ton be respected while also understanding that there is a pandemic and cases are spiking at a high rate. Pipe dream I know but if we could, maybe we could lower the numbers a little while also allowing our society to still choose freely the actions that they want to take given their own individual values and freedoms especially now that it's the holidays. It's interesting that the strictest states are seeing an explosion of cases not much different than the most open states. Being strict obviously doesn't work in practice as there is just no way to enforce things to the level there needs to be to lower cases.

I think for a lot of stricker/more shut down states, their goals are too high. They want to see no growth in positive cases. That just isn't realistic. It seems better to set the sights a little lower. There will be new cases regardless of the rules until there is a vaccine that been used enough around the country and world. SO instead, work towards lowering rates more realistically, in much smaller amounts. Don't try to go for a home run here. Play small ball. People will get covid. So maybe be ok with a higher % of new positive cases but at a lower rate than what there is today. Its a tough situation and so its no doubt going to be hard to do.
Totally agree with your final statement. We all know that extensive spread happens due to close, continual contact, whether that's at home or in personal private gathering. Short of measure they took in China, no amount of policy is going to prevent the vast majority of spread as people are social beings, with community contact a NEED not a fringe desire.

All these other closure are for optics and not based on science or real data.

I think the only policy should be closure of large indoor events like concerts and packed stadiums. The data from Mardis Gras in New Orleans was definitive on that, and it makes logical sense. You have close contact mixing with many types of people over long durations. Even that part of me wants to say keep it upon and let people make their own choices.
Reply Quote
1
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ORAggieFan • 7:34a, 12/16/20
AG
ORAggieFan said:
So, you're saying that closing safe things like outdoor dining and driving people into houses isn't smart?
POTD, or should have been, on this board.

Insanity is defined by the insane closure rules applied sporadically across the country with zero correlation to cases.
Reply Quote
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.