U.S. Coronavirus Highest Day Ever

[stevil]

...and how does a country, that's a major international economic hub with 330 million people, do that?

It's easy for an island nation of 4 million people to go "hard and fast" by simply shutting down international travel and sheltering in place for 30 days.

I agree that the countries are different, but how did China do it?

USA really has no excuses.
As a country you are doing very poorly.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I agree that the countries are different, but how did China do it?

USA really has no excuses.
As a country you are doing very poorly.

A couple different things:
1) Who knows if China was even being 100% honest about their numbers
2) China has an authoritarian (sometimes bordering on draconian at times) government. We don't have that here (nor would anyone want that). Sure, we could send out armed patrols to point guns at people if they try to leave their house, but we all know why that would turn out quite poorly in some regions of the country. NY Times even referred to their strategy as "Mao-style social control"
3) China also used a different sort of reporting metrics than other nations. For instance, early on, they didn't have enough tests to test everyone so were turning patients (even with suspected covid symptoms) and they weren't getting counted. About 1/4 of the way through, they stopped including people who tested positive, but displayed no symptoms in their counts...so who know what the real case/death counts are.


We're certainly not handling it the best, I'd happy grant you that. However, to say that outcomes are exclusive to one type of leadership or another only works if you ignore a lot of the data. There are several countries that in terms of deaths per 100k and case fatality ratio isn't all that much better than ours, and they have leadership figures that most would label as "progressive and competent" (IE: not Donald Trump or a populist right wing candidate)
Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

For example, Belgium isn't doing so hot (they actually have a case fatality ratio that's higher than ours and a higher deaths/100k count)
France's case fatality ratio is a tad higher than ours, and their deaths/100k isn't that much better than ours
Netherland's numbers aren't anything to write home about either in terms of those two metrics mentioned.

If covid statistics alone were an indicator of pandemic handling competence, the president of Sierra Leone is putting every first world leader to shame. (with 7 million+ people, and only 2300 cases and 74 deaths)

 

[Tanj]

For example, Belgium isn't doing so hot (they actually have a case fatality ratio that's higher than ours and a higher deaths/100k count)
France's case fatality ratio is a tad higher than ours, and their deaths/100k isn't that much better than ours
Netherland's numbers aren't anything to write home about either in terms of those two metrics mentioned.

So it's OK because the US is just as badly off as a bunch of other countries.

I'm pretty sure "exceptionalism" is supposed to go the other way.

 

[stevil]

A couple different things:
1) Who knows if China was even being 100% honest about their numbers

True, I don't consider China as being honest.
I have doubts about the data coming out of USA as well though at the moment.

2) China has an authoritarian (sometimes bordering on draconian at times) government. We don't have that here (nor would anyone want that).

NZ, Australia and Canada have democratic societies though, and we are doing much, much better than USA

Sure, we could send out armed patrols to point guns at people if they try to leave their house,

NZ and Australia didn't do this, I doubt Canada did this.

We're certainly not handling it the best, I'd happy grant you that.

I'd be interested to know what you think USA could have done better.

However, to say that outcomes are exclusive to one type of leadership or another only works if you ignore a lot of the data.

Oh, there are a lot of factors in play.

There are several countries that in terms of deaths per 100k and case fatality ratio isn't all that much better than ours, and they have leadership figures that most would label as "progressive and competent" (IE: not Donald Trump or a populist right wing candidate)

Countries in Europe are all surrounded by each other, that region is a hotspot.
North America isn't though, Canada is doing just fine.

For example, Belgium isn't doing so hot (they actually have a case fatality ratio that's higher than ours and a higher deaths/100k count)

It seems Belgium was doing really well up until late September after which they decided to loosen their rules. The government did it to themselves and should bear a large amount of blame.
How Belgium failed its second coronavirus test
many experts continue to be perplexed about why the government loosened rules at the end of September — a decision that, in hindsight, looks incomprehensible. Guidance on social contacts was eased, as was the time recommended for self-isolation.
Belgium Coronavirus: 333,718 Cases and 10,899 Deaths - Worldometer

France's case fatality ratio is a tad higher than ours, and their deaths/100k isn't that much better than ours

France is in the middle of a huge Europe outbreak, and they are doing significantly better than USA.

If covid statistics alone were an indicator of pandemic handling competence, the president of Sierra Leone is putting every first world leader to shame. (with 7 million+ people, and only 2300 cases and 74 deaths)

Not NZ, we have done far better than Sierra Leone.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

NZ and Australia didn't do this, I doubt Canada did this.

Canada and NZ have a unique situation of having a low population density, and not being major international hubs. Canada did much better than us for H1N1 (Swine flu) as well, and that was during a time when we had Obama (who had the "pandemic playbook"), and Canada had conservative Stephen Harper running the show.

I'd be interested to know what you think USA could have done better.

Restrict international travel earlier, replenish PPE, be better prepared for testing and contact tracing, shut down large gatherings (such as sporting events) in February, Not send covid positive patients into nursing homes, and restrict interstate travel in and out of NY and Washington State after the first cases where detected there.

Not NZ, we have done far better than Sierra Leone.

Adjusted for population sizes, I don't know that's a valid claim.

Adjusted for population size: NZ had more cases, and while they had fewer deaths, that's largely attributable to having more elevated technology to treat those cases.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So it's OK because the US is just as badly off as a bunch of other countries.

I'm pretty sure "exceptionalism" is supposed to go the other way.

It's not "OK", I'm simply saying that the type of leadership (conservative vs. liberal) doesn't have a correlative relationship with Covid outcomes.

The narrative is "if Trump weren't so terrible by setting a bad example, or we had a liberal running the show, outcomes would've been drastically different". I'm saying, there's no evidence to suggest that.

The community spread we're seeing isn't exclusive to either party. There are groups (demographics that lean left and right) who are flouting the recommendations.

I've showed articles about the parties hosted in West Hollywood, and House parties hosted by DJ's in Chicago and NYC (safe to say, the groups involved are quite democratic/liberal leaning), to show that there's people, in both parties, who suffer from "covid fatigue", who aren't responding well to things like stay at home orders and shutdowns.

Are the west hollywood parties and NYC and Chicago house parties full of Trump supporters who are refusing to abide by the rules because of his bad influence? Or are they simply full of 18-25's who are tired of being cooped up?

U.S. Coronavirus Highest Day Ever

If you look at my post here, do you think the people attending these gatherings are persuaded by Trump's rhetoric? Or do you think they're simply young people who aren't responding well to the lockdown orders when they want to spend time with their friends?

 

[Tanj]

It's not "OK", I'm simply saying that the type of leadership (conservative vs. liberal) doesn't have a correlative relationship with Covid outcomes.

I would agree. The correlation comes with leadership which is weak versus strong. Trump's leadership along with large swathes of Europe, have been weak. Belgium as an example. Currently the worst affected country in the world, their response is to add a curfew from 12am to 5am, because, yeah, that's when all the transmissioning is happening.

If you look at my post here, do you think the people attending these gatherings are persuaded by Trump's rhetoric? Or do you think they're simply young people who aren't responding well to the lockdown orders when they want to spend time with their friends?

I think there'd be less of them if the was strong societal condemnation lead by a strong government with enforcement capability. Trump's rightwing populist anti science stance, up to and including each of his rallies being spreader events, his treatment of people like Fauci, His feeble attempts at federal direction coupled with ignoring his own administrations directives, have been a humanitarian disaster of truly epic proportions.

We know now this is not a seasonal virus in any reasonable sense of the word, and there's increasing evidence immunity is short lived, it puts 20% of it's cases into hospital for some period of time (as opposed to 1% for influenza), and thanks to the Trump lead right wing less than 50% of Americans will take a vaccine when it is available. There's also increasing evidence that even mild cases get damage to non-regenerative organs, such as the heart.

The sense in which the US is "turning the corner" is analogous to a horror movie in which the young girl turns the corner to go down into the basement, in her neglige, carrying a candle, by herself.

Not only is the US the bottom of the whole world right now it will continue to be the bottom of the whole world for probably years, and a huge percentage of that can be blamed directly on Trump.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

I agree that the countries are different, but how did China do it?

USA really has no excuses.
As a country you are doing very poorly.

Of course the United States has no good excuse. We have Trump supporters people , being manipulated by the president(Trump) in the white house. And the vice president has no guts to tell people the truth , The president (Trump) is completely wrong and Trump and Pence should be fired. And go to prison for deceiving people.

 

[rambot]

A couple different things:
1) Who knows if China was even being 100% honest about their numbers
2) China has an authoritarian (sometimes bordering on draconian at times) government. We don't have that here (nor would anyone want that). Sure, we could send out armed patrols to point guns at people if they try to leave their house, but we all know why that would turn out quite poorly in some regions of the country. NY Times even referred to their strategy as "Mao-style social control"
3) China also used a different sort of reporting metrics than other nations. For instance, early on, they didn't have enough tests to test everyone so were turning patients (even with suspected covid symptoms) and they weren't getting counted. About 1/4 of the way through, they stopped including people who tested positive, but displayed no symptoms in their counts...so who know what the real case/death counts are.


We're certainly not handling it the best, I'd happy grant you that. However, to say that outcomes are exclusive to one type of leadership or another only works if you ignore a lot of the data. There are several countries that in terms of deaths per 100k and case fatality ratio isn't all that much better than ours, and they have leadership figures that most would label as "progressive and competent" (IE: not Donald Trump or a populist right wing candidate)
Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

For example, Belgium isn't doing so hot (they actually have a case fatality ratio that's higher than ours and a higher deaths/100k count)
France's case fatality ratio is a tad higher than ours, and their deaths/100k isn't that much better than ours
Netherland's numbers aren't anything to write home about either in terms of those two metrics mentioned.

If covid statistics alone were an indicator of pandemic handling competence, the president of Sierra Leone is putting every first world leader to shame. (with 7 million+ people, and only 2300 cases and 74 deaths)

Ok. South Korea.

 

[stevil]

Canada and NZ have a unique situation of having a low population density, and not being major international hubs.

We have shut down international travel, USA should also.
What would it matter when international travel is shut down whether a country used to be an international hub or not?

Canada did much better than us for H1N1 (Swine flu) as well, and that was during a time when we had Obama (who had the "pandemic playbook"), and Canada had conservative Stephen Harper running the show.

I'm certainly not saying that liberals are better than conservatives. That argument is something you would have to take up with someone else.

Restrict international travel earlier, replenish PPE, be better prepared for testing and contact tracing, shut down large gatherings (such as sporting events) in February, Not send covid positive patients into nursing homes, and restrict interstate travel in and out of NY and Washington State after the first cases where detected there.

I like these, they are good.
I think more is needed though.
In NZ it started with good leadership and good communications.
Leadership formed a taskforce with scientists, together they created a plan. An alert system, a strategy (for us it was elimination). They communicated clearly and honestly, they got the people of NZ on board. They have shifted us up and down the alert system as needed. They have put financial support packages together, they have got the whole country doing their part.
You are not going to beat this disease without the support of the majority of the country.

Adjusted for population sizes, I don't know that's a valid claim.
Adjusted for population size: NZ had more cases, and while they had fewer deaths, that's largely attributable to having more elevated technology to treat those cases.

We have had far fewer deaths.
We have no community transmission, our kids are back at school, sporting events are back on with full audience attendance. No need for masks, nothing to fear, we are even starting to open up our bubble to Australia.

 

[KCfromNC]

Canada and NZ have a unique situation of having a low population density, and not being major international hubs.

Compare Canada against South Dakota. Guess which one has the 8x higher per-capita case rate? I'm not sure that low population density or lacking international hubs is really the deciding factor here.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Compare Canada against South Dakota. Guess which one has the 8x higher per-capita case rate? I'm not sure that low population density or lacking international hubs is really the deciding factor here.

Canada (the nation as a whole?)

Canada's overall population density is 4 people per square Kilometer (6.4 people per square mile)

South Dakota is 11.3 people per square mile.

Granted, Canada has a unique aspect in that large parts of their country is inhabitable (unless you want to brave some bitter winter climate), and South Dakota is just one our of low-density states.

However, you can find instances where their higher density areas had similar issues to ours of when controlling for overall size and population density.

Quebec would be a prime example of that.

They have a population of 8.4 million people, and their stats thus far are:

Some states that have comparable population sizes:

...and then you can find states of a similar size that did way worse in terms of case count, like Arizona

Even when you look at their most populous province, Ontario (with 14 million people), that's not that much more than our most populous county (LA County) that has 10 million people, and the land mass of Ontario is obviously much larger and much more spread out than that of LA County.


The more condensed the people are, the more vectors of probably transmission exist.

I'm not knocking Canada here, I love Canada...my family wouldn't have a summer home up there if we didn't like it. And Justin certainly took some more decisive action in some regards when compared to Trump. However, Canada could've implemented the same laxness in terms of restrictions, and still ended up with better outcomes than us (per capita) simply due to having fewer areas of high population density.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Ok. South Korea.

You mean a country where face mask wearing has been common culture for decades? (so people were already doing one of the things that prevents transmission so it wasn't a huge culture shift?)
Face Mask Culture Common in East, New to West

"You need to wear a mask...oh, 3/4 of people were already doing that anyway...great".

It's a lot easier to get young people to mask-up when many were already doing it anyway as a fashion statement.

It's a little harder sell to kids here in the US.

...and I know the line that keeps getting repeated is "if we just had strong leadership at the top...". Sorry, no, a bunch of party boys in West Hollywood and a bunch of teens in Chicago and NYC (who were throwing house parties, maskless during the pandemic) aren't taking social queues from Donald Trump.

In fact, I'd go as far as saying that if he had insisted on mask wearing, many in the 18-25 demographic would've conflated with some "tell-tale sign of fascism" given the current political climate.

 

[stevil]

In fact, I'd go as far as saying that if he had insisted on mask wearing, many in the 18-25 demographic would've conflated with some "tell-tale sign of fascism" given the current political climate.

But wouldn't it have been great if Trump had been telling people the seriousness of the situation and requesting, promoting and leading by example with regards to wearing face masks.

Unfortunately Trump did the complete opposite and he now is rightly criticised for that.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

But wouldn't it have been great if Trump had been telling people the seriousness of the situation and requesting, promoting and leading by example with regards to wearing face masks.

Unfortunately Trump did the complete opposite and he now is rightly criticised for that.

Well sure, he's an egomaniac and narcissist, and his one high point was the economy, so anything that challenged his one strong point was going to be met with at blasé attitude as he was trying to keep the one strong point of his administration in-tact.

The hyper-partisanship (and division over him, as a person) was set in stone before the pandemic set in.

So going into the pandemic, it was a case where 50% of the people would follow him no matter what, and 50% of the people would oppose him no matter what.

That's not a great spot to be in with regards to setting policy for a nation...especially during crisis time.

Some of it is the result of his own doing with using charged language, some of it is the result of hysteria by people who are determined to prove that whatever he does is "the worst".

In a perfect world a president (no matter the party) could make recommendations during a time of crisis, and people from both parties would respect it.

That sort of civil environment left our country in the early 2000's.

We're literally in a spot where when a family wants to have a picnic at the beach (outdoors), they're accused of "being selfish" and "not taking covid seriously", but then entities try to defend mass protests and claim that they're not "super spreader" events.

On the flip side, we have people who think the virus is a hoax, but will selectively apply that logic and say that re-opening restaurants isn't a risk, but then highlight the risks involved with antifa/BLM protests when it's convenient.

It's a messy situation.

The reality is, with a novel virus (where not many people have immunity yet), any form of human interaction comes with a certain level of risk of contracting it. (and potentially spreading it to others if you don't know you have it). But 90% of our country identifies with one of two political factions that are dead set on blaming the other side for anything that goes wrong.

There's plenty of blame to go around for our current situation. A lot of aspects were out our control, but for the ones that were in our control, partisanship dictated policy (on both sides).

 

[stevil]

So going into the pandemic, it was a case where 50% of the people would follow him no matter what, and 50% of the people would oppose him no matter what.

I don't agree with this.

Typically, in times of adversity people appreciate and support their leader who is doing all to support and protect them.
It is a great time for a leader to become accepted and win over the people.

Unfortunately Trump has not led and has not protected the people. It doesn't even seem that he has tried.

 

[essentialsaltes]

So going into the pandemic, it was a case where 50% of the people would follow him no matter what, and 50% of the people would oppose him no matter what.

No, going into this, 90% of people would have trusted public health officials. Trump made it political and contradicted the relevant experts. This didn't have to happen.

 

[Xenophon]

Nobody cares. It's meaningless. Only science illiterates care.

 

[FireDragon76]

A couple different things:
1) Who knows if China was even being 100% honest about their numbers
2) China has an authoritarian (sometimes bordering on draconian at times) government. We don't have that here (nor would anyone want that). Sure, we could send out armed patrols to point guns at people if they try to leave their house, but we all know why that would turn out quite poorly in some regions of the country. NY Times even referred to their strategy as "Mao-style social control"
3) China also used a different sort of reporting metrics than other nations. For instance, early on, they didn't have enough tests to test everyone so were turning patients (even with suspected covid symptoms) and they weren't getting counted. About 1/4 of the way through, they stopped including people who tested positive, but displayed no symptoms in their counts...so who know what the real case/death counts are.


We're certainly not handling it the best, I'd happy grant you that. However, to say that outcomes are exclusive to one type of leadership or another only works if you ignore a lot of the data. There are several countries that in terms of deaths per 100k and case fatality ratio isn't all that much better than ours, and they have leadership figures that most would label as "progressive and competent" (IE: not Donald Trump or a populist right wing candidate)
Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

For example, Belgium isn't doing so hot (they actually have a case fatality ratio that's higher than ours and a higher deaths/100k count)
France's case fatality ratio is a tad higher than ours, and their deaths/100k isn't that much better than ours
Netherland's numbers aren't anything to write home about either in terms of those two metrics mentioned.

If covid statistics alone were an indicator of pandemic handling competence, the president of Sierra Leone is putting every first world leader to shame. (with 7 million+ people, and only 2300 cases and 74 deaths)

You're not making a case for American style "freedom" at all. Freedom is no good to the dead.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You're not making a case for American style "freedom" at all. Freedom is no good to the dead.

I wasn't trying to make a "case for" one style of leadership over another.

Obviously there are times where freedom can equate to "giving people enough rope to hang themselves with".

I'm just disputing the narrative that our problem is uniquely bad because of Trump.

I think no matter who the president was, the US would be in a uniquely bad situation compared to other countries.

I've seen people cite articles talking about Canada's successes with tamping it down compared to ours with comments like "This is how it looks when you have a real leader".

Would our numbers have been a little better? Sure.

But this idea that our deaths per 100k and cases per 100k would've resembled Canada's if we have a leader like Canada's is wishful thinking.

Now, if someone wanted to assert that instead of our 230k deaths and 9 million cases, we could've maybe had something like 180k deaths and 7 million cases under a more competent leader (which would certain be an improvement), I'd entertain that theory.

The fact of the matter is, it's just not easy to tamp thing down when you have cities as congested as some of ours.

List of United States cities by population density - Wikipedia

Compare that to the densities in Canadian cities.

We also have to factor in that we had more cases than Canada early on (IE: community spread was happening already, before anyone knew what it was or before either side had a plan for what to do about it)

The first "official" US diagnosis was January 20th...which means, there were probably others before then who just thought they had a severe bug given the time of year it was.

...and we have (or had) more incoming travelers from the country of origin than Canada did, as well as flights from other countries that had already experienced some spread.

Even if you look at the statistics from both countries first official reported cases, to the point when lockdowns and measures started, we were still on a much worse trajectory than them, even before either country implemented any serious measures.

If you look at the timeframe of January 27th to March 11th (when Canada started implementing strict measures, and when a few of our states did)

For instance, On February 24th, Canada confirmed its 9th case.

By that point in time, we were confirming our 53rd.

By Early-Mid March, when Canada started implementing their measures (and a few of our states began shutting some things down)
Canada was at a total of 45 cases, we were at a total of 564.

The more people you have, and the more high-density areas (vectors of transmission) you have, the harder it's going to be to contain.

Whether both countries did nothing, or both countries implemented the exact same measures at the exact same time, Canada's per capita numbers would still look much better than ours.