Dear Friends,
Not sure how long it takes locally, but in Santa Clara County where they have tested 11,782 patients, it takes 2.27 days on average.
On their dashboard, they call this "Average Days Turnaround Time".
Their dashboard is available at:
Regards,
John Troidl
https://images.app.goo.gl/ggpTgjQXgs5D9SQ9A
Dear Friends,
In science we have "stronger evidence" and "weaker evidence" as we rarely have proof. But stronger evidence is a whole lot better than weaker evidence. And it is more "actionable"…. that is, it is something that is solid enough for us to act on.
We want our government to use the most current and robust science to make decisions. Particularly big decisions like "sheltering in place" and closing or restricting access to parks and other amenities that have well known health promotion effects.
So, in this ongoing discussion of the corona virus/covid-19, the flu, etc, let's pay attention to the level of evidence that "experts" are using to make decisions for our society.
And let's consider whether or not we properly fund our Federal, State, and Local public health agencies which are supposed to track illnesses (who is sick from or dying from what?) enough to actually do their jobs.
Respectfully,
John
PS Please check out the link to Evidence Pyramid.
Dear Yolo County folks… the numbers for CV/Covid in Yolo County as so small it is hard to make statistical inferences from them.
But not so for Santa Clara County, Northern Caifornia's worst zone for the corona virus. Here is the link to the Santa Clara County Public Health Department Corona Virus Dashboard:
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/DiseaseInformation/novelcoronavirus/Pages/dashboard.aspx
Please note the large sample size from this pool of symptomatic patients who were referred by their provider for the CV test: 11607 tests. Results: 10.55% were positive and 89.45% were negative. The average turnaround time for the test was 2.88 days.
Please note: Santa Clara folks tell me that those positive results are "tight". Their testing standards are such that they avoided false positives as much as possible.
As you can imagine these results raise a lot of questions:
This is National Public Health Week folks…. let's appreciate what public health people do including their unusual skills in analyzing data. This is not a clinical skill, this is a PUBLIC HEALTH skill.
Enjoy the dashboard viewing!
John J. Troidl, MBA, PhD
(I have a PhD in public health and have also taught various courses in public health for a number of years).
Being a bit of an information addict, I subscribe to several newspapers/journals and read lots others in the library or online. One paper I do subscribe to is the Washington Post which has added quite a few reporters in the last couple of years. They do a particularly good job of following health and public health issues.
So, I read this article which came out about 4 p.m. (Pacific Time) yesterday about the national CV death toll ………with some great interest:
The Washington Post folks do a daily count which they keep updated and just sent me an email answer to this question: "Have there been any confirmed deaths of CHILDREN from CV?"
Their answer: NO.
So, no deaths to children…. which further reinforces the likelihood that they are "the perfect transmitters"…… they get the bug, they carry the bug, they feel no symptoms or few, they don't die from it and therefore are fully available to then transmit the bug…. increasingly to their grandparents and other caregivers who are taking care of them now that school is out.
Dispersing them from school, especially in the absence of test data, may have been a less than optimal choice (being nice here).
Again, these are challenging times especially with the lack of testing data and I am confident everyone is acting with the best interest of the kids and families in mind.
It is just my opinion that maybe that decision should be re-visited…..
John Troidl
So, we are ALL dealing (even those in denial) with the corona virus threat. And I believe that everyone is trying to be as conscientious as possible in our decision making. Which is a bit of a challenge given that we have so very, very, very little testing data to know "how big this thing is" and that includes we lack community level data regarding who has the virus.
Even with the lack of large scale data which has been done in South Korea, we seem reasonably confident in some "knowns":
So, work with me on this one. If you think there is a flaw in my thinking, please bring it up. (But do your homework and think rigorously, I have been working on this and run it past some very smart people who think I might have a good point here.).
If the most vulnerable are our seniors and the least harmed are our children…. and the children can be/are unwitting transmitters…. then when we look at the decision to suspend school we have two main options:
It is also novel because I don't think that this situation…. send the kids home for a month has ever happened before. No big deal if it has, I just don't recall it in 30+ years in Davis.
Ok, so it looks like the School District, at the urging of the Yolo County Public Health Department chose Option 2: Send the kids home. This seemed reasonable, the desire was to implement "social distancing" which would theoretically "flatten the case curve" which would delay, but not reduce, the incidence of illness.
But theoretically is theoretically and we live in the real world, don't we?
So, how does this work? Let's examine a "theory of action" or take it step by step in the implementation phase.
So, with essentially no warning or time for preparation, the parents are told "Take 'em, they're yours for the next month" and last Saturday received their children for the duration…. estimated to be one month or until April 12th. How are the families going to manage this?
The families that I talked to are scrambling. Some families have a stay at home parent (Mom or Dad) who can step up to have the kids full time (and don't think that this new situation is an easy adjustment or stress free). In some families, both parents are working but they have a baby sitter for at least some of the time the kids will now be at home. For some families, their kids are old enough and responsible enough to be left home alone (some estimates are that there are approximately two families in Davis that meet this criteria). And for the rest of the families, the strategy is "call in the grandparents"!
Across the US almost 40% of grandparents already care for their grandchildren and the percentage is expected to go up during this corona virus crisis. (https://www.newsobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article241226456.html)
So, let me ask you…. and I'd love to be wrong….. did we just create the circumstances to give our seniors in this community the MAXIMUM exposure to the corona virus by dismissing the kids from school before any of them could be tested? Instead of "flattening the curve" have we, by spreading out the kids into the community and in heightened contact with their grandparents, actually accelerated the curve?
I am sure that all of you have seen the kids in Davis out and about… and of course spending more time at home. Is the "law of unintended consequences" gonna come and bite us on the rear end as our elders, with this heightened exposure from the kids who have been sent home from school, come down with this disease in increasing numbers?
All thoughtful comments, reflections, and even rebuttals are welcome. I'm just concerned and wanted to share that with you.
Regards,
John
In case you missed it, today the entire meeting which included Dr. Chapman's presentation was live streamed and recorded: https://yolocountyca.swagit.com/play/03092020-1208
Suggest you give yourself a little time to sit down and listen to Dr. Chapman's presentation…. it is one of the best organized, most accessible presentations on the matter that I have heard or read anywhere.
We are fortunate to have Dr. Chapman and his staff working on our behalf in Yolo County. He is an excellent Public Health Officer and our Yolo County Department of Public Health is really doing a great job of informing the public and working with a variety of stakeholders including other health care providers, schools, cities, adult day health, senior centers, etc to get the word out in a calm, professional manner so that we will know the risks, hear good advice on what to do/what not to do and to carry on our lives in the midst of a public health threat.
Our Public Health Department is the "go to" place for this kind of information and guidance.
Thanks, Dr. Chapman!
John Troidl
PS Supervisors Provenza and Saylor can be heard on the re-play of the live stream asking some really good questions and helping guide the discussion on ways that are meaningful for the public. Check it out!
The headline in the Daily Post (#1 in Palo Alto and the Mid-Peninsula) is
"STANFORD HIT WITH HOUSING BILL"
….. and then underneath
"$155.8 million for expansion".
Yes, you read that correctly, Stanford is paying Santa Clara County over $150,000,000 for permission to expand.
This is such good news. The money goes to affordable housing in the County exchange for expansion of academic buildings associated with Stanford University.
Bravo Santa Clara County!
There is also an additional requirement to build affordable housing on campus.
Gosh, it is so refreshing when a university provides valuable resources (like cash) to the local areas where it is located.
Way to go Stanford!!
John
To be sure, I am still learning about this "deal". And I am willing to be enlightened. So, my comments are preliminary….. but concerned.
It seems like the deal is totally future oriented. That is, it takes a "go forth and sin no more" form of agreement i.e. it only pertains to the students who come to this area due to the (additional) incremental growth of the University. That is often a good approach, sometimes makes it easier to come to an agreement. Particularly if parties are inclined to maintain previously entrenched positions. *
But how about the 20,000 "temporary occupants" who are already inhabiting Davis and nearby towns? By this I refer to undergraduates who should be housed on campus who currently live in the community and drive rental rates up and availability of housing down. I don't mind if grad students are living in the community, that's fine. It is not unusual for "adult learners" to continue to live in the communities that contain the university where they did their grad work.
Davis has a well earned reputation for being concerned about safety……why, we even invented bike lanes in Davis! And many other towns have copied us.
But we started bike lanes DECADES ago when the town had a much smaller population and much less traffic. How are we doing these days? How are we doing in 2018?
Is Davis considered a safe town to ride a bike in? To be a pedestrian? To be a pedestrian if you are a Senior Citizen? Or a child? How ARE we doing?
I am prompted to ask this by an article I read in today's LA Times about traffic flow and safety in LA, the Land of the Automobile. Here's the article: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-speed-trap-20180722-story.html
Kern County Public Health Department has launched a new voluntary informational program for people and families dining at Kern County restaurants.
Restaurants can seek to qualify as 'Certified Healthy" if they meet several specific criteria including:
Here is the list of criteria that restaurants must follow to qualify for the Certified Healthy program. These can be met either as part of the regular menu or with a lite menu.
Check it out here!
Davisite 