Texas numbers continue to fall after reopening

There are 30 million people in Texas. 70 deaths per day (in proximity to a positive covid test, not "of" covid") is hardly in the mire. More than 200,000 people die in Texas every year. If the criteria for coming out of this is that no one must ever die within 28 days of a positive covid test ), then we are in this forever.

California has more deaths and it's still in lockdown.

I did a lateral flow test on a orange yesterday and it came back positive.
Fucks sake it was a decent post until the last sentence!
 


I'm getting some of these most reliable testing utilities, the dog and two kittens already earmarked any other garden creatures to be added? Serious suggestions only.
 
There are 30 million people in Texas. 70 deaths per day (in proximity to a positive covid test, not "of" covid") is hardly in the mire. More than 200,000 people die in Texas every year. If the criteria for coming out of this is that no one must ever die within 28 days of a positive covid test ), then we are in this forever.

California has more deaths and it's still in lockdown.

I did a lateral flow test on a orange yesterday and it came back positive.

Type 2 diabetes and morbid obesity certainly kill more in Texas.
 
Define a safe re-opening then.

Been a keen statistician, im sure that you are aware, most re-openings are going to appear safe at first. X amounts of cases with only x amount of hospitalisation and deaths. The problem is, as past data has shown, it is the younger people who are more socially active and the workers who tend to be younger and healthier(and more importantly more asymptomatic) who get it first.

Their data wont be a fair reflection of the whole position, and that will be the majority of the early data. It is what happens after the virus has spread through the age brackets (which it always does) which will define a safe opening. I dont think that that data is available for comparative countries yet.

I think the cautious approach is the correct one until we can be certain. not to mention the potential for a mutation that causes problem. slowly slowly as we jab away is best in my opinion.
 
Been a keen statistician, im sure that you are aware, most re-openings are going to appear safe at first. X amounts of cases with only x amount of hospitalisation and deaths. The problem is, as past data has shown, it is the younger people who are more socially active and the workers who tend to be younger and healthier(and more importantly more asymptomatic) who get it first.

Their data wont be a fair reflection of the whole position, and that will be the majority of the early data. It is what happens after the virus has spread through the age brackets (which it always does) which will define a safe opening. I dont think that that data is available for comparative countries yet.

I think the cautious approach is the correct one until we can be certain. not to mention the potential for a mutation that causes problem. slowly slowly as we jab away is best in my opinion.

I agree

Also with the current plan, if the virus follows the same path it did last summer there would be lower numbers even with no vaccine program

The real test of the vaccine I think will be September/ October this year

I would imagine most restrictions will be gone in the Summer apart from international travel and quarantine for returning folk. Hopefully if we dont see another spike in deaths this can be relaxed too
 

Back
Top