Coronavirus in Massachusetts (Natick: homes, mall, housing)

[charolastra00]

Known cases have risen slightly from our low, but that does not mean that the actual number of people with covid has increased. With more testing, we catch more people. Our hospitalization numbers are fairly flat, which tells me we're catching more cases and not *having* more cases.



Less than 5 people who work at the university I work for have tested positive for covid since we began testing in July (and that number includes all of the students who have since moved back). All were asymptomatic. It's unlikely that they would have ever gotten tested if not forced through routine testing, and possible that we were able to stem the spread downstream by identifying them. While colleges and other workplaces are pumping up numbers, it's also catching asymptomatic spreaders.

[BostonMike7]

Originally Posted by charolastra00

Our hospitalization numbers are fairly flat, which tells me we're catching more cases and not *having* more cases..

That is a good point to make.

Looking at the chart, hospitalizations have hovered around the 325-350 range since Mid-July. Shows it's pretty stable.

The blips of higher number of cases could suggest more asymptomatic cases are being found due to ramped up testing for all by employers and schools.

[BostonMike7]

Actually, looking at the national numbers, one could argue that this is the case all over.

Looking at worldometers
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

US new daily case count

US new daily deaths



Looking at the new case count, you would think the new deaths would be proportional to what was seen previously back in April/May. But, it's not. US had almost 3K deaths per day back then, but now only maybe 1300-1500/day, while the new daily case count is 2-3X what it was previously.


Couple reasons for it perhaps? Better testing capability catching asymptomatic spread, better treatments, or perhaps not capturing the true number of cases in the US in the Feb-May time period?

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

Actually, looking at the national numbers, one could argue that this is the case all over.

Looking at worldometers
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

US new daily case count

US new daily deaths



Looking at the new case count, you would think the new deaths would be proportional to what was seen previously back in April/May. But, it's not. US had almost 3K deaths per day back then, but now only maybe 1300-1500/day, while the new daily case count is 2-3X what it was previously.


Couple reasons for it perhaps? Better testing capability catching asymptomatic spread, better treatments, or perhaps not capturing the true number of cases in the US in the Feb-May time period?

Or demographics are shifted toward the lower age groups, who have lower mortality rates.

[rach5]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

Or demographics are shifted toward the lower age groups, who have lower mortality rates.

That's a big part of it.

[BostonCollege]

One more reason for lower hospitalizations is unfortunately the target population in which virus is in it's most toxic form is no more or well protected (immunity or isolation).

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

Looking at the new case count, you would think the new deaths would be proportional to what was seen previously back in April/May. But, it's not. US had almost 3K deaths per day back then, but now only maybe 1300-1500/day, while the new daily case count is 2-3X what it was previously.

The testing criteria was very different. April/May and now is apples and oranges.

Apples to apples (or so it seems), what stands out to me is that the new daily cases now (nationwide) are half of what they were a month ago...yet new deaths are about the same (slightly up). Definitely not proportional.

What it means is unclear. At least to me it's unclear.

And as for the MA stats being "stable", perhaps...but that's not "fantastic" or "great" as someone claimed.

[redplum33]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

Or demographics are shifted toward the lower age groups, who have lower mortality rates.

Originally Posted by rach5

That's a big part of it.

Proportionally, deaths are 2X what they were a month ago.

[Space_League]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

12% of all residents total?



That's what I was thinking as well. If you all the sudden had the capability to test everyone in the state weekly, that percent positive number would get driven down very low. In order for that number to be meaningful, the number of tests administered, and the criteria for who takes them needs to be constant. With Aug wrapping up, it's possible a large number of recent tests were administered to people looking to squeeze in vacations, or schools/businesses looking to test employees before return to work/school which would drive that number lower. If you look at page 6 of the daily COVID report, you'll see the number of tests being administered is higher now than what was being done in July. That can account for driving the positivity down to where it is at 1.0%

I agree 12% of all residents is an absurd number. If anyone has a better idea what that number actually means please clarify. My best guess is that it is either (a) 12% of residents in facilities with outbreaks (b) 12% of residents in reporting facilities or (c) 12% of residents in publicly funded facilities

Pretty much any of these and their combinations are various shades of awful, and it may very well be 12% of all residents.

I spoke with some family members who work in MA nursing homes and in some of their units half of the residents are dead from COVID. It's particularly uncontrollable in dementia units where reducing inter-resident contact is impossible

[yesmaybe]

Originally Posted by Space_League

I agree 12% of all residents is an absurd number. If anyone has a better idea what that number actually means please clarify. My best guess is that it is either (a) 12% of residents in facilities with outbreaks (b) 12% of residents in reporting facilities or (c) 12% of residents in publicly funded facilities

Pretty much any of these and their combinations are various shades of awful

You have to remember that people are sent to nursing homes for a reason. You should expect a decent amount of "turnover".