[teejers1]

OK, I’ll buy some impact to push down spread could be a result of national retailers requiring masks. However, given the rate of transmission, that doesn’t explain a 20k daily reduction.

So we have SCC’s data fiasco that it says is under reporting cases based on faulty data collection and aggregation methods. Who knows how many counties and states are similarly plagued.

But here’s some evidence of deliberate attempts to ignore the amount of spread:
https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/...423753.php

The AP also reported overall testing capacity has dropped 3.5% over the last two weeks.

But you can’t hide the deaths, which continue to climb.

I don't see why any of this should be a surprise, as the public increasingly comes to understand and accept the norms of social distancing. 

I suggestd long ago that the discipline of major retailers would be a major factor, and so it may be proving. Not only does such practice reduce places of contagion, but it also sets a powerful example for other modes of socialization. 

As to rising deaths, I only follow Santa Clara County. It has been interesting over the past two months that death rates have NOT spiked, even though case counts rose significantly. Hospitalizations rose dramatically at the start, then leveled off at about 180. But they never rose in proportion to the case census.

I appreciate MT's posts (and his avid following of county and state data).  But I also find it hard to believe that hospitalization numbers would suffer from whatever glitch is apparently infecting (pun intended) the count on number of tests, positive test rate, etc.  Those strike me as completely different sets of numbers (and magnitudes of same) that would be reported differently.  Hospitals know how many patients are in beds (acute and ICU), what % of those in those beds are Covid patients, and number of excess beds available.  I find it hard to believe that any mix up in testing data would cripple hospitalization numbers.

As to GR's point on SCC hospitalization spiking, it was separately reported that patients from Imperial County and San Quentin prison were sent to hospitals in the Bay Area.  The number was never disclosed (nor location of where patients ended up), which is mind-boggling.  But the point is that the "spike" in SCC hospitalization could be attributable to these "outside county" numbers.  It's astounding to me that this data is not being shared.

Hospitalizations rose, then leveled off. FWIW, the number dropped dramatically yesterday.

But the percentage of those hospitalized attributable to Covid has been in a pretty consistent range, IIRC (5-8%).  

Regardless, I think it's worth knowing what number of Covid patients treated in a particular hospital were transferred in from outside the county (at least for abnormal transfers like the Imperial County and San Quentin transfers).  Then you may aggregate those to get county information.  If you believe that re-opening should be gauged to ability of local community to provide hospital care to those who need it, that kind of information is pretty important.

Of course, there is no indication that the decision-makers in Sacramento or locally are even factoring in that information into their decisions.  Why the media does not press them on this is another mind-boggler (at least from here).

[teejers1]

OK, I’ll buy some impact to push down spread could be a result of national retailers requiring masks. However, given the rate of transmission, that doesn’t explain a 20k daily reduction.

So we have SCC’s data fiasco that it says is under reporting cases based on faulty data collection and aggregation methods. Who knows how many counties and states are similarly plagued.

But here’s some evidence of deliberate attempts to ignore the amount of spread:
https://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/...423753.php

The AP also reported overall testing capacity has dropped 3.5% over the last two weeks.

But you can’t hide the deaths, which continue to climb.

I don't see why any of this should be a surprise, as the public increasingly comes to understand and accept the norms of social distancing. 

I suggestd long ago that the discipline of major retailers would be a major factor, and so it may be proving. Not only does such practice reduce places of contagion, but it also sets a powerful example for other modes of socialization. 

As to rising deaths, I only follow Santa Clara County. It has been interesting over the past two months that death rates have NOT spiked, even though case counts rose significantly. Hospitalizations rose dramatically at the start, then leveled off at about 180. But they never rose in proportion to the case census.

I appreciate MT's posts (and his avid following of county and state data).  But I also find it hard to believe that hospitalization numbers would suffer from whatever glitch is apparently infecting (pun intended) the count on number of tests, positive test rate, etc.  Those strike me as completely different sets of numbers (and magnitudes of same) that would be reported differently.  Hospitals know how many patients are in beds (acute and ICU), what % of those in those beds are Covid patients, and number of excess beds available.  I find it hard to believe that any mix up in testing data would cripple hospitalization numbers.

As to GR's point on SCC hospitalization spiking, it was separately reported that patients from Imperial County and San Quentin prison were sent to hospitals in the Bay Area.  The number was never disclosed (nor location of where patients ended up), which is mind-boggling.  But the point is that the "spike" in SCC hospitalization could be attributable to these "outside county" numbers.  It's astounding to me that this data is not being shared.

Hospitalizations rose, then leveled off. FWIW, the number dropped dramatically yesterday.

But the percentage of those hospitalized attributable to Covid has been in a pretty consistent range, IIRC (5-8%).  

Regardless, I think it's worth knowing what number of Covid patients treated in a particular hospital were transferred in from outside the county (at least for abnormal transfers like the Imperial County and San Quentin transfers).  Then you may aggregate those to get county information.  If you believe that re-opening should be gauged to ability of local community to provide hospital care to those who need it, that kind of information is pretty important.

Of course, there is no indication that the decision-makers in Sacramento or locally are even factoring in that information into their decisions.  Why the media does not press them on this is another mind-boggler (at least from here).