With all due respect @NYGovCuomo. Some of the data made no sense from the get go. NY operated under the assumption that it will need 30K - 40K ICUs in a matter of 14-21 days despite the fact that calculator data suggested that it won’t come close to it. When a week passed,
which was basically another week of data showing that NY won’t need 30K+ ICUs in a matter of then-7-14 days, NY did not step away from this projection. We merely pushed it back from April 6-13 to the end of April. Sorry @NYGovCuomo but this is not science. Only the following week
did NY finally back away from the 30K ICU expectation. When challenged on this, the answer is “mitigation worked better than expected.” Sorry again @NYGovCuomo but “data” should be able to tell you how well mitigation will work 7-14 days out. At a minimum, not be off by 700%!
There is more @NYGovCuomo. NY has now 222K known cases based on the level of testing you have done. This means if we had 5-10 times more testing by now, NY’s case count with symptoms (mostly they get tested) would easily be seen at 1-2 million, but hospitalizations and ICU need
is not aligned with this. Meaning, 12.5% cases with symptoms do NOT need beds (as feared); and 3% of cases with symptoms do no need ICUs (as feared). This tells us that the reason NY did not 30K ICUs in a matter of weeks is because the “data & science” had a bad read on Corona Mr
.@NYGovCuomo. It is not because “mitigation worked bete expected.” Basically, if we go with “data & science” we can do better than “mitigation worked better than expected” to explain why NY was 700% off on the ICU need 2 weeks out. This line is good on the margins; not a 700%.
There is more, honorable @NYGovCuomo. (BTW folks I am not trolling the governor. I respect him immensely but data hands around him are missing glaring data in front of them as I am tweeting for weeks already; albiet to the four walls). Anyway, a week out, IHME expected that
NY’s ICU count will rise from a total of 1,583 to a total of 10,900 by April 2nd. This meant a daily rise of ICUs by about 1,331 — At a time when NY’s daily ICU rise was 300 a day! When April 2nd came and NY was only at 3,700 ICU beds in total, IHME simply pushed back its apex by
a week to April 9 and upped the ICU need to 12,000. Jumping from 3,700 to 12,000 ICUs in a week meant a daily rise of 1,100+ ICU cases. Sorry @NYGovCuomo, how is it “data & science” to expect a daily ICU rise of 1,100 when we just had ANOTHER WEEK of rising daily 300? PLEASE!
Here is the big joke, Mr. @NYGovCuomo. If and since IHME’s March 26th expectation that NY will need 10,900 ICUs in a week made no sense, then how/why did we expect NY will need 30K by the second week of April? You closed down NY in large part due to expectations worse than IHME.
Fair to do so at the time “to be safe.” But now it is established that those assumptions were way, way off. As expalined above “mitigation worked better than expected” does not explain it. Therefore, why are we doubling down on policies that those flawed expectations generated?
.@NYGovCuomo BTW, the likelihood that NY has now easily 1-2 million cases with symptoms does not include those who have/had Coronavirus but have/had no symptoms so they did not even check. Furthermore, for a few weeks before the lockdown, New Yorkers were told to quarantine for
14 days if they were in the same large room where an infected person was hours earlier! This assumes a very high contagious rate which may be true. For weeks after that, NY had no lockdown and the later lockdown itself was not Spain-style. Trains are operating and essential
business are open. All this, plus the point above that if you test more you will see more, suggests that NY has/had easily a few millions Coronavirus cases but not close to the alarming hospital/ICU levels that “data & science” projected a week out.
The current likely case count in NY (in the millions; not the 222K which only reflects confirmed cases), means that Corona does not have anywhere close to a 12.5% hospitalization rate or and 3% ICU rate. As such we can’t set policy based on these now-debenked assumptions.
.@NYGovCuomo For weeks, caregivers (companions, family, etc) have almost no access to hospitals under the assumption that EVERYONE who shows up has Coronavirus and that EVERYONE will infect EVERYONE at the hospital and then EVERYONE will die. Ok. Maybe not everyone X 3 but this
policy assumes that Coronavirus is way more spread than the current official NY count of 1% of the population (222K out of almost 20 million people). The assumption is that many people have it; easily more than 5-10 out of 100, and that those 5-10 out of 100 will easily
infect 5-10 others. Very possible. But on a statewide basis, this (together with the other things that I listed) suggests that a few million in NY already have/had Corona but the hospital/ICU levels are not a fraction of what NY expected it will be. One more thing @NYGovCuomo.
Many people say that deaths run 2 weeks behind infection so when NY has now 15,000 deaths, we need to line it up with the case count of 2 weeks ago to know the Case Fatality Rate (CFR). Fair enough, but if NY has now 2 million cases, I doubt highly that it was only one million
two weeks ago; except if we assume it doubled in 2 weeks despite a semi-lockdown. NYs count two weeks ago was easily 1.5 million (or more). This would be a CFR of 1% or less; not close to the 4%+ that it appears NY has now. cc @JonCampbellGAN @Azi @ZackFinkNews @errollouis
.@NYGovCuomo Am I saying open in full like it is mid Feb? No. But your staff needs to get a handle on the “data & science” that drive those policies; including the policy at the hospitals which only strained the system and likely caused many deaths too. Stadiums, amusement parks
and public pools can stay closed for a while and restaurants would not have sit ins for a while either. But every business is “essential” as far life is concerned but in a smat way. Children below 16 should not be brought to stores; those age 60 or above should get their
shopping (all shopping/services; again, EVERYTHING is essential) done by 11:00 AM while the rest can/should shop noon onward. Employees (100% staffed) at retail should have masks and so should those who go in (you indeed ordered the latter). As far as non-retail work is
concerned, companies can be ordered to keep 50% staff at home (rather than “non essential” being fully shutdown for another month), surfaces cleaned daily; sanitizer at the door, and employees should check their temp in the AM. If it is above a set level, stay home.
Obviously, none of the above suggests that Coronavirus is a child’s play. I ordered masks Feb 23 which is two days before the CDC said at a presser that people should think of Coronavirus as a bad flu season and 15 days before Dr. Fauci said that healthy people can go cruising.
.@NYGovCuomo There are almost no deaths in NY of Covid among those under the age of 20.
The 7 deaths is 0.057% of NY Covid deaths. In the 2017-2018 flu season across the US, this group had more than 1% of all flu deaths!
That’s A rate EIGHTEEN TIMES WORSE!
See the data:
The 7 deaths is 0.057% of NY Covid deaths. In the 2017-2018 flu season across the US, this group had more than 1% of all flu deaths!
That’s A rate EIGHTEEN TIMES WORSE!
See the data:
It’s 18 times worse in the fu despite the vaccine! Every life is precious including the lives of children upended because their parents have mental breakdowns, return to alcohol/drug or commit suicide due to an economic calamity. Mr @NYGovCuomo, as cold as it may appear, govrnmnt
policy for the masses is usually not set about one life or even a thousand lives. If yes, we would shut down every December for a month and save tens of thousands of lives from the flu. No this is not the flu but yes gov policy is about big picture data. So considering that only
0.057% (that’s less than a tenth of a percent) Coronavirus deaths in NY are in those under the age of 20 while 84.3% deaths are in ages 60+ (including 64.7% deaths being among those who are 70 or above), we need policies that reflect this. It’s not about April 29 or May 15.
Policies need to be with age groups in mind with some examples given above. Considering the “data & science” about ages, there are ways to open schools soon: You can open up until certain grades (6-7-8; whatever). Key areas/buses disinfected daily; students should be given
sanitizer a few times daily; staff above 60 should perhaps stay away for a while; younger staff should have masks; parents should not send children who are under the weather; school can send home if a student does not check out at the door. You can cut a school day per week.
Mr. @NYGovCuomo. Do I take responsibility for every child’s well-being if you open? No; just as you don’t take when schools are open and there is violence and just as U can’t know the human cost of an economy that already lost 3 times the amount of jobs as the Great Recession!
“But what about the seniors who live with chidlren under the age of 18”? In NY only 3% seniors live with this age group (if I remember correctly). Regardless, does anyone think that the last 4 weeks those chidlren were indoors all day? No. They go out and brought back in Corona.
Worse, in the last 4 weeks those children were more hours a day with grandma/grandpa at home than had they been in school. Guess who made this point Mr. @NYGovCuomo? YOU DID THREE weeks ago but we have yet to see policies that reflect this thinking and reality.
Speaking about responsibilities of life/death regarding Coronavirus, many people are dying in hospital becasue they are there alone which means frustration -> angst -> panic -> and worse. Being alone/stressed is the worse for people who are ill. Then there is the fact that
without a companion to alert a nurse on time (such as the need to suction a brewthing tube) it end in death. I am not blowing smoke towards @NYGovCuomo. This is me relaying what I hear from family and EMS. But state policy still shuts-out most companions and all we hear every
day at press conferences from DC to Albany to City Hall is open/shut economy; social distance, masks and charts. There is little-to-no focus on a key issue at hand which is lack of care at hospitals due to lack of access for caregivers. Anyway all, stay home/safe/sane.
I wrote last night that NY has only 225K known cases because this reflects testing and that if you test 5-10 times more you will see 5-10 times the case count too. See this chart: If the blue (total tests) is higher, the yellow (positive cases) is higher too. It’s obvious.
The point is NY likely has/had millions of cases but the ICU need did not hit anywhere close to 30K because the assumptions (3% cases need ICUs) were off to the doomsday side. This matters because policy is still based on the old assumption and NY leaders think we didn’t reach
those dark ICU numbers because “mitigation worked better than expected” which means if we ease up we will need 30K ICUs within weeks. But NY likely has/had millions of cases despite mitigation but not 30Ks ICUs because the old assumptions are not accurate. Time to give it up.
According to Ferguson, who was way off on the dark side about Coronavirus, closing schools reduces total Coronavirus deaths by 2-4 percent, but this paper lists the many issues that parents/children suffer from school closures.
thelancet.com/journals/lanch…
cc @NYGovCuomo @GovMurphy.
thelancet.com/journals/lanch…
cc @NYGovCuomo @GovMurphy.
