Subaru XV Crosstrek Forums banner

21 - 40 of 92 Posts

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
And yes, travel will be a risk. BC has a lot of tourism, both in summer and winter. So that will be tougher to mange going forward, and will take a long time to recover, too, I think. Being selfish, I kind of like that, too, as will be able to enjoy more of that ourselves here, without all the jacked up prices caused by tourists. Whistler used to be a great place, not crowded and not too expensive. Now it is crazy expensive, and not good for us locals.
 

Registered
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
8,161 Posts
I know we discussed this before and you disagreed. But I think another difference here is that we did not take the cookie cutter approach (like they did in Ontario and Quebec) and did not close down everything. Because we have very limited medical resources here, we took a very targeted approach with the outbreak areas with testing, contact tracing and isolated them. We had a few fires spring up (meat plants were scary), but they reacted very quickly with those and got them contained before it spread to the community.

What I found surprising, though, is there were no outbreaks in the homeless population. A whole bunch of them camped out in a downtown park, and for sure they were not social distancing. Why were they not affected? What about your homeless in CA? How are they faring?
I recall one of the reasons I disagreed was that the folks who live inland of here descend on the beach communities at the weekends, so keeping the same rules in place in both areas would help protect everyone. Same kind of reason @Montanan isn't looking forward to all the Californians descending on his state (OAK would have been one of them)... 馃樃

It's not going well with the homeless situation here. It wasn't before the pandemic...
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
It's not going well with the homeless situation here. It wasn't before the pandemic...
Not going well with ours here either, though not because of CV, but tragically lots of overdoses. Are yours getting CV, though?
 

Registered
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
8,161 Posts
Not going well with ours here either, though not because of CV, but tragically lots of overdoses. Are yours getting CV, though?
I haven't noticed any particular stats on that in the news but the poorer and especially black communities have higher rates for a variety of social, health and economic issues.
 

Super Moderator
2013 XV Crosstrek, Tangerine Orange
Joined
3,499 Posts
In this social-media age, one of the problems with "doing your own research" is the fact that there's so much un-curated information out there, often intentionally designed to mislead -- like that chart. As much as people love to hate on the mainstream media nowadays, quantitatively their reports are much more likely to have the weight of science behind them, while much of the other stuff the bots are pushing through the internet does not. It's really worrisome, and it's why there are so many ludicrous and ugly and dangerous conspiracy theories going around and gaining credence. Mostly, "doing your own research" online means looking to prop up your own confirmation biases.

I recall one of the reasons I disagreed was that the folks who live inland of here descend on the beach communities at the weekends, so keeping the same rules in place in both areas would help protect everyone. Same kind of reason @Montanan isn't looking forward to all the Californians descending on his state (OAK would have been one of them)... 馃樃
It's interesting: the county where I live had by far the highest Covid infection rate in the state -- something like 40% of all the state cases at one point. And it seems pretty likely that travel was behind that ... visitors to Yellowstone and the ski resorts, lots of out-of-state university students, trust-fund Californians and Texans with vacation homes at Big Sky. Clamping down on that out-of-state travel was probably super-important here, and the last few weeks we've been almost totally Covid-free. Now that the politicians and the capitalists are clamoring to open up Yellowstone again, it will be interesting to see if our self-created isolation bubble pops, and what will happen if it does.
 

Registered
Joined
113 Posts
The problem is that "herd immunity" is not a strategy if the only path towards it is, "let a bunch of people get infected, hope they don't die."

There is no effective treatment outside of symptomatic treatment while the virus runs its course, and people are having a terrifyingly wide array of responses to the disease. There are young, healthy people who get it and experience nothing outside of a light cough. There are young, healthy people who have it ravage their lungs and kill them or cause permanent damage.

Herd immunity is a strategy for diseases where you can either control the outcome of the disease through highly effective treatments, or provide a vaccine. Otherwise, it's not a strategy. It's literally equivalent to crossing your fingers or shrugging your shoulders.
And it's (herd immunity) not going in Sweden as some pundits would like people to think. Sweden, the only European country taking this approach, has a far higher rate of death than the rest of Europe and is still experiencing a lot of the economic downturn effects of the other countries. I'm not willing to sacrifice human beings for the sake of "the economy" (as if it's a living thing...).
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
In this social-media age, one of the problems with "doing your own research" is the fact that there's so much un-curated information out there, often intentionally designed to mislead -- like that chart. As much as people love to hate on the mainstream media nowadays, quantitatively their reports are much more likely to have the weight of science behind them, while much of the other stuff the bots are pushing through the internet does not.
Well, I very much disagree with your media statement. I can't watch them for 5 minutes without catching them on a misrepresentation (out of context cherry picking) or outright lies (because I saw the actual news event live). But I know everyone has their leanings, and they will believe what they want.

But you keep referring to the chart I posted. Instead of just attacking it and its source and what it might infer, can you point out the specific numbers that are wrong, and what the correct numbers then are? Keep in mind that the numbers are from the publish date, a few days ago.
 

Super Moderator
2013 XV Crosstrek, Tangerine Orange
Joined
3,499 Posts
Some of the problems with that chart are outlined in the article I linked to, but as I've said a couple of times my main issue with stuff like that is the way that it cherry-picks and misrepresents data to make an inference that isn't represented by the data itself, but that supports someone's confirmation bias. "Pay income taxes -- die of Coronavirus. No income taxes -- you're safe!" "Close the churches -- you die. Open them up -- you're fine!" Those connections may seem ludicrous when I say them like that, but at least at a subliminal level the intended audience for that chart eats that stuff up.

Instead of posting politically charged references like that, a chart might actually be semi-useful if it plotted variables that could actually have some bearing on disease transmission -- like the fact that NYC has one of the highest population densities in the country, or that the arc of the pandemic there is farther along than it is in Texas. But that doesn't serve the political mission of the professionally angry conspiracy theorists.
 

Registered
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
8,161 Posts
I wish we had the popcorn eating emoticon from the previous site... 馃樃
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
Some of the problems with that chart are outlined in the article I linked to,
Ironically, that SFGate article is how I found that chart. But besides criticising its source, I didn't see them post their corrections (except the morality,... haha). I have been following the worldometers site, pretty well daily, and didn't see any conflicts with that data for that point in time.

Again, please tell me which specific numbers you think are wrong and what are the correct ones. My interest was not the politics, but the data about openings or not, and the death rates between those states. That was the point I was talking about. I never mentioned budgets, finances, or politics. Why are CA and FL death rates the same despite different approaches to managing the virus (cookie cutter vs targeted, and openings, etc). And please no mention of politics, just about the approaches and how they affected the outcomes.
 

Premium Member
Joined
315 Posts
Personally, I'm lucky to live in one of the most rural states in the union, and one that had the courage to clamp down on large gatherings and long-distance travel before things got too out of hand. Montana now has one of the lowest infection rates in the country, though I'm worried that will change when the travel restrictions end and we get bombarded with out-of-state tourists again. (Fortunately, I'm spending a good part of my summer hanging out in the wilderness backcountry, so hopefully I won't have to worry about this as much as some folks.)
Lucky you. My grandson is in the Marines and he is an MP when he gets out he wants to be a Police officer. He ask me where would be a good place to move and I mentioned. Montana, North Dakota and Utah. Montana my first choice.
 

Registered
2018 Orange Subaru Crosstrek Limited
Joined
372 Posts
First I want to be clear, I am not promoting herd immunity. Just saying that there are many others discussing it. I have my own misgivings about it. However, I have been watching the success or not of the states that are locked down vs the ones that have opened up. Here is an interesting comparison of NY, TX CA and FL. You can draw your own conclusions from that. Note the death rate of CA and FL which are almost identical despite very different approaches.
View attachment 300015

And here where I live, we did not do a full shutdown. Non-essential businesses were allowed to continue as long as they observed the mitigation rules (social distancing, sanitizing, etc). And now our news cases and deaths are nearing zero. Our peak was near the end of March.
View attachment 300016
"MOST POPULOUS STATES BY THE NUMBERS" Table's goal is not stated. My first thought, given the posts, is that it was trying to measure the impact of contracting Covid 19 with mortality.

The "Mortality Rate" shows 0.0081% but doesn't define what it means. We can find what it means by finding the numbers they used to calculate 0.0081% By dividing the number of folks who (presumably) tested positive with the entire state and include all citizens that did not test positive. The table ignores the number of actual events.

Using Florida data from the table: "Cases" by "Outcomes" is what we generally ask. Mortality is an outcome that describes the loss of human life and this is being discussed in the context of a specific disease. We don't generally want to know "What happens to mortality to those who are not being impacted by an event" unless we just want to know a general piece of information. .

By using "Cases" vs "State Population" the chart equates Covid 19 Deaths with "All citizens who did NOT contract the disease" (22,000,000 (state population) - 41, 923 (folks who tested positive with Covid 19) This allows the folks cooking the graph to add 21,958,077 people to the bury the real outcome of death vs infection. This is middle school stuff on having kids recognized cooked tables, I know, I tried to help kids understand to make sure they understood what a graph said before bothering with the rest. Tables need to state what they are measuring. The table above is dishonest if its intent was to show mortality as an outcome of disease. Admittedly the table doesn't pretend to describe what it is measuring, but I would argue that makes the table deceptive used in this context.

As an example. If my county in California has a high per capita crime rate and I want to make it seem smaller I can use "Crimes Committed" within my county but add the entire population of California to make the number seem incredibly tiny. Easy. Deceptive. If you are looking for the crime rate for a county you would not be expecting the populations of all other counties to be added to it. The expectation of cause and effect are what most honest people want to know.

There are a number of problems with the top table. Cause and effect are ignored. I wish I was still teaching as I would use this table on a test to see if my 8th grade math student would catch the attempt to confuse things.

Could you state the source of the table, I was hoping for a link? Thanks!
 

Registered
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
8,161 Posts
Ironically, that SFGate article is how I found that chart. But besides criticising its source, I didn't see them post their corrections (except the morality,... haha). I have been following the worldometers site, pretty well daily, and didn't see any conflicts with that data for that point in time.

Again, please tell me which specific numbers you think are wrong and what are the correct ones. My interest was not the politics, but the data about openings or not, and the death rates between those states. That was the point I was talking about. I never mentioned budgets, finances, or politics. Why are CA and FL death rates the same despite different approaches to managing the virus (cookie cutter vs targeted, and openings, etc). And please no mention of politics, just about the approaches and how they affected the outcomes.
There was that spat about Florida's COVID-19 website and whether data was being suppressed. Not sure whom to believe there. And as I wrote earlier, it also depends how they're classifying the deaths. Every state has a different death investigation system, some have a coroner system with elected officials, some have a medical examiner system with a pathologist as the head. In some states (like California) every county has their own coroner or medical examiner. I'm sure there's a wide range of procedures and beliefs in play here. It seems unafathomable to me that not closing bars and restaurants, not wearing masks, etc. could result in less transmission and fewer deaths.
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
The "Mortality Rate" shows 0.0081% but doesn't define what it means. We can find what it means by finding the numbers they used to calculate 0.0081%
Huh? Just simple math, CV deaths divided by total pop. 1779/22M = .000080863 or .0081%. Numbers of dead are same as worldometer.com that I quoted. I said this number is a point in time (last week), so it will rise as more deaths still occur. But the comparison is valid since they were taken from the same day (higher today for both of course).
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
They are slowly learning more and more about the virus. Now they saying it does not spread so easily from surfaces.
Makes sense to me, which is why going out the beach is not so dangerous (as long as you maintain social distancing). I saw another study a week or more ago, that said it does not survive well (just a few minutes) in sunlight. So why did CA allow people to go to some beaches and exercise, but not touch the dry sand (ie lay on the beach)? What data do their doctors/scientists use to make that decision?
 

Registered
'18 and '19 Crosstrek Limiteds
Joined
8,161 Posts
Makes sense to me, which is why going out the beach is not so dangerous (as long as you maintain social distancing). I saw another study a week or more ago, that said it does not survive well (just a few minutes) in sunlight. So why did CA allow people to go to some beaches and exercise, but not touch the dry sand (ie lay on the beach)? What data do their doctors/scientists use to make that decision?
My understanding is because of the crowding, large groups getting together on the beaches, lots of people ignoring the rules. Not that someone might pick it up from the sand.
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
It seems unafathomable to me that not closing bars and restaurants, not wearing masks, etc. could result in less transmission and fewer deaths.
[/QUOTE]
My understanding is that they still advised social distancing, and no crowds of more than 10. This was a little while ago. I heard the governor say that. That's basically what we have here in BC, and our cases/deaths near nil now. No community outbreaks for some time.

I still don't understand why our homeless didn't have any outbreaks. They certainly don't observe even social distancing. Maybe some of their drugs have therapeutic benefits..., haha. But they are always outside.
 

Registered
2018 Orange Subaru Crosstrek Limited
Joined
372 Posts
I did not say the number was wrong. I said that in a discussion of Covid 19 I expected it to describe outcomes from an event. A cause and an effect. I didn't comment on the World Graph as I read your table first and wanted to understand what it said. My point is that important information, such as what happens when you get Covid 19 is the cause and the effect. Measuring people who are not involved in an event, who haven't been identified as being part, into outcomes escapes me as an important reference when buried in very large numbers (millions). I think I must be missing something important that you have to say, if so you could help me by explaining and providing the citation of your table. Thanks. Perhaps your source describes the main column and row definitions?
 

Registered
Vancouver, BC, Canada CGK 2018 Ltd EyeSight
Joined
2,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #40
I did not say the number was wrong. I said that in a discussion of Covid 19 I expected it to describe outcomes from an event. A cause and an effect. I didn't comment on the World Graph as I read your table first and wanted to understand what it said. My point is that important information, such as what happens when you get Covid 19 is the cause and the effect. Measuring people who are not involved in an event, who haven't been identified as being part, into outcomes escapes me as an important reference when buried in very large numbers (millions). I think I must be missing something important that you have to say, if so you could help me by explaining and providing the citation of your table. Thanks. Perhaps your source describes the main column and row definitions?
Well, as we know, and has been illustrated on this thread so far, causes and effects are very speculative at this time, and our understanding of this virus continues to change. That's why I like to quote facts and numbers. I will let you draw your own conclusions.I have my opinions which you well know, and you are free (and encouraged) to give yours.

Hey, I am just helping Montanan and his overlords to generate (eyeballs) more advertising revenue on this forum. So instead of threatening to shut down the thread, he should be encouraging it. They like it when the popcorn comes out...haha.
 
21 - 40 of 92 Posts
Top