Coronavirus pandemic

[Roadgeekteen]

I think we should have a nationwide mask order if it's allowed.

I still think it makes little sense to require residents of a county with zero COVID cases to date (such as the county I grew up in, zero cases within 30 miles of the town I grew up in) to wear a mask at all times.  But apparently I'm in the minority on that one.

Maybe not nationwide, but in counties throughout America with some amount of cases. I do agree that this matter might be better left to the states, but if that's the case states should be allowed to close their borders.

Weren't some kind of doing that early on?  I seem to recall some Tennessee/North Carolina State Lines out in the Blue Ridge Mountains got some Jersey Barriers.

I think closing state borders might be illegal.

[webny99]

A mask order still makes some degree of sense in a zero-case county, because an infected visitor could bring it in and not make it a zero-case county anymore. Having a mask order means that visitor would have to stay masked, protecting the residents from exposure.

And, how can we be sure it really is a zero-case county? Just because no one has an official positive test result doesn't mean no one has it. People are traveling back and forth between counties (to work, to shop, to visit friends or family) all the time. They could pick it up anywhere, and if they're asymptomatic, they likely won't bother to get tested.

And even if they do have symptoms, there are a ton of reasons not to get tested:
(a) they think the virus isn't spreading in their area, so they write it off and don't bother
(b) they don't personally know anyone who has been tested, and are dissuaded by the "PITA" factor and uncertainty of how it works
(c) they might lack information on how and where to get tested, considering their county probably hasn't administered many tests
(d) they fear being the first positive case in the county

...just to name a few.

[tradephoric]

If Michigan had testing 3172 people yesterday they would have only reported 104 cases. 

What makes you think so? I would say if they tested 3000 people, they would get  450 positives. Any reason to think otherwise?

Well my original 104 estimate was based on the fact that there has been an 85% drop in test positivity in Michigan from April 19th to today (16.6% down to 3.3%).  But you can also estimate how many people would test positive based on hospitalizations.  Since April 19th the Covid hospitalizations in Michigan have dropped 85% from 3,500 hospitalizations down to about 500.  So if 3172 tests resulted in 528 positive cases back in April, then you would expect 3172 tests performed today to result in roughly 75 cases (or 15% of 528). 



Whether you focus on test positivity rate or hospitalizations, things in Michigan are magnitudes better than what they were in April.  Yet the media has an obsession with daily cases and only wants to focus on how they are rising now.  I guess reporting that both the test positivity rate and hospitalizations are down by over 80% isn't sexy.

[hotdogPi]

Michigan has gone way down and then started going slightly up. However, CA, AZ, TX, MS, AL, and FL (and probably several others) are at their peak, way above what they were in April.

[SEWIGuy]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks
**Mask orders in place
**Open back up responsibly

That's the short-term solution.  We should have started this three weeks ago.

We won't do it.  But that's how you would be able to open schools safely, etc.

[jeffandnicole]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks
**Mask orders in place
**Open back up responsibly

That's the short-term solution.  We should have started this three weeks months ago.

We won't do it.  But that's how you would be able to open schools safely, etc.

People won't allow it.  What if they run out of food?  What if they run out of bottled water?  What if they run out of baby formula?  What if they need suntan lotion?  What if they need a new Apple Watch?

We live in a country where people don't like to be told not to do something.  In other certain countries, if they complain, or if they are found outside, the results would be fatal, and they know it, and most accept it.

[SEWIGuy]

Shutting down still means essential businesses open.  Just like in Europe, Japan, Korea, etc.

[webny99]

Maybe the South and Southwest should shut down, since they never shut down properly last time, and that's where the spikes in cases are.
But the Northeast is definitely not shutting down again.

[RobbieL2415]

Walmart is requiring masks in all its stores:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/coronavirus-walmart-sams-club-face-mask-shop

CVS, Target, Kroger, Kohl's, and Best Buy have joined the club.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/business/cvs-target-masks-required/index.html

_________

In other news, refrigerated trucks are heading to Arizona and Texas.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/16/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html

I think we should have a nationwide mask order if it's allowed.

Not allowed from within the states. That's on them

Between the states? Probably.

Masks can be required in/for
- All Federal buildings and for all Federal contractors.
- Carriers under the jurisdiction of the FAA and NTSB
- Firearms dealers

[Brandon]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks
**Mask orders in place
**Open back up responsibly

That's the short-term solution.  We should have started this three weeks ago.

We won't do it.  But that's how you would be able to open schools safely, etc.

The feds cannot shut down the country.  They have control over external borders, but they cannot restrict travel within the US.  The only way they (the feds) can do a mask order is to tie it to some sort of funding, i.e. like the 55 mph law.  Otherwise, it's up to each individual state, with the exceptions of those areas that are federal property (office buildings, post offices, etc.).  I'd strongly suggest reading the constitution sometime.

[kphoger]

Shutting down still means essential businesses open.

Isn't that what the shutdown orders have specifically said?  Non-essential businesses must close or do work-from-home, essential businesses stay open.  That's what we've had already.

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks
**Mask orders in place
**Open back up responsibly

That's the short-term solution.  We should have started this three weeks ago.

More like three months ago.

A mask order still makes some degree of sense in a zero-case county, because an infected visitor could bring it in and not make it a zero-case county anymore. Having a mask order means that visitor would have to stay masked, protecting the residents from exposure.

And, how can we be sure it really is a zero-case county? Just because no one has an official positive test result doesn't mean no one has it. People are traveling back and forth between counties (to work, to shop, to visit friends or family) all the time. They could pick it up anywhere, and if they're asymptomatic, they likely won't bother to get tested.

And even if they do have symptoms, there are a ton of reasons not to get tested:
(a) they think the virus isn't spreading in their area, so they write it off and don't bother
(b) they don't personally know anyone who has been tested, and are dissuaded by the "PITA" factor and uncertainty of how it works
(c) they might lack information on how and where to get tested, considering their county probably hasn't administered many tests
(d) they fear being the first positive case in the county

...just to name a few.

Isn't that paranoia?

Vast majority of businesses serving locals only?
Near-zero tourism?
Not a single reported case this entire time?
But the bogey man might pop out at any time!

Seriously, in the town I grew up in, the highway through town has two gas stations and a diner.  That's it.  There used to be a motel or two, but they're not even open anymore.  Every other business in town sees basically zero customers from out of town.  It's rare to see more than a couple of customers in any business except the grocery store at one time.  Back when there was still a coffee/donut shop in the "downtown area" (such as that is), it was the same old farts in there every single morning, retired farmers who never go anywhere.  And that's the county seat, with no larger town within 29 miles in any direction.  To date, there have been zero COVID cases reported anywhere in the county.  Other than the people in the gas stations and perhaps the diner, why would anybody there need to wear a mask?

In fact, mandating from the capital that everyone wear one just reinforces that the politicians in Topeka are out of touch with the reality of rural Kansas.  Imagine three local farmers hanging out on the floor of the grain elevator in nearby Ludell (population 80), and tell me what they think of the governor when she requires them to wear masks because they're not members of the same household.  Or I remember when my mom worked as a clerk at the feed store in town.  That was technically a public-facing business open to customers.  Yet not a single one of those employees or customers were from out of town;  furthermore, every one of them knew most of the others by name, where they lived, what they did for a living, who their family members were, etc.  Is it realistic to purport that they must live in fear of some outsider spreading contagion?

What would, in my opinion, generate greater respect would be a statewide order that triggers mask mandates once a county hits a certain threshold of case numbers.  (I don't know if that threshold should be a static number or some formula based on population and/or healthcare capacity.)

[kphoger]

The feds cannot shut down the country.  They have control over external borders, but they cannot restrict travel within the US.  The only way they (the feds) can do a mask order is to tie it to some sort of funding, i.e. like the 55 mph law.  Otherwise, it's up to each individual state, with the exceptions of those areas that are federal property (office buildings, post offices, etc.).  I'd strongly suggest reading the constitution sometime.

↓  Which is why JNW linked to it in answer to the question posed earlier.  ↓

Nice try.  The fact is our national response has been a disaster.  Explaining away these number is ridiculous.

When one considers that each state is responsible for the response, it will never actually be a "national" response.

We should have had a national response, not every state for themselves.

Name the federal law or relevant clause in the constitution and amendments that allows for it.

Spending Clause.

[SEWIGuy]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks
**Mask orders in place
**Open back up responsibly

That's the short-term solution.  We should have started this three weeks ago.

We won't do it.  But that's how you would be able to open schools safely, etc.

The feds cannot shut down the country.  They have control over external borders, but they cannot restrict travel within the US.  The only way they (the feds) can do a mask order is to tie it to some sort of funding, i.e. like the 55 mph law.  Otherwise, it's up to each individual state, with the exceptions of those areas that are federal property (office buildings, post offices, etc.).  I'd strongly suggest reading the constitution sometime.

I know all of this.  But that's what would work.

[SectorZ]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks

That will kill many more people thru suicide, neglected care, lack of care for many medical issues, along with causing likely widespread rioting.

[webny99]

And, how can we be sure it really is a zero-case county? Just because no one has an official positive test result doesn't mean no one has it. People are traveling back and forth between counties (to work, to shop, to visit friends or family) all the time. They could pick it up anywhere, and if they're asymptomatic, they likely won't bother to get tested.
...

Isn't that paranoia?

I actually wasn't strongly on the side that masks should be required in so-called zero-case counties.
I was just pointing out that the premise of "zero-case" itself might not be accurate: the virus could be spreading there for weeks before a positive case is reported, but by the time people realize it's spreading and start taking it seriously, it might be too late.

Seriously, in the town I grew up in, the highway through town has two gas stations and a diner.  That's it.  There used to be a motel or two, but they're not even open anymore.  Every other business in town sees basically zero customers from out of town.  It's rare to see more than a couple of customers in any business except the grocery store at one time.
...

Or I remember when my mom worked as a clerk at the feed store in town.  That was technically a public-facing business open to customers.  Yet not a single one of those employees or customers were from out of town;  furthermore, every one of them knew most of the others by name, where they lived, what they did for a living, who their family members were, etc.

Yup. Having spent quite a bit of time in rural North Dakota, I get it. Rural towns are so totally different from suburban and urban areas in this regard, to the point where it's fun to joke with friends and family about the "everyone knows everyone" phenomenon, and how visitors can get completely confused trying follow all the names mentioned in any given conversation.

In our neighborhood, we come up with standard ways to refer to the neighbors we don't know, using descriptions of them, or their house or dog or whatever. But in small-town America, you know everyone in town, and the next town over, and all the farms in between, on a first-name basis. It's just expected.

What would, in my opinion, generate greater respect would be a statewide order that triggers mask mandates once a county hits a certain threshold of case numbers.  (I don't know if that threshold should be a static number or some formula based on population and/or healthcare capacity.)

I agree with that, although I think a formula would probably work better than a static number. 20 cases is insignificant in an urban county, but a potential big problem in a rural county with 2500 residents.

[SEWIGuy]

**Shut the whole country down for six weeks

That will kill many more people thru suicide, neglected care, lack of care for many medical issues, along with causing likely widespread rioting.

No it wouldn't.  Not even close.  Even if you doubled the number of annual sucides (just shy of 50,000) you wouldn't come close to the figure who have died from Covid.

[kalvado]

I think we should have a nationwide mask order if it's allowed.

I still think it makes little sense to require residents of a county with zero COVID cases to date (such as the county I grew up in, zero cases within 30 miles of the town I grew up in) to wear a mask at all times.  But apparently I'm in the minority on that one.

Regardless, a nationwide order isn't really consistent with how federalism works.

The feds have the authority to mandate masks, if they're so inclined, in places and circumstances that fall under their direct jurisdiction - so, for example, they could mandate everyone wear masks in post offices, on airplanes, on military bases, etc. And they could, through OSHA, mandate all employees wear masks while at work. But it's not really their place to make rules about what customers do while shopping, dining, etc. - this is under the purview of states.

If anything, centrally coordinated PR campaign could make sense. Probably strassing on "patriotic". Celebrities, 9/11 responders, politicians of all flavors.
Probably too late by now as "no mask" became a political statement as well.

[tradephoric]

The cases and hospitalization data out of NYC has been encouraging as of late.  They got hit extremely hard in April but for months now their cases have cratered.  This is a good sign for places like Arizona, Florida, and Texas as once their cases begin to drop they hopefully won't see a resurgence (this virus basically appears to be 'One and Done'). 

It seems that once a state reaches a test positivity of about 30% the virus begins to peter out (basically running out of new people to infect).  Once you reach the point where you feel like the healthcare system is at capacity (like Arizona right now), that's the point when the virus starts to subside.  Two major field hospitals were build in metro Detroit in March during the heart of the outbreak there and both of which went almost entirely unused.  Same thing happened in NYC where that ship they sent treated very few COVID patients (along with the Javits Center). 

[kphoger]

I think we should have a nationwide mask order if it's allowed.

I still think it makes little sense to require residents of a county with zero COVID cases to date (such as the county I grew up in, zero cases within 30 miles of the town I grew up in) to wear a mask at all times.  But apparently I'm in the minority on that one.

Regardless, a nationwide order isn't really consistent with how federalism works.

The feds have the authority to mandate masks, if they're so inclined, in places and circumstances that fall under their direct jurisdiction - so, for example, they could mandate everyone wear masks in post offices, on airplanes, on military bases, etc. And they could, through OSHA, mandate all employees wear masks while at work. But it's not really their place to make rules about what customers do while shopping, dining, etc. - this is under the purview of states.

If anything, centrally coordinated PR campaign could make sense. Probably strassing on "patriotic". Celebrities, 9/11 responders, politicians of all flavors.
Probably too late by now as "no mask" became a political statement as well.

Fixed your quote string.

[SEWIGuy]

The cases and hospitalization data out of NYC has been encouraging as of late.  They got hit extremely hard in April but for months now their cases have cratered.  This is a good sign for places like Arizona, Florida, and Texas as once their cases begin to drop they hopefully won't see a resurgence (this virus basically appears to be 'One and Done'). 

It seems that once a state reaches a test positivity of about 30% the virus begins to peter out (basically running out of new people to infect).  Once you reach the point where you feel like the healthcare system is at capacity (like Arizona right now), that's the point when the virus starts to subside.  Two major field hospitals were build in metro Detroit in March during the heart of the outbreak there and both of which went almost entirely unused.  Same thing happened in NYC where that ship they sent treated very few COVID patients (along with the Javits Center). 

It isn't about the virus "petering out."  It's about governments reacting by shutting things down and/or citizens not putting themsevles in risky situations.

[Roadgeekteen]

The cases and hospitalization data out of NYC has been encouraging as of late.  They got hit extremely hard in April but for months now their cases have cratered.  This is a good sign for places like Arizona, Florida, and Texas as once their cases begin to drop they hopefully won't see a resurgence (this virus basically appears to be 'One and Done'). 

It seems that once a state reaches a test positivity of about 30% the virus begins to peter out (basically running out of new people to infect).  Once you reach the point where you feel like the healthcare system is at capacity (like Arizona right now), that's the point when the virus starts to subside.  Two major field hospitals were build in metro Detroit in March during the heart of the outbreak there and both of which went almost entirely unused.  Same thing happened in NYC where that ship they sent treated very few COVID patients (along with the Javits Center). 

Hopefully cases down south drop but the difference is NYC was locked down out the peak. AZ/FL/TX are not.

[GaryV]

Shutting down still means essential businesses open.  Just like in Europe, Japan, Korea, etc.

Yeah, but a whole lot of things were deemed "essential" so they stayed open.  For example, all the yard signs paying tribute to healthcare workers, first responders, teachers, etc. - who printed those? why was that essential?

And then because there were so many exceptions, all the places that didn't get an exception wanted one.  And I will grant that many of them had good points.  Why could you go inside your big-box home improvement store in Michigan and buy a hammer, but you couldn't go to their outside area and buy a tomato plant for your garden?

[tradephoric]

It appears the virus has already 'petered out' in many regions.  Does it make sense to keep everything locked down for the areas that have already been ravaged by the virus?  It's like keeping the tornado sirens on after the tornado has already blown through town.  For instance why can't things fully reopen in NYC at this point?

[GaryV]

Because "petered out" doesn't mean gone.  Reduced isn't zero.  And who's to say that someone from an active area won't come into the newly wide-open city and start the infections again?  Unless you're assuming NYC has reached the "herd immunity" plateau.

[kphoger]

My own state of Kansas was well into a good downward trend, when suddenly the curve started trending steeply upward again.  "Petering out" isn't necessarily the beginning of the end.

Again, take a look at Montana, Alaska, and Hawaii.