Is The Pandemic Coming To An End At Last?

BlueTex said:

Basically what happened is the original bill was sent to the senate on 7/22/2019 where it sat in McConnell's graveyard until March of this year. Pelosi and McConnell got together and agreed to have the senate amend the original bill to respond to the pandemic. The senate amended the bill on March 25, 2020 by changing the name of the bill and striking everything after the enacting clause in the original bill and inserting the all the text that created what we call the CARE act.

Here is that amendment: Engrossed Amendment Senate (03/25/2020)

The bill then went back to the house where on March 27th the senate amendment was approved by a house voice vote. It was then sent to the president who signed it that day.

Click to expand...

Am I right in assuming that the previous (unamended) bill became null and void after the subsequent amendment?

snakestretcher said:

Am I right in assuming that the previous (unamended) bill became null and void after the subsequent amendment?

Click to expand...

That's not the right way to think about it... The "original bill" is what was passed and signed into law after it was amended by the senate and the name changed. It's still HR 748 but with an amended name and text. The reason they used this approach is due to the rules of the house. Legislation has to go through a lot of steps in the house to before being sent to the senate. The "original bill" had gone through all these steps and was primed and ready for a senate vote. To respond quickly, they just took the existing bill and had the senate amend it and return it to the house.

To answer the question I think you are asking, did they keep the original language about excise taxes on high cost employer-sponsored health care plans, then the answer is no.

BlueTex said:

That's not the right way to think about it... The "original bill" is what was passed and signed into law after it was amended by the senate and the name changed. It's still HR 748 but with an amended name and text. The reason they used this approach is due to the rules of the house. Legislation has to go through a lot of steps in the house to before being sent to the senate. The "original bill" had gone through all these steps and was primed and ready for a senate vote. To respond quickly, they just took the existing bill and had the senate amend it and return it to the house.

To answer the question I think you are asking, did they keep the original language about excise taxes on high cost employer-sponsored health care plans, then the answer is no.

Click to expand...

Ok, thanks for that. US legislation is a complex and baffling thing-much like ours.

Jay59 said:

It's nice that you had a graphic showing how President Trump save deBlasio's bacon in April.

Click to expand...

What you failed to do is separate the COVID cases from the other cases.

Click to expand...

There is NO NEED to separate COVID cases, because there is no doubt whatsoever that these changes in ICU headroom and usage of hospitals are a direct result of the pandemic.

I mean, really. Let's say that normally, ICU usage is 60%. Then, a pandemic hits. Let's say the non-pandemic ICU usage drops to 30%. Meanwhile, pandemic usage starts at 5%, then increases to 10%, 15%, 30%, all the way up to 70%. Tell us all, what happens then?

Do you just not believe all of the reports and data, from hospitals and state officials, that hospitals in hot spots are getting increasingly slammed?

Anyway. Whatever excuses you spin about "backlogs" do not work. New York has allowed elective procedures for over a month; Florida and Texas barred elective procedures weeks ago. If the increase in cases was a result of some sort of "backlog," then we would see ICU usage surge in NY, and drop in Florida and Texas -- yet that is the exact opposite of what we see. Hmmmmm

They have only 7% ICU usage, because you have to be in an emergency to get into a hospital.

Click to expand...

lol

No, dude. New York State started allowing elective procedures in April; NYC in May. And yet, ICU headroom has slowly dropped since mid-May. Hmmmmm

Inpatient admissions nationwide in VA hospitals, the nation’s largest hospital system, were down 42 percent for six emergency conditions—stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, appendicitis, and pneumonia—during six weeks of the Covid-19 pandemic (March 11 to April 21) compared with the six weeks immediately prior (January 29 to March 10)

Click to expand...

And again, I already discussed that:

- COVID-19 causes strokes and cardiac issues. Meaning some unknown percentage of those events will be connected to COVID-19.

- During the time he was discussing, NY was vastly undertesting, meaning we missed a huge percentage of COVID-19 cases -- which, again, surely caused many of the deaths of people who didn't go to the hospital.

- I have said, MULTIPLE TIMES, that health officials, hospitals etc. know full well that when too many COVID patients fill beds and use up staff resources, they won't be able to handle ANY new patients, and that will result in collateral damage from the virus.

- I have said, MULTIPLE TIMES, that health officials, hospitals etc. know full well that some people will be too scared to go to a hospital during a pandemic and that will also result in collateral damage from the virus.

By the way, it is completely routine to include these types of deaths as an effect of the pandemic, because if there wasn't a pandemic, people would go to the hospital for normal care. The CDC did not suddenly invent the idea of attributing a large percentage of excess deaths to pandemics at the end of May. Yeesh.

In New York, you have to die because the hospitals are closed.

Click to expand...

:roll:

You really need to get your facts straight.

Again! New York hospitals weren't closed. They stopped elective procedures for several weeks. Then, there was a brief period when ICUs were maxed out, so doctors needed to ration care, or tell people with less urgent problems to stay home. That ended WEEKS ago.


It is well past time for you to get your head out of the sand. Every day that passes, it's getting worse. Cases are surging out of control. The number of new deaths per day is no longer declining, nationally it is now gradually climbing. Just like Italy and New York, hot spots in Florida, Texas, Arizona and elsewhere are getting overwhelmed. COVID-19 is not on the verge of "losing epidemic status," as you claimed in the first post of this thread.

Bucky said:

And you are? Where is your medical degree? Can I see it please,

Click to expand...

Several people...decently educated it appears...posted the same I. I have a library of epidemiology books, it's a person fascination since college microbio...I'm happy to provide sources...it's a commonly touted positive example. Do I need a medical degree to do so here? Or just legitimately substantiated sources?

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

Click to expand...

jaeger19 said:

I have a medical degree. Lursa is correct and you are wrong.

Click to expand...

Thank you!

Visbek said:

There is NO NEED to separate COVID cases, because there is no doubt whatsoever that these changes in ICU headroom and usage of hospitals are a direct result of the pandemic. I mean, really. Let's say that normally, ICU usage is 60%. Then, a pandemic hits. Let's say the non-pandemic ICU usage drops to 30%. Meanwhile, pandemic usage starts at 5%, then increases to 10%, 15%, 30%, all the way up to 70%. Tell us all, what happens then? Do you just not believe all of the reports and data, from hospitals and state officials, that hospitals in hot spots are getting increasingly slammed?
Anyway. Whatever excuses you spin about "backlogs" do not work. New York has allowed elective procedures for over a month; Florida and Texas barred elective procedures weeks ago. If the increase in cases was a result of some sort of "backlog," then we would see ICU usage surge in NY, and drop in Florida and Texas -- yet that is the exact opposite of what we see. Hmmmmm No, dude. New York State started allowing elective procedures in April; NYC in May. And yet, ICU headroom has slowly dropped since mid-May. Hmmmmm And again, I already discussed that:
- COVID-19 causes strokes and cardiac issues. Meaning some unknown percentage of those events will be connected to COVID-19.
- During the time he was discussing, NY was vastly undertesting, meaning we missed a huge percentage of COVID-19 cases -- which, again, surely caused many of the deaths of people who didn't go to the hospital.
- I have said, MULTIPLE TIMES, that health officials, hospitals etc. know full well that when too many COVID patients fill beds and use up staff resources, they won't be able to handle ANY new patients, and that will result in collateral damage from the virus.
- I have said, MULTIPLE TIMES, that health officials, hospitals etc. know full well that some people will be too scared to go to a hospital during a pandemic and that will also result in collateral damage from the virus.
By the way, it is completely routine to include these types of deaths as an effect of the pandemic, because if there wasn't a pandemic, people would go to the hospital for normal care. The CDC did not suddenly invent the idea of attributing a large percentage of excess deaths to pandemics at the end of May. Yeesh. You really need to get your facts straight. Again! New York hospitals weren't closed. They stopped elective procedures for several weeks. Then, there was a brief period when ICUs were maxed out, so doctors needed to ration care, or tell people with less urgent problems to stay home. That ended WEEKS ago. It is well past time for you to get your head out of the sand. Every day that passes, it's getting worse. Cases are surging out of control. The number of new deaths per day is no longer declining, nationally it is now gradually climbing. Just like Italy and New York, hot spots in Florida, Texas, Arizona and elsewhere are getting overwhelmed. COVID-19 is not on the verge of "losing epidemic status," as you claimed in the first post of this thread.

Click to expand...

You seem to think that saying the same incorrect thing more than once makes it more correct. Buy a clue. Hospitals try to keep their ICU as close to full as possible and 90% is fairly routine. 7% usage means the hospitals are not open. Better yet, buy a book on logic.

Jay59 said:

That's the headline. The reason is the sharp decline in COVID deaths since mid April. It is coming close to no longer qualifying as an epidemic.

"Based on death certificate data, the percentage of (total U.S.) deaths attributed to pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19 decreased from 9% during week 25 to 5.9% during week 26,â€� the CDC noted, adding that this was the 10th-straight week of declining deaths. While the "percentage is currently at the epidemic threshold", additional data in coming weeks could change that.​

Spoiler

Is The Pandemic Coming To An End At Last? – Issues & Insights

Click to expand...

Do


and


give you a clue?

BlueTex said:

There is nothing to debate about the origins of the bill. It's all public record.

Click to expand...

That's the beauty of it.

Lutherf said:

No. I merely think that a Democrat in the WH is the only thing that will save the world. It's science!

Click to expand...

I think any responsible adult would do. The key is 'responsible'.

TU Curmudgeon said:

Do and give you a clue?

Click to expand...

Nice. I had not seen a couple of those, but please always give the cite.

Definitely a pause in the progression, but not a change of direction. As OP noted, we are in the fringe region of pandemic and I doubt that changed in the last two weeks, either up or down. That said, the ten day average of averages tells the story pretty plainly.

Visbek said:

There is NO NEED to separate COVID cases, because there is no doubt whatsoever that these changes in ICU headroom and usage of hospitals are a direct result of the pandemic.

I mean, really. Let's say that normally, ICU usage is 60%. Then, a pandemic hits. Let's say the non-pandemic ICU usage drops to 30%. Meanwhile, pandemic usage starts at 5%, then increases to 10%, 15%, 30%, all the way up to 70%. Tell us all, what happens then?

Do you just not believe all of the reports and data, from hospitals and state officials, that hospitals in hot spots are getting increasingly slammed?

...

Click to expand...

The "Claque Trump" DS to the question "Do you just not believe all of the reports and data?" is "Yes, unless, of course, we hear Mr. Trump - on FOX News - telling us we should.".

Jay59 said:

Nice. I had not seen a couple of those, but please always give the cite.

Definitely a pause in the progression, but not a change of direction. As OP noted, we are in the fringe region of pandemic and I doubt that changed in the last two weeks, either up or down. That said, the ten day average of averages tells the story pretty plainly.

Click to expand...

The source data is worldometer and current as of my first coffee of the day. The graphs, and other charts are updated daily and are available at Daily Statistical Summary of COVID-19.

The trend lines are generated using Excel and are "projections" ("projections" rely on existing, current, data only and assume that the current situation will not change) NOT "predictions" ("predictions" rely on comparing the current data to similar incidents in the past and then assuming that the same changes that happened in the past will happen this time).

TU Curmudgeon said:

The source data is worldometer and current as of my first coffee of the day. The graphs, and other charts are updated daily and are available at Daily Statistical Summary of COVID-19.

The trend lines are generated using Excel and are "projections" ("projections" rely on existing, current, data only and assume that the current situation will not change) NOT "predictions" ("predictions" rely on comparing the current data to similar incidents in the past and then assuming that the same changes that happened in the past will happen this time).

Click to expand...

Nicely done graphs. You say polynomial fit for the yellow line. What order of polynomial, because it looks quadratic?

The 10 day average looks linear. If you choose to associate the jump around 24 June with the riots 3-4 weeks earlier, it looks very consistent.

Jay59 said:

Nicely done graphs. You say polynomial fit for the yellow line. What order of polynomial, because it looks quadratic?

The 10 day average looks linear. If you choose to associate the jump around 24 June with the riots 3-4 weeks earlier, it looks very consistent.

Click to expand...

It was actually the (default) "cubic".

However, since you raised the point I went back and took a look at the trend lines and, by gum, quadratics work even better so I'll be updating them later today and posting using the revised formulation tomorrow.

TU Curmudgeon said:

It was actually the (default) "cubic".

However, since you raised the point I went back and took a look at the trend lines and, by gum, quadratics work even better so I'll be updating them later today and posting using the revised formulation tomorrow.

Click to expand...

I would at least try 4th and 5th order, if it does not take too much computation juice. Then look at the coefficients and see which are small relevant to the others.

Jay59 said:

I would at least try 4th and 5th order, if it does not take too much computation juice. Then look at the coefficients and see which are small relevant to the others.

Click to expand...

I tried third, fourth, and fifth orders, and the third order analysis makes more sense - especially since the fourth order analysis indicates that all COVID-19 deaths will stop within three weeks (and fifth order indicates that all deaths will stop within a week). It could be that I simply don't have enough data points in the driving tables to allow any higher order than 3 to work properly yet.

Jay59 said:

You seem to think that saying the same incorrect thing more than once makes it more correct. Buy a clue.

Click to expand...

:roll:

Hospitals try to keep their ICU as close to full as possible and 90% is fairly routine. 7% usage means the hospitals are not open. Better yet, buy a book on logic.

Click to expand...

:roll:

What a crock. The evidence goes against your position, so you just attack the very same type of evidence you rely on.

Sorry dude, but you cannot wish this pandemic away.

Texas Tribune, 7/14: Texas hospitals are running out of drugs, beds, ventilators and even staff

Houston Chronicle, 7/11: ICU beds reach new low in Texas as COVID cases pass 250,000 mark

NPR, 7/13; Florida ICU Could Hit Capacity 'In Days' As Health Care Workers Face Burnout

AC Central, 7/13: ICU beds, ventilators in use hit new records as Arizona reports 1,357 new COVID-19 cases


And again, there is no sign that the CDC is about to declare the pandemic over. How long do you plan to keep denying the obvious?

Thoreau72 said:

Because there is evidence that it was planned. The most obvious of that is the chronological events of the CARES Act. It was introduced more than a year BEFORE the crisis began.

Click to expand...

UGH! What on earth are you talking about? I'm SO interested in seeing a link to the CARES Act that pertains to the Corona Virus a year before Corona Virus was discovered. Back to the future?

jakiejakester said:

UGH! What on earth are you talking about? I'm SO interested in seeing a link to the CARES Act that pertains to the Corona Virus a year before Corona Virus was discovered. Back to the future?

Click to expand...

Trump protected us from them.
Trump came in and fired all those eggheads who were planning pandemics.








/s

Simon W. Moon said:

Trump protected us from them.
Trump came in and fired all those eggheads who were planning pandemics.

/s

Click to expand...

I presume that the "/s" at the end of the post means "End Sarcasm".

TU Curmudgeon said:

I presume that the "/s" at the end of the post means "End Sarcasm".

Click to expand...

That's what my kids tell me

Simon W. Moon said:

That's what my kids tell me

Click to expand...

Unfortunately you should also have a "Begin Sarcasm" command for proper html formatting.

TODAY'S CHARTS​

1. The YELLOW trend lines are "polynomial" trend lines and those tend to be "livelier" than "linear" trend lines. Where appropriate, those trend lines have been upgraded from “cubic” to “quadratic” and now make even more sense. Thank you “Jay59” for the suggestion.
   *
2. The smaller the number of data points, the less reliable the trend lines are.
   *
3. Further suggestions to improve the accuracy of the PROJECTIONS are welcomed. “I don’t like the data or what generally accepted mathematical formulae say about the data – so you are full of crap.” comments will be ignored.
   *
4. The GREEN trend lines are “linear” trend line and those tend to be unresponsive to later developments.
   *
5. The ACTUAL TREND is likely to be someplace between that indicated by the GREEN trend line and the YELLOW trend line.
   *
6. The “7 Day Rolling Average” chart (which is less volatile than the “Daily Deaths” chart and less “lethargic” than the “10 Day Average of Averages” chart) also has a RED “exponential” driven trend line and a BLUE “power” driven trend line (for the chronically “intensely meticulously totally detail oriented”).
   *
7. Reported deaths normally take dips on weekends (which means the Sunday and Monday numbers are lower than the actual numbers of deaths and the Tuesday and Wednesday numbers are higher),
   *
8. Reported deaths normally take dips around “emotionally significant dates” (sometimes known as “The ‘Christmas’ Effect” or “The ‘Birthday’ Effect”).
   *
9. The trend lines are based on actual current and past data and are footed on the assumption that the conditions current as the generation of the chart do not change.
   *
10. IF those conditions do change THEN the trend lines WILL change. This, unlike what some dolt will tell you, does NOT mean that the trend lines were wrong when calculated.
    *
11. Simply pulling numbers out of your butt, the way that some dolts do, and then using those PIOOYA numbers to claim expertise just doesn’t hack it in the real world (well, outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC it doesn’t).