portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary oregon & cascadia

health

Covid-19 Deaths in Oregon

What percentage of Oregonians have died from the Covid-19 virus?
As of today (5/16/20) 0.003% of Oregonians have died - that's 3/1000ths of 1%. Oh my!

No Big Deal 17.May.2020 12:57

tomfoolery

That cheesy percentage number equals out to be 137 dead people in Oregon.

Harvard University and Federal government says Oregon can open 19.May.2020 00:44

>

A Harvard University study released May 7 found that Oregon's testing capacity is near what is needed to safely lift some social distancing measures, and that the percent positive tests returned in the last week was 3.5%, well under the 10% or less recommended for reopening.


Portland's Healthcare at Foster Creek (operating as St. Jude Operating Company with Melchor Balaz as its registered agent, part of Benicia Senior Living) had 29 deaths by mid-May, approximately one-fourth of the entire State's total.


A Couple of Questions for Lockdown-State Continuing Advocates 21.May.2020 09:07

:

Since many states are reopening, and the virus hasn't gone away, and it remains ('novel' coronavirus) contagious


1. why aren't cases and deaths skyrocketing?

2. why aren't they increasing at all?

Why would you ask here? 21.May.2020 13:11

Garth

:: Your question should be posed to people who study these things. They are called experts. In this case, they are epidemiologists, virologists, and the like.

haha, triggered Troll Garth 21.May.2020 13:54

_

hey Garth why isn't Oregon already back open when Harvard University and the Federal government's Phase stage requirements, say that it can?

Expectation? 21.May.2020 14:37

Mike Novack

"1. why aren't cases and deaths skyrocketing?

2. why aren't they increasing at all?"

Assuming that reopening caused a resurgence in the epidemic, WHEN would you expect to see that in terms of weeks after reopening? If you are arguing, see, we reopened and no resurgence you have a strange idea about both incubation period and the number of "generations" for any increase to be noticed.

We are reopening now, mid May? Then I would not expect to see the numbers jump up (if they are going to) until July at the earliest, more likely end of August. THAT is when we would see "skyrocketing" (if we do), not now.

hey Mike, nice try 21.May.2020 15:38

_

"incubation period", "generations" -

epidemiological buzzwords make Mike Novack (Garth, et al.) expert?

We're supposed to believe that you, Mike Novack, 'know more' than us? Lol.










One-third of all Oregon's Covid-19 deaths have occurred in nursing and elder home facilities. Most Covid-19 deaths across the United States have been from individuals with MODERATE TO SEVERE COMORBIDITIES, i.e. people who are already MODERATELY TO SEVERELY UNHEALTHY PRIOR TO ENCOUNTERING AND BEING INFECTED WITH SARS-CoV-2.











Care to tell us what the Federal government's Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 guidelines SPECIFICALLY consist of, Mike?


Shall we stay in lockdown all over planet Earth for the next two years Mike? Will that cover the "incubation period", "generations"?

why don't we just go into total lockdown every influenza (many of which are coronaviruses, though not SARS-CoV-2) season?

Global lockdown from November to February, in perpetuity?










































I'm loving this, PDX IMC's two resident trolls have predictably shown up on a mainstream media Facebook worthless Time-Wasting topic here, i.e. nobody gives a **** about having this "mask vs. no masks", "stay sheltered / open up" BULLSHI* conversation here... and never will

YET, THE TROLLS SHOWED UP to 'debunk' it. ***KING Lol. Like flies on shit.

p.s. I didn't even post this topic/start this thread 21.May.2020 15:43

_

therefore by default I simply don't give a Flying ***K about the topic itself, or who originally posted it



yet I do find it infinitely HILARIOUS that it served as a perfect dog-whistle Cookie for the "Here's What Is *actually* Going On" busybodies Novack, Garth (who are spawn-replicating themselves all over the world's corporate social media in open stay-home vs. open-up 'warfare'). Identifying <-- their discrete interest-spectrum, for making appearance/showing their a**. That is all.

You are changing the subject 21.May.2020 19:04

Mike Novack

Whether we should stay in a lockdown to protect lives or reopen the economy regardless is a different question. On that you do not yet necessarily know what side I am on. Because that was NOT what I was responding to.

The question was "why aren't we seeing an upsurge in cases from reopening". THAT is what I was responding to. Since you object to more scientific terms I will try again in language a fifth grader should understand.

a) When a person is exposed to the virus in sufficient amount to make them sick with it this does not happen overnight. It takes several days for the virus to increase in their bodies. It takes several more until they begin coughing virus out so that it might infect other people, and then they do that for several more days. So when somebody has been exposed and and becomes ill, about two weeks before they are done infecting other people. That is why two week isolation is suggested for people who are known to be exposed.

b) If for every person who has the virus, they infect two people, and then they infect four, it still takes a few more repetitions of this till it is thirty two, or whatever is recognized as a new upsurge.

c) In other words, the reason we are not seeing an upsurge from reopening is that it is FAR too soon to be able to see one. To be clear, that is NOT saying that there will be an upsurge. Just that saying "see, no upsurge from reopening" is nonsense.

RE: "see, no upsurge from reopening" ok I'll bite. 22.May.2020 05:46

_

( fwiw willing to discuss it just for the sake of discussion..... )


I'm not claiming "see, no upsurge".......

I merely asked the open-ended question about why aren't cases substantially increasing in frequency or overall total number. In Oregon (one of the U.S. states least hard-hit by this novel virus contagion), particularly.

And of course we are not seeing a great amount of contagion, infection, or deaths in (exterior to the dense Portland-Multnomah County region) most of this state. In comparison with other U.S. cities and states, particularly the hardest-hit areas like NYC, Louisiana, Detroit etc.


I'm in favor of the recommended isolation periods and protocols for those 'known to be exposed' (as far as that ? can be 'known'...) and for the most vulnerable population (folks with comorbidities, overweight 42% of Americans are obese  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2020/03/438279.shtml diabetics, elderly). Common sense, makes sense and serves purpose in those instances.

Anyway, most of this data will not be available to anyone (incl. public health officials, epidemiologists) for reliable in-depth analysis until many months from now.
Translation: No reliable numerical data currently exist to extrapolate or analyze infection rates with certainty. But will in the next several months.

RE: the novel virus itself, SARS-CoV-2 is going to evolve into strains. Meaning that, even if a substantial majority of the human population becomes infected by the initial-vector strain, a new strain can possibly re-infect us all within the next 6 to 18 months. As is already well known and typical with coronaviruses and related influenza viruses (e.g. the various similar geneteically-related strains of flu which can infect populations within a nearby timeframe of a few seasons).

So when we hypothesize about infection, rates of infection, r0 etc. we are going to have to take into account completely genetically separate strains of this novel coronavirus which can be contagious through and re-infect our population.



btw Mike:
I'm a scientist (though not of the medical variety, even though my Mom's an RN) professionally registered with the state of Oregon so you can go ahead and attempt to 'impress' whoever with your rhetoric and I at least won't be offended. (plus I can actually comprehend and interpret it)

That's a coincidence 22.May.2020 06:46

Mike Novack

My background also science, but not medical (although in recent decades, because working with chestnut/chestnut blight having picked up more genetics*). I can read/follow the papers and judge where math/statistics questionable.

Coronas vs influenzas -- I'm not sure that follows. No reason yet to assume as rapid a change in strains. Why? We get new influenza strains on a regular (just about annual) basis because that virus family has something about as close to "sex" as a virus can have. If two strains present in a cell, not only do both get replicated but some "copies" get formed with parts of each and any of these that are viable constitute a new strain.

Can corona viruses do that? Well we don't know about this new (to humans) member of the family but there have been four "normal" corona viruses in humans for a long time, all minor ailments among the "common colds". THEY seem to remain stable as four distinct viruses, not "mixing" the way influenza does. So while yes, I would expect new strains to arise, I think more likely on the "mutation" time scale for changes in virus strains as opposed to the rapid changes in influenzas.

That's on the good side for prospects for a vaccine. On the negative side, I looked up vaccines for the serious corona virus diseases in animals. I wanted to see which labs might already have had success with creating corona virus vaccines. Very much a mixed bag, success in some cases, not yet in others (for example, two deadly corona virus diseases in pigs; they have a vaccine for one but not the other). So creating a vaccine for corona viruses might be tricky. That they have done it for the strain that causes MERS but not yet for SARS means we just have to wait and see for this strain.

* and virus too -- the blight fungus has a virus that can weaken it. Sadly, unlike in the corresponding situation with Dutch elm disease, the strains of the virus are limited to which strains of fungus they can attack, though this is an area of research to see if a "universal" virus strain could be found.

RE: strains 22.May.2020 18:08

_

I mentioned that merely because of some discussion and research that has occurred with regard to SARS-CoV-2.

I have no idea if the epidemiology / etiology is going to turn out to be similar to various flu viruses and infections we are regularly plagued with; only because the possibility might ? exist. At the moment, 'official' health establishment and virology sources insist there is only 1 defined strain of SARS-CoV-2 (and that only minor differences in its genome sequences exist).

Agreed about all the vaccine discussion and research thus far. On the 'nonprofessional'/ political / economic side, much corporate media propaganda has appeared along the lines of "a vaccine is the only thing that will bring us all out of lockdown".... but an effective vaccine specifically targeting SARS-CoV-2 could be a long ways off. (the experimental Moderna vaccine, for example, has apparently been able to generate antibodies in tested patients...)

Most of ^ this discussed, also depends heavily also on the amount of reliable, conclusive testing data for antibodies and infection rates/percentages among the population. Perhaps ? by the end of 2020 researchers and public health officials will have more conclusive etiology and reliable infection rate-antibody datasets for SARS-CoV-2 at their disposal.