6 ms·

> in NYC, we did "literally see the bodies piling up" in March and April Was this because of the excess COVID deaths or just because some the services that nor

by ptero 6y ago

> in NYC, we did "literally see the bodies piling up" in March and April Was this because of the excess COVID deaths or just because some the services that normally handle deaths were deemed non-critical and so the chain of services that handle bodies just had glitches? Or, to look at it scientifically, did the uptick in NYC deaths per week in March and April put the total deaths per week above, say, (average + 3 sigma) over the past couple of years. Honest question, I do not know this answer but knowing this would help put the numerical base behind an emotional statement. For your second question, On your "how many" question: nobody I know says that 200k deaths do not constitute something worthy of attention. But on average, over 3 million people die per year in the US. 650k per year (according to CDC) just from heart disease, much of it preventable with better habits and good exercise. If 200k deaths is enough to force major life restrictions on everyone (and spend over $5 trillion to limit economic fallout), should we bring the same machinery to focus on heart disease as well: force video taped gym sessions and cardio exercises? require wearable monitors? prohibit admittance to public transport without a gym validation stamp or a doctor note? Those sound aggressive, sorry! That was not the intent; but just from a purely objective approach I do not see why the answer to those should be an automatic "no" if we accept COVID policies as automatic "yes". My 2c.

nobody9999 6y ago
>Or, to look at it scientifically, did the uptick in NYC deaths per week in March and April put the total deaths per week above, say, (average + 3 sigma) over the past couple of years. Honest question, I do not know this answer but knowing this would help put the numerical base behind an emotional statement. This survey[0] answers (in the affirmative) your question: "During March 11–May 2, 2020, a total of 32,107 deaths were reported to DOHMH; of these deaths, 24,172 (95% confidence interval = 22,980–25,364) were found to be in excess of the seasonal expected baseline. Included in the 24,172 deaths were 13,831 (57%) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated deaths and 5,048 (21%) probable COVID-19–associated deaths, leaving 5,293 (22%) excess deaths that were not identified as either laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19–associated deaths (Figure)." [0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm
- ptero 6y ago
  Thank you for the link, good data! To nitpick though, it does not quite answer the question of whether "the bodies were piling up" because totals exceeded pre-COVID processing capacity or because the processing chain broke down. That is, was the level during Spring of 2020 (higher than average Spring, your link shows it) also higher than previous spikes that included other seasons.
  - mcguire 6y ago
    To counter-nitpick... :-) Could your place of employment handle a 2-month long, 5x spike? Would the processing chain break down? Would it make a difference which it was?
    - ptero 6y ago
      To c-c nitpick :). The issue is not being able to handle the 5x volume spike, but handling the spikes the system handled just fine before (but not necessarily at the same day of the week/month/year). For example, if my employer promises not to reduce cafeteria service and a month later says "no cafeteria for employees today due to a conference; we cannot feed that many people; go away" a hungry employee should check if we had such spikes before and if so how well we did. If indeed it was a unique surge, OK. But if every year we have similar spikes and they never turned employees away, "we did reduce service" is a better explanation than "we cannot serve such volumes" :).
      - mcguire 6y ago
        You know, this is not a link I'd ever thought I'd be looking for: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-york-city-expands-morgue-capacity-by-75-can-now-handle-3600-corpses-at-a-time-2020-03-30 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-york-city-expands-morg... "Without the makeshift morgues, the city can accommodate between 800 and 900 bodies, Aja Worthy-Davis, the executive director for the Office of Public Affairs for the Office of Chief Medical Examiner, told MarketWatch on Monday. "“Between the tent and the refrigerated trucks, we have space for between 3,500 and 3,600,” Worthy-Davis said." And then there's this, which is interesting.... https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/health-care/what-happens-when-you-die-new-york-city.html https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/health-care/w... "That unprecedented number of deaths over the course of a few months has led funeral homes to experience a backlog, which has, in turn, overwhelmed city and hospital morgues with bodies waiting to be picked up by funeral homes. "For some in this business, the crisis has served as a reminder of just how much families need to have their deceased loved ones cared for with respect. “We got swamped and weren't able to offer services at the time,” D’Arienzo, the funeral director, said of the backlog funeral homes were experiencing. “Families were so desperate, it just ignited a fire under me to make sure that we're always prepared.”" So the problem looks like funeral homes not picking up bodies. Which makes sense; I don't think they're in the processing capacity business. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/10/new-york-funeral-homes-crematoriums-cemeteries-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/10/new-york-fun... Has the interesting comment: "<p>New York’s governor, Andrew Cuomo, this week signed an executive order allowing out-of-state funeral directors to come into the state to help relieve pressure on funeral services. The move came after the <a href="https://www.nfda.org/news/in-the-news/nfda-news/id/4984/an-open-letter-to-governor-andrew-cuomo--urgent-request-for-license-reciprocity-for-funeral-directors https://www.nfda.org/news/in-the-news/nfda-news/id/4984/an-o..." data-link-name="in body link" class="u-underline">National Funeral Directors Association</a> wrote an open letter letter to the governor, saying hundreds of people were willing to help." (Yeah, the Guardian doesn't want me to see the article.)
teachrdan 6y ago
You're asking the wrong question. It's not correct to ask if COVID shelter in place orders are worth it for "200k" deaths. The correct question to ask is, "What is the cost of not sheltering in place?" The answer seems to be between two million and three million deaths in the US from COVID alone[0]. Of course, there would be even more deaths due to ICUs being full and even more acute shortages of PPE for medical personnel. We would also experience profound second- and third-order effects of millions of additional deaths on the economy. > should we... force video taped gym sessions and cardio exercises? require wearable monitors? prohibit admittance to public transport without a gym validation stamp or a doctor note? I hope you've taken the opportunity to read this again. To be charitable, it does not meet the high standards I think we hold ourselves to at HN. People suffering from heart disease don't infect others with a potentially fatal virus. Other countries have applied strict shelter in place and mask rules with great success. In the US, compliance with such rules has been made political, and questioning it--often with straw man arguments like those above--has become the mark of supposed contrarian rebels. As a result we have something of the worst of both worlds. Sadly, as more Americans irresponsibly refuse to apply basic COVID safety measures, more people get infected, thus supplying rhetorical ammunition to critics like those in this thread. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/health/coronavirus-herd-immunity-simulation-vaccine/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/health/coronavi...
- teachrdan 6y ago
  I notice I'm getting downvoted for this post. Perhaps I was too verbose or inarticulate, so I'll try to be clearer: * Are mask and shelter in place laws worthwhile to avoid two to three million additional deaths due to COVID?
  - umanwizard 6y ago
    I downvoted you because the idea that 1% of the total population will die without lockdowns is directly contradicted by all available evidence. Various countries had various levels of lockdown, and none had anywhere remotely close to that fraction of their population die.
mcguire 6y ago
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm "During March 11–May 2, 2020, a total of 32,107 deaths were reported to DOHMH; of these deaths, 24,172 (95% confidence interval = 22,980–25,364) were found to be in excess of the seasonal expected baseline. Included in the 24,172 deaths were 13,831 (57%) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated deaths and 5,048 (21%) probable COVID-19–associated deaths, leaving 5,293 (22%) excess deaths that were not identified as either laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19–associated deaths (Figure)." During those roughly 2 months, there were 32,107 deaths; in a normal year there would be about 32,107 - 24,172 = 7,935 deaths. Normally, that would be ~100 deaths/day; during that time there were ~500 deaths/day. ("New York" deaths peaked at about 800/day, although I'm not sure if that was NYC or the state.) Edit: Dang it. I'll leave this here anyway.

by ptero 6y ago

nobody9999 6y ago

>Or, to look at it scientifically, did the uptick in NYC deaths per week in March and April put the total deaths per week above, say, (average + 3 sigma) over the past couple of years. Honest question, I do not know this answer but knowing this would help put the numerical base behind an emotional statement. This survey[0] answers (in the affirmative) your question: "During March 11–May 2, 2020, a total of 32,107 deaths were reported to DOHMH; of these deaths, 24,172 (95% confidence interval = 22,980–25,364) were found to be in excess of the seasonal expected baseline. Included in the 24,172 deaths were 13,831 (57%) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated deaths and 5,048 (21%) probable COVID-19–associated deaths, leaving 5,293 (22%) excess deaths that were not identified as either laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19–associated deaths (Figure)." [0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm

ptero 6y ago
Thank you for the link, good data! To nitpick though, it does not quite answer the question of whether "the bodies were piling up" because totals exceeded pre-COVID processing capacity or because the processing chain broke down. That is, was the level during Spring of 2020 (higher than average Spring, your link shows it) also higher than previous spikes that included other seasons.
- mcguire 6y ago
  To counter-nitpick... :-) Could your place of employment handle a 2-month long, 5x spike? Would the processing chain break down? Would it make a difference which it was?
  - ptero 6y ago
    To c-c nitpick :). The issue is not being able to handle the 5x volume spike, but handling the spikes the system handled just fine before (but not necessarily at the same day of the week/month/year). For example, if my employer promises not to reduce cafeteria service and a month later says "no cafeteria for employees today due to a conference; we cannot feed that many people; go away" a hungry employee should check if we had such spikes before and if so how well we did. If indeed it was a unique surge, OK. But if every year we have similar spikes and they never turned employees away, "we did reduce service" is a better explanation than "we cannot serve such volumes" :).
    - mcguire 6y ago
      You know, this is not a link I'd ever thought I'd be looking for: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-york-city-expands-morgue-capacity-by-75-can-now-handle-3600-corpses-at-a-time-2020-03-30 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-york-city-expands-morg... "Without the makeshift morgues, the city can accommodate between 800 and 900 bodies, Aja Worthy-Davis, the executive director for the Office of Public Affairs for the Office of Chief Medical Examiner, told MarketWatch on Monday. "“Between the tent and the refrigerated trucks, we have space for between 3,500 and 3,600,” Worthy-Davis said." And then there's this, which is interesting.... https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/health-care/what-happens-when-you-die-new-york-city.html https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/health-care/w... "That unprecedented number of deaths over the course of a few months has led funeral homes to experience a backlog, which has, in turn, overwhelmed city and hospital morgues with bodies waiting to be picked up by funeral homes. "For some in this business, the crisis has served as a reminder of just how much families need to have their deceased loved ones cared for with respect. “We got swamped and weren't able to offer services at the time,” D’Arienzo, the funeral director, said of the backlog funeral homes were experiencing. “Families were so desperate, it just ignited a fire under me to make sure that we're always prepared.”" So the problem looks like funeral homes not picking up bodies. Which makes sense; I don't think they're in the processing capacity business. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/10/new-york-funeral-homes-crematoriums-cemeteries-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/10/new-york-fun... Has the interesting comment: "<p>New York’s governor, Andrew Cuomo, this week signed an executive order allowing out-of-state funeral directors to come into the state to help relieve pressure on funeral services. The move came after the <a href="https://www.nfda.org/news/in-the-news/nfda-news/id/4984/an-open-letter-to-governor-andrew-cuomo--urgent-request-for-license-reciprocity-for-funeral-directors https://www.nfda.org/news/in-the-news/nfda-news/id/4984/an-o..." data-link-name="in body link" class="u-underline">National Funeral Directors Association</a> wrote an open letter letter to the governor, saying hundreds of people were willing to help." (Yeah, the Guardian doesn't want me to see the article.)

teachrdan 6y ago

You're asking the wrong question. It's not correct to ask if COVID shelter in place orders are worth it for "200k" deaths. The correct question to ask is, "What is the cost of not sheltering in place?" The answer seems to be between two million and three million deaths in the US from COVID alone[0]. Of course, there would be even more deaths due to ICUs being full and even more acute shortages of PPE for medical personnel. We would also experience profound second- and third-order effects of millions of additional deaths on the economy. > should we... force video taped gym sessions and cardio exercises? require wearable monitors? prohibit admittance to public transport without a gym validation stamp or a doctor note? I hope you've taken the opportunity to read this again. To be charitable, it does not meet the high standards I think we hold ourselves to at HN. People suffering from heart disease don't infect others with a potentially fatal virus. Other countries have applied strict shelter in place and mask rules with great success. In the US, compliance with such rules has been made political, and questioning it--often with straw man arguments like those above--has become the mark of supposed contrarian rebels. As a result we have something of the worst of both worlds. Sadly, as more Americans irresponsibly refuse to apply basic COVID safety measures, more people get infected, thus supplying rhetorical ammunition to critics like those in this thread. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/health/coronavirus-herd-immunity-simulation-vaccine/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/health/coronavi...

teachrdan 6y ago
I notice I'm getting downvoted for this post. Perhaps I was too verbose or inarticulate, so I'll try to be clearer: * Are mask and shelter in place laws worthwhile to avoid two to three million additional deaths due to COVID?
- umanwizard 6y ago
  I downvoted you because the idea that 1% of the total population will die without lockdowns is directly contradicted by all available evidence. Various countries had various levels of lockdown, and none had anywhere remotely close to that fraction of their population die.

mcguire 6y ago

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e5.htm "During March 11–May 2, 2020, a total of 32,107 deaths were reported to DOHMH; of these deaths, 24,172 (95% confidence interval = 22,980–25,364) were found to be in excess of the seasonal expected baseline. Included in the 24,172 deaths were 13,831 (57%) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated deaths and 5,048 (21%) probable COVID-19–associated deaths, leaving 5,293 (22%) excess deaths that were not identified as either laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19–associated deaths (Figure)." During those roughly 2 months, there were 32,107 deaths; in a normal year there would be about 32,107 - 24,172 = 7,935 deaths. Normally, that would be ~100 deaths/day; during that time there were ~500 deaths/day. ("New York" deaths peaked at about 800/day, although I'm not sure if that was NYC or the state.) Edit: Dang it. I'll leave this here anyway.