So is MOCO just never opening?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should base all important public policy decisions on nursing homes. Working families don’t really matter.

Nursing homes is where some people in working families work.

Than put your focus on resourcing on nursing homes

Does anyone know why the outbreaks in Moco nursing homes and deaths are so high?
Why there are so many individual places with 20+ deaths?

It’s not even just that it’s in nursing homes across the board;- we seem to have some of the worst outcomes (deaths) at individual nursing homes. Did we have more of the bad actors, not inspect them?

My point was out of all the nursing homes in the state of Maryland, Moco had 4 out of the 5 worst ones in terms of death count. Why?
Probably because covid is more likely to kill sick, old people than non-sick, non-old people.

[Anonymous]

Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should base all important public policy decisions on nursing homes. Working families don’t really matter.

Nursing homes is where some people in working families work.

Than put your focus on resourcing on nursing homes

Does anyone know why the outbreaks in Moco nursing homes and deaths are so high?
Why there are so many individual places with 20+ deaths?

It’s not even just that it’s in nursing homes across the board;- we seem to have some of the worst outcomes (deaths) at individual nursing homes. Did we have more of the bad actors, not inspect them?

My point was out of all the nursing homes in the state of Maryland, Moco had 4 out of the 5 worst ones in terms of death count. Why?
Probably because covid is more likely to kill sick, old people than non-sick, non-old people.

The larger point is that it’s stupid bordering on insane to hold all of society hostage over nursing home deaths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should base all important public policy decisions on nursing homes. Working families don’t really matter.

Nursing homes is where some people in working families work.

Than put your focus on resourcing on nursing homes

Does anyone know why the outbreaks in Moco nursing homes and deaths are so high?
Why there are so many individual places with 20+ deaths?

It’s not even just that it’s in nursing homes across the board;- we seem to have some of the worst outcomes (deaths) at individual nursing homes. Did we have more of the bad actors, not inspect them?

My point was out of all the nursing homes in the state of Maryland, Moco had 4 out of the 5 worst ones in terms of death count. Why?
Probably because covid is more likely to kill sick, old people than non-sick, non-old people.

The larger point is that it’s stupid bordering on insane to hold all of society hostage over nursing home deaths.

AND we're back to sacrificing the elderly to appease Mammon. Y'all can talk all you want about "focusing resources on nursing homes," but your true colors always come out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

The Acute care bed utilization metric doesn’t make sense. It’s at 70% in a normal time. Also, they want a decline in cases WITH increased testing. That makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

The Acute care bed utilization metric doesn’t make sense. It’s at 70% in a normal time. Also, they want a decline in cases WITH increased testing. That makes no sense.

You don't think they should be looking at acute care bed utilization rate?

As for decline in cases, there's been a decline in three-day-average new confirmed cases for 8 days straight. So it makes sense empirically. And it also makes sense conceptually - you want a decline in new confirmed cases, period. Because otherwise the number of new confirmed cases isn't declining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should base all important public policy decisions on nursing homes. Working families don’t really matter.

Nursing homes is where some people in working families work.

Than put your focus on resourcing on nursing homes

Does anyone know why the outbreaks in Moco nursing homes and deaths are so high?
Why there are so many individual places with 20+ deaths?

It’s not even just that it’s in nursing homes across the board;- we seem to have some of the worst outcomes (deaths) at individual nursing homes. Did we have more of the bad actors, not inspect them?

My point was out of all the nursing homes in the state of Maryland, Moco had 4 out of the 5 worst ones in terms of death count. Why?
Probably because covid is more likely to kill sick, old people than non-sick, non-old people.

The larger point is that it’s stupid bordering on insane to hold all of society hostage over nursing home deaths.

AND we're back to sacrificing the elderly to appease Mammon. Y'all can talk all you want about "focusing resources on nursing homes," but your true colors always come out.

I agree with the stay at home orders overall- we had to get a handle on things before they spun out of control and overwhelmed hospitals.

BUT- PPs are right that the outcomes at nursing homes have been particularly bad in MoCo. It’s clear some focused efforts ARE needed. Why are you so against help for nursing homes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

The Acute care bed utilization metric doesn’t make sense. It’s at 70% in a normal time. Also, they want a decline in cases WITH increased testing. That makes no sense.

You don't think they should be looking at acute care bed utilization rate?

As for decline in cases, there's been a decline in three-day-average new confirmed cases for 8 days straight. So it makes sense empirically. And it also makes sense conceptually - you want a decline in new confirmed cases, period. Because otherwise the number of new confirmed cases isn't declining.

There’s a decline in cases because we haven’t really increased testing to the level they want. Expecting the cases to decline with testing 5% of the population is ridiculous.

Acute care utilization at 75% in a pandemic is reasonable, considering non-pandemic level is 70%. Expecting it to be 70% during a pandemic is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Agreed- the 70% utilization target makes no sense. If they're that concerned about hospital capacity, they should go back to cancelling all elective and non-emergent procedures at hospitals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There’s a decline in cases because we haven’t really increased testing to the level they want. Expecting the cases to decline with testing 5% of the population is ridiculous.

Acute care utilization at 75% in a pandemic is reasonable, considering non-pandemic level is 70%. Expecting it to be 70% during a pandemic is ridiculous.

But we haven't increased to testing 5% of the population. These are the measures they're using right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we should base all important public policy decisions on nursing homes. Working families don’t really matter.

Nursing homes is where some people in working families work.

Than put your focus on resourcing on nursing homes

Does anyone know why the outbreaks in Moco nursing homes and deaths are so high?
Why there are so many individual places with 20+ deaths?

It’s not even just that it’s in nursing homes across the board;- we seem to have some of the worst outcomes (deaths) at individual nursing homes. Did we have more of the bad actors, not inspect them?

My point was out of all the nursing homes in the state of Maryland, Moco had 4 out of the 5 worst ones in terms of death count. Why?
Probably because covid is more likely to kill sick, old people than non-sick, non-old people.

The larger point is that it’s stupid bordering on insane to hold all of society hostage over nursing home deaths.

AND we're back to sacrificing the elderly to appease Mammon. Y'all can talk all you want about "focusing resources on nursing homes," but your true colors always come out.

I agree with the stay at home orders overall- we had to get a handle on things before they spun out of control and overwhelmed hospitals.

BUT- PPs are right that the outcomes at nursing homes have been particularly bad in MoCo. It’s clear some focused efforts ARE needed. Why are you so against help for nursing homes?

Are you getting in your demagogue practice for the day? Nobody has said they're against help for nursing homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

Okay, I should have said some of them do not make sense.

New cases - this will increase with increased testing
Deaths - this is a trailing metric and is skewed by care home deaths
Bed utilization - <70% is better than pre-Covid so we have no hope or achieving this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Enough already Elrich. Your key indicators make no sense. Time to move to stage 1. Then shortly after get the summer camps and pools open.

Three-day averages of

number of new confirmed cases (14 declining days)
number of new covid-related deaths (14 declining days)
number of covid-related hospitalizations (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ER patients (14 declining days)
number of covid-related ICU hospitalizations (14 declining days)
acute care bed utilization rate <70% (days of adequate capacity)
percentage of ventilators in use <70% (days of adequate capacity)

Which of those indicators don't make sense, in your opinion?

Okay, I should have said some of them do not make sense.

New cases - this will increase with increased testing
Deaths - this is a trailing metric and is skewed by care home deaths
Bed utilization - <70% is better than pre-Covid so we have no hope or achieving this

When there is increased testing, which there currently isn't, they can adjust it.
Deaths are a lagging indicator, but it's perfectly appropriate to use lagging indicators as part of a set of metrics. Also, nursing-home deaths are deaths.
If 70% is the normal bed utilization rate, it makes sense to include it in the set of metrics. There is no indication that the county is planning to postpone stage 1 until the bed utilization rate goes below 70%.

[Anonymous]

Why do we need increased testing? Is there even demand for it? Most states are now begging people to get tested.