Jump to content

Taking it to the Streets - Covid-19 #12


Fragile Bird

Recommended Posts

Maybe I’m just getting cynical, but I think it’s likely that from the media perspective it’s so much better that the mayor of Las Vegas is an idiot.  They’ve gotten way more mileage out of that than they would have from interviewing an elected leader taking a sensible level-headed approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, for those interested, at 6PM UK time (1PM Eastern, for those in the States, 7PM Central European Time for those blessed by being on the right side of the Atlantic) the Cambridge Union is hosting an on-line debate for the proposition that government-mandated lockdowns are the right choice to make. Here's the for and against sides:

Quote

Proposition:
Dr John Edmunds OBE is a Professor in the Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

Dr Christl Donnelly FRS CBE is a Professor of Statistical Epidemiology at Imperial College London and a Fellow of St Peters, Oxford.

Dr Karol Sikora is an oncologist and Dean of Medicine at the University of Buckingham. He is a graduate of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.

Dr Paul Hunter is Professor in Medicine at the University of East Anglia.

Opposition:
Dr Anders Tegnell is the State Epidemiologist of the Swedish Public Health Agency where he leads the government’s response to the pandemic.

Peter Hitchens is a journalist who writes for The Mail on Sunday.

Dr Leonid Eidelman is the Chair of the Division of Anesthesia and Intensive Care at Tel Aviv University and has served as President of both the Israeli Medical Association and the World Medical Association.

Dr Mushfiq Mobarak is a development economist and Professor at Yale University.

Shame that Hitchens got himself involved, guessing he's going to be providing pointless bombast. Oh well.

It'll be streaming on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/user/cambridgeunionsoc?app=desktop

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Hmm, seems a strange conclusion to draw. Those on ventilators are presumably the most seriously ill so it seems natural that there would be a higher number of deaths among these patients, unless i’m just missing something

Agreed. If people are ill enough to need a ventilator I'd guess 100% of them would be dying without one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so here is a Daily Mail (yeah I know) article about ventilators and it’s making some interesting points about how covid is more similar to altitude sickness and you should be giving people oxygen rather then ventilating them. Which, I dunno, I thought  was standard practice anyway and people were only put on ventilators if oxygen failed?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8230775/Is-proof-live-saving-ventilators-actually-deathtraps.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fragile Bird said:

Can you give a breakdown of the deaths per age, or a link to the breakdown please? I'm curious to see what my chances of dying would be in Sweden.

See here. "Sjukdomfall per åldersgrupp" = Confirmed cases by age group, "Avlidna per åldersgrupp" = Deaths by age group.

Bear in mind that for the most part confirmed cases are only people who presented as very ill.

There's also this which provides data on how many patients have been in intensive care and has break downs by age, sex, etc. There's even a chart on common risk factors. 9.2% of those in ICU have been women over 65, vs. 27.9% being men over 65.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Hmm, seems a strange conclusion to draw. Those on ventilators are presumably the most seriously ill so it seems natural that there would be a higher number of deaths among these patients, unless i’m just missing something

 

7 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

Agreed. If people are ill enough to need a ventilator I'd guess 100% of them would be dying without one.

There is much speculation now that ventilators are being over-used. They have been used because experience tells doctors that when a patient comes in with very low oxygen numbers, you put them on a ventilator. But ventilators can damage the lungs. I've been watching doctors say Covid-19 patients appear to have 'stiff' lungs. I've also seen doctors say flipping patients over so that they sleep on their bellies and giving them oxygen using only a nose respirator (sorry, forgot the term) can be very effective, because your lungs are in your back and lying on your stomach gives them room to expand.

This fact was brought to the attention of doctors by a renowned Italian specialist who is known as the world authority on the topic. Again, a doctor I saw being interviewed paraphrased an old brokerage firm commercial, "When EF Hutton talks, people listen."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ventilators-covid-overuse-1.5534097

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I've also seen doctors say flipping patients over so that they sleep on their bellies and giving them oxygen using only a nose respirator (sorry, forgot the term) can be very effective,

Proning is the term.

Also, a note in general, EuroMOMO has updated its website both with Week 16 info (lots of uncertainty going back to week 13, though) and with a much nicer presentation of data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. We are apparently thinking about loosening restrictions from 4th May. But... why exactly? Our number of new cases per day is on a rise. Two weeks ago we were at an average of 50 new cases per day, now it’s around 100. May the 4th be with us...! 

(One day during the quarantineI will stop littering my updates with popular culture jokes, I promise) 

 

 

 

(but it is not this day.)


 

 

:leaving: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Lol, probably because they saw news reports that Las Vegas wants to open, and how were they supposed to know she's an idiot?

I suspect this isn’t the first odd proclamation ahe has made.  Again, if she has no power only a ceremonial title why does she matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I suspect this isn’t the first odd proclamation ahe has made.  Again, if she has no power only a ceremonial title why does she matter?

The Gaming Commission controls casinos. She is the mayor of Las Vegas, and whether or not she has power is irrelevent, she speaks symbolically for Las Vegas. Who else do you want to see interviewed? The Governor has been interviewed as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

There is much speculation now that ventilators are being over-used. They have been used because experience tells doctors that when a patient comes in with very low oxygen numbers, you put them on a ventilator. But ventilators can damage the lungs. I've been watching doctors say Covid-19 patients appear to have 'stiff' lungs. I've also seen doctors say flipping patients over so that they sleep on their bellies and giving them oxygen using only a nose respirator (sorry, forgot the term) can be very effective, because your lungs are in your back and lying on your stomach gives them room to expand.

 

20 minutes ago, Ran said:

Proning is the term.

Huh, I sleep on my stomach anyway.  I've always thought sleeping on your back was trouble.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Are these hospital networks in NYC, New Orleans, and others of the hardest hit spots?  Or in places where non-emergency medicine is shut down and the Covid case loads aren't utilizing full capacity?  You can see on you tube nurses claiming to be furloughed because there's no work in their area.  But I'm skeptical of all self dramatized anecdotes by default.  (Unvarnished truth has rather lower virality, alas.)

Supposedly, hospitals are getting reimbursed more money, more quickly, for Covid patients than for other patients.  If that's the case, then trusting the US case numbers becomes rather more difficult for me as well.  (And as Ty also mentioned upthread about greedy non-profits, non-profit is merely a tax classification. It doesn't cause an organization to behave ethically and in society's wider interest necessarily.  And while I'd rank the ethics of hospital billing above some industries, I suspect the lack of transparency incentivizes chicanery)  So that would make me think that hospital systems in NYC and its suburbs aren't the ones you're talking about.  Could you clarify?

MN and WI, and it sounds like every network is where ours is too in these areas, and we’re not hit that hard comparatively. There’s simply no work outside of the ER and COVID testing sites, so no, those nurses are not lying. And the problem is the waves could be regional in nature, and a lot of people in the Midwest are worried our real wave hasn’t come yet.

And yes, non-profit designation is completely meaningless. I was once offered a job to sell knives door to door for a non-profit. It’s a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

The Gaming Commission controls casinos. She is the mayor of Las Vegas, and whether or not she has power is irrelevent, she speaks symbolically for Las Vegas. Who else do you want to see interviewed? The Governor has been interviewed as well.

The Governor has power.  This mayor does not.  Why should anyone expect her to be competent?  She doesn’t need to be competent to hold a ceremonial position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The Governor has power.  This mayor does not.  Why should anyone expect her to be competent?  She doesn’t need to be competent to hold a ceremonial position.

Because every mayor of every large city has been the leader in their city to protect their citizens, and have regularly been interviewed. She may not have the power to regulate casinos, but she has other powers in running the city.

You are getting overly finicky on this point, Ser Scot. Mayors across the US are being interviewed about conditions in their cities. Why shouldn't she be interviewed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeor said:

Reopening Las Vegas would be a complete disaster.

If they're allowed, some casinos will probably dip their toe in the water to try it - after all, hardcore gamblers have somewhat inelastic demand, they will want to get their fix and head out to Vegas. Between all the cards and chips changing hands, and then all the people flying in and out of Vegas to other parts of the US, it would be sheer lunacy to have that as the first place open.

But the people want to work!!!

Translation: Billionaires are quickly ceasing to be billionaires, so time to exert maximum pressure on the politicians they think they own.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Because every mayor of every large city has been the leader in their city to protect their citizens, and have regularly been interviewed. She may not have the power to regulate casinos, but she has other powers in running the city.

You are getting overly finicky on this point, Ser Scot. Mayors across the US are being interviewed about conditions in their cities. Why shouldn't she be interviewed?

No, you are misunderstanding my point.  In the US a “Mayor” doesn’t always have power as though they are the CEO of a town or city.  

Frequently, they are nothing more than the person with the title of “Mayor”.  They don’t determine, policy, direction, enforcement, or anything.  All of that is done by the “City Manager” and the City Council.  The “Mayor” is literally a figurehead with no power at all.

That sounds like the set up for the City of Las Vegas.  This woman has nothing more than a sash that says “Mayor”.  Hence, my question about the value of interviewing her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

No, you are misunderstanding my point.  In the US a “Mayor” doesn’t always have power as though they are the CEO of a town or city.  

Frequently, they are nothing more than the person with the title of “Mayor”.  They don’t determine, policy, direction, enforcement, or anything.  All of that is done by the “City Manager” and the City Council.  The “Mayor” is literally a figurehead with no power at all.

That sounds like the set up for the City of Las Vegas.  This woman has nothing more than a sash that says “Mayor”.  Hence, my question about the value of interviewing her.

And you are ignoring my point. She's the mayor of the city. She represents the city. I don't know any city that doesn't have a city manager that runs day to day operations. Are you saying city managers in the US overrule city councils? News organizations do not interview the city manager, unless it's on some issue that has come up, they interview the mayor, because the mayor is elected by the people of the city to represent them. That's her job - she represents Las Vegas.

eta: and she won her last election with 73% of the vote. She and her husband have held the position of mayor for decades, so yes, she speaks for Las Vegas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

No, you are misunderstanding my point.  In the US a “Mayor” doesn’t always have power as though they are the CEO of a town or city.  

Frequently, they are nothing more than the person with the title of “Mayor”.  They don’t determine, policy, direction, enforcement, or anything.  All of that is done by the “City Manager” and the City Council.  The “Mayor” is literally a figurehead with no power at all.

That sounds like the set up for the City of Las Vegas.  This woman has nothing more than a sash that says “Mayor”.  Hence, my question about the value of interviewing her.

There’s a town here in MN that literally elects a dog to be their mayor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...