|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 24, 2020 8:42:28 GMT -6
Did you all see the release from BOA about reducing the minimum time to five minutes? I think that's a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by yayband914 on Jun 24, 2020 8:48:39 GMT -6
Official statement from Music for All today (06/24):
An update from Music for All on the 2020 Bands of America season: Surveying participating directors and consulting with the BOA Advisory Committee, we continue the planning for our 2020 Bands of America Championships.
To help with bands’ planning and show preparations, Bands of America’s minimum performance time will be reduced from six (6) to five (5) minutes for 2020. Bands will be permitted a performance time from 5 to 11 minutes for the 2020 Bands of America Championship season. BOA reserves the right to any further considerations if conditions warrant.
We will continue to address appropriate modifications to operations in terms of safety guidelines for participants and spectators.
marching.musicforall.org
|
|
|
Post by Leasingflyer on Jun 24, 2020 8:53:13 GMT -6
So it seems like Music for all really wants BOA to happen this year. It makes sense for the seniors, but I’m torn. Maybe the Covid virus will get better in the late fall? Maybe it won’t? This entire thing just confuses me.
|
|
|
Post by paddy on Jun 24, 2020 9:01:50 GMT -6
So it seems like Music for all really wants BOA to happen this year. It makes sense for the seniors, but I’m torn. Maybe the Covid virus will get better in the late fall? Maybe it won’t? This entire thing just confuses me. BOA cares a little bit about seniors and a LOT about financial solvency.
|
|
|
Post by Leasingflyer on Jun 24, 2020 11:26:25 GMT -6
So it seems like Music for all really wants BOA to happen this year. It makes sense for the seniors, but I’m torn. Maybe the Covid virus will get better in the late fall? Maybe it won’t? This entire thing just confuses me. BOA cares a little bit about seniors and a LOT about financial solvency. I see no lies in this statement
|
|
|
Post by paddy on Jun 24, 2020 11:29:27 GMT -6
BOA cares a little bit about seniors and a LOT about financial solvency. I see no lies in this statement And just to clarify, this isn’t a criticism (though it may be cynicism). MFA has to create money to survive. They make money by hosting workshops and BOA contests. They lost money in the spring and summer workshops/symposium. If they don’t have BOA they are in financial trouble.
|
|
|
Post by LeanderMomma on Jun 24, 2020 11:49:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 24, 2020 12:33:18 GMT -6
Fact lies in perception these days. Thank you for the link.
|
|
|
Post by LeanderMomma on Jun 24, 2020 16:08:41 GMT -6
From one of my nurse friends today... Update shared from St. David's North Austin Medical Center: "An update today from an Infectious Disease physician:
In the past 3 weeks:
The COVID+ rate in ATX up 480%
Hospitalization rate is up 300%
3% of the overall population have tested positive. The estimate is that 15-20% of the population is positive. Herd immunity requires 70-80%
Majority of + cases are <39 years old and at less risk of being critically ill. Young adults are socializing without masks and are the Typhoid Marys of COVID19. Facemasks are proven to limit exposure. You need an innoculum of virus to get sick - that's DOSE + TIME. This virus is unlike most other respiratory viruses. Droplets come out of your mouth to infect others (not so much spread through touching a contaminated surface). A COVID+ patient infects an average of 4 people (influenza is 1.5 people) – also due to the fact that 80% of COVID-infected people are asymptomatic and typically if you have the flu you feel terribly and you stay home in bed.
Mortality has dropped significantly in the past weeks due to proning and avoiding intubation/mechanical ventilation and tolerating a lower oxygen saturation than we normally would if the patient is comfortable. Dexamethasone steroid therapy is also a contributing factor.
Convalescent plasma serum supply is depleted in Austin today - more is coming from NY this afternoon.
The virus isn’t going anywhere and we can’t keep the economy shut down forever so universal masking is imperative when indoors or in enclosed spaces - that includes breakrooms at work. Try to eat meals outside if you can."
|
|
|
Post by hewhowaits on Jun 25, 2020 5:49:34 GMT -6
3% of the overall population have tested positive. The estimate is that 15-20% of the population is positive. Herd immunity requires 70-80% A COVID+ patient infects an average of 4 people (influenza is 1.5 people) – also due to the fact that 80% of COVID-infected people are asymptomatic and typically if you have the flu you feel terribly and you stay home in bed. [cynicism] So the measures taken (forced upon us) have served to prevent any possibility of herd immunity while causing significant changes to our economy and other aspects of daily life. [/cynicism]
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Jun 25, 2020 6:18:53 GMT -6
3% of the overall population have tested positive. The estimate is that 15-20% of the population is positive. Herd immunity requires 70-80% A COVID+ patient infects an average of 4 people (influenza is 1.5 people) – also due to the fact that 80% of COVID-infected people are asymptomatic and typically if you have the flu you feel terribly and you stay home in bed. [cynicism] So the measures taken (forced upon us) have served to prevent any possibility of herd immunity while causing significant changes to our economy and other aspects of daily life. [/cynicism] There were 2 ways to deal with the virus, and neither was taken (nor would they have been supported by public opinion) 1. 100% lockdown for a period greater than twice the virus' incubation period, followed by continued quarantine of anyone who had contact with any infected individuals for a further incubation period. By 100% lockdown, I mean EVERYONE staying IN their home - no exceptions. Those who contracted the virus would be isolated and it would be unable to spread. 2. 0% change in societal function. The virus is allowed to run its course. More people contract the virus, the vast majority of whom would be able to fight it off through natural bodily processes, but herd immunity is achieved and a vaccine is able to be produced. Again, neither would have been popular, either could have been effective if properly implemented and followed.
|
|
|
Post by OldSchoolTrumpet on Jun 25, 2020 6:29:38 GMT -6
3% of the overall population have tested positive. The estimate is that 15-20% of the population is positive. Herd immunity requires 70-80% A COVID+ patient infects an average of 4 people (influenza is 1.5 people) – also due to the fact that 80% of COVID-infected people are asymptomatic and typically if you have the flu you feel terribly and you stay home in bed. [cynicism] So the measures taken (forced upon us) have served to prevent any possibility of herd immunity while causing significant changes to our economy and other aspects of daily life. [/cynicism] You could make that case. It's almost equivalent of fighting a war in a limited fashion so as not to lose, but with no chance of winning. Just a long protracted struggle.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 7:25:44 GMT -6
From one of my nurse friends today... Update shared from St. David's North Austin Medical Center: "An update today from an Infectious Disease physician: In the past 3 weeks: The COVID+ rate in ATX up 480% Hospitalization rate is up 300% 3% of the overall population have tested positive. The estimate is that 15-20% of the population is positive. Herd immunity requires 70-80% Majority of + cases are <39 years old and at less risk of being critically ill. Young adults are socializing without masks and are the Typhoid Marys of COVID19. Facemasks are proven to limit exposure. You need an innoculum of virus to get sick - that's DOSE + TIME. This virus is unlike most other respiratory viruses. Droplets come out of your mouth to infect others (not so much spread through touching a contaminated surface). A COVID+ patient infects an average of 4 people (influenza is 1.5 people) – also due to the fact that 80% of COVID-infected people are asymptomatic and typically if you have the flu you feel terribly and you stay home in bed. Mortality has dropped significantly in the past weeks due to proning and avoiding intubation/mechanical ventilation and tolerating a lower oxygen saturation than we normally would if the patient is comfortable. Dexamethasone steroid therapy is also a contributing factor. Convalescent plasma serum supply is depleted in Austin today - more is coming from NY this afternoon. The virus isn’t going anywhere and we can’t keep the economy shut down forever so universal masking is imperative when indoors or in enclosed spaces - that includes breakrooms at work. Try to eat meals outside if you can." Poor Typhoid Mary. What a tough life that must have been for her. Although I must disagree because once you fight off the virus (even asymptomatically) you eventually cannot shed it after the 14 days so were told. Typhoid Mary was spreading it all her life.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 7:27:01 GMT -6
[cynicism] So the measures taken (forced upon us) have served to prevent any possibility of herd immunity while causing significant changes to our economy and other aspects of daily life. [/cynicism] There were 2 ways to deal with the virus, and neither was taken (nor would they have been supported by public opinion) 1. 100% lockdown for a period greater than twice the virus' incubation period, followed by continued quarantine of anyone who had contact with any infected individuals for a further incubation period. By 100% lockdown, I mean EVERYONE staying IN their home - no exceptions. Those who contracted the virus would be isolated and it would be unable to spread. 2. 0% change in societal function. The virus is allowed to run its course. More people contract the virus, the vast majority of whom would be able to fight it off through natural bodily processes, but herd immunity is achieved and a vaccine is able to be produced. Again, neither would have been popular, either could have been effective if properly implemented and followed. I LOVE option 2. Let's get you in Trump's ears! LOL
|
|
|
Post by paddy on Jun 25, 2020 7:44:06 GMT -6
There were 2 ways to deal with the virus, and neither was taken (nor would they have been supported by public opinion) 1. 100% lockdown for a period greater than twice the virus' incubation period, followed by continued quarantine of anyone who had contact with any infected individuals for a further incubation period. By 100% lockdown, I mean EVERYONE staying IN their home - no exceptions. Those who contracted the virus would be isolated and it would be unable to spread. 2. 0% change in societal function. The virus is allowed to run its course. More people contract the virus, the vast majority of whom would be able to fight it off through natural bodily processes, but herd immunity is achieved and a vaccine is able to be produced. Again, neither would have been popular, either could have been effective if properly implemented and followed. I LOVE option 2. Let's get you in Trump's ears! LOL Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info.
|
|
|
Post by Allohak on Jun 25, 2020 8:02:23 GMT -6
I LOVE option 2. Let's get you in Trump's ears! LOL Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info. This is a good point. Rapidly mutating viruses and short-term antibodies make vaccines difficult.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 8:32:05 GMT -6
I LOVE option 2. Let's get you in Trump's ears! LOL Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info. You're not convincing me otherwise. I'm not a doctor so I can't speak to every study that comes out but i'd say any herd immunity is better than none.
|
|
lhsax
Junior Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by lhsax on Jun 25, 2020 8:57:01 GMT -6
Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info. You're not convincing me otherwise. I'm not a doctor so I can't speak to every study that comes out but i'd say any herd immunity is better than none. Lol, I mostly lurk here and stick to the Texas board, but for someone who has served as the poster boy of the "band no matter what movement" this comment sure discredits your angle. It reads as "I don't care about studies that don't support my specific opinion" and "I'm not a doctor, but I definitely think I know more than they do." Not here to pick a fight, i accept our differing opinions and completely respect your point of view (I would love for you to be right in the end), but gotta have a little bit of an open mind here.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 9:02:44 GMT -6
You're not convincing me otherwise. I'm not a doctor so I can't speak to every study that comes out but i'd say any herd immunity is better than none. Lol, I mostly lurk here and stick to the Texas board, but for someone who has served as the poster boy of the "band no matter what movement" this comment sure discredits your angle. It reads as "I don't care about studies that don't support my specific opinion" and "I'm not a doctor, but I definitely think I know more than they do." Not here to pick a fight, i accept our differing opinions and completely respect your point of view (I would love for you to be right in the end), but gotta have a little bit of an open mind here. I’m not going to rehash everything I’ve already said last week for the sake of “upsetting the group” (which I respect btw) so I’d say ya just gotta go read what I wrote then because I very clearly dealt with this. 😊😊
|
|
lhsax
Junior Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by lhsax on Jun 25, 2020 9:08:13 GMT -6
Lol, I mostly lurk here and stick to the Texas board, but for someone who has served as the poster boy of the "band no matter what movement" this comment sure discredits your angle. It reads as "I don't care about studies that don't support my specific opinion" and "I'm not a doctor, but I definitely think I know more than they do." Not here to pick a fight, i accept our differing opinions and completely respect your point of view (I would love for you to be right in the end), but gotta have a little bit of an open mind here. I’m not going to rehash everything I’ve already said last week for the sake of “upsetting the group” (which I respect btw) so I’d say ya just gotta go read what I wrote then because I very clearly dealt with this. 😊😊 Oh, don't worry, I've read it all Just adding my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 9:15:04 GMT -6
I’m not going to rehash everything I’ve already said last week for the sake of “upsetting the group” (which I respect btw) so I’d say ya just gotta go read what I wrote then because I very clearly dealt with this. 😊😊 Oh, don't worry, I've read it all Just adding my 2 cents. Cool beans!
|
|
|
Post by twhsalumniparent on Jun 25, 2020 9:17:52 GMT -6
I LOVE option 2. Let's get you in Trump's ears! LOL Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info. What we previously knew about coronaviruses in general already predicted that result. I think the only vaccine that has been marketed was for dogs (if someone knows otherwise please let me know), and it has a short effective period. So all these things imply we just have to live with it and get on with our lives as there is nothing else to be done in the immediate/short term (sure, continue researching coronaviruses and keep working on finding more effective vaccines, but that most likely is a long term project). What is the alternative? The overwhelming majority of cases are asymptomatic or very mild symptoms. We accept a certain mortality rate for dozens/hundreds of other diseases, IMO we have to do the same here.
Here is something I came across to play with regarding modeling infection rates and what the infection growth curves should look like depending upon the various input parameters: gabgoh.github.io/COVID/index.html
|
|
|
Post by paddy on Jun 25, 2020 9:22:16 GMT -6
Except that there are new studies coming out of Sweden (a country that essentially followed the 0% change idea) that there is a decreasing presence of antibodies in infected and recovered patients. Vaccines and herd immunity work off of long term presence of antibodies to keep you from getting a disease a second time. That may mean that we can develop a vaccine like the flu vaccine (that boosts immunity but doesn't prevent contracting COVID), but herd immunity is unlikely given this new info. What we previously knew about coronaviruses in general already predicted that result. I think the only vaccine that has been marketed was for dogs (if someone knows otherwise please let me know), and it has a short effective period. So all these things imply we just have to live with it and get on with our lives as there is nothing else to be done in the immediate/short term (sure, continue researching coronaviruses and keep working on finding more effective vaccines, but that most likely is a long term project). What is the alternative? The overwhelming majority of cases are asymptomatic or very mild symptoms. We accept a certain mortality rate for dozens/hundreds of other diseases, IMO we have to do the same here.
Here is something I came across to play with regarding modeling infection rates and what the infection growth curves should look like depending upon the various input parameters: gabgoh.github.io/COVID/index.html I was simply saying that chasing herd immunity as a magic bullet was not a solution. I believe that we should work on ways to live with and mitigate the risks (proper hygiene, distancing when possible, masks as needed, etc) and protect the most vulnerable in our society (which is actually a pretty reasonable way to live life in general).
|
|
|
Post by Samuel Culper on Jun 25, 2020 9:33:25 GMT -6
If herd immunity is unlikely and a specific vaccine cannot be developed, then what is the point of shutting down? Everybody takes precautions and we go about our business. We cannot isolate forever or we won't have an economy to destroy and unemployment will be permanently high.
I'm not saying this is the reality, just responding to assertions made above.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 9:40:44 GMT -6
If herd immunity is unlikely and a specific vaccine cannot be developed, then what is the point of shutting down? Everybody takes precautions and we go about our business. We cannot isolate forever or we won't have an economy to destroy and unemployment will be permanently high. I'm not saying this is the reality, just responding to assertions made above. the answer is: we're not thinking
|
|
|
Post by dbalash on Jun 25, 2020 10:03:11 GMT -6
The Midwest Clinic in Chicago in December is cancelled.
|
|
|
Post by marimba11 on Jun 25, 2020 10:03:42 GMT -6
Deaths daily have taken a 72% drop from their peak nationwide as cases have increased (undoubtedly the younger/ healthier are testing positive, more testing ect.).
At this point I have serious doubts we will have a reliable vaccine for COVID 19 with all this antibody talk, a healthy immune response might not generate antibodies. The important question is whether or not a vaccine is even needed given the low morbidity and mortality of the virus in the vast majority.
|
|
|
Post by angelee on Jun 25, 2020 10:29:36 GMT -6
If herd immunity is unlikely and a specific vaccine cannot be developed, then what is the point of shutting down? Everybody takes precautions and we go about our business. We cannot isolate forever or we won't have an economy to destroy and unemployment will be permanently high. I'm not saying this is the reality, just responding to assertions made above. I believe the point of shutting down for two or more cycles of the virus is to burn it out. All infections have been treated and no one will transmit it because it’s gone. We did not do that as a society. So many kept going out before restrictions were lifted. We had no hope of containment here. I know the government pretends they tried, and we did slow the initial spread. But the goal here was not to eliminate but to spread it out. And that’s what has happened. Americans as a whole would never agree to a full lockdown. Look at how many are complaining even after “it’s over”!
|
|
|
Post by LeanderMomma on Jun 25, 2020 14:07:17 GMT -6
I’m not going to rehash everything I’ve already said last week for the sake of “upsetting the group” (which I respect btw) so I’d say ya just gotta go read what I wrote then because I very clearly dealt with this. 😊😊 Oh, don't worry, I've read it all Just adding my 2 cents. welcome to the HR fold friend! Pull up a chair and stay awhile.
|
|
|
Post by twhsalumniparent on Jun 25, 2020 14:10:35 GMT -6
What we previously knew about coronaviruses in general already predicted that result. I think the only vaccine that has been marketed was for dogs (if someone knows otherwise please let me know), and it has a short effective period. So all these things imply we just have to live with it and get on with our lives as there is nothing else to be done in the immediate/short term (sure, continue researching coronaviruses and keep working on finding more effective vaccines, but that most likely is a long term project). What is the alternative? The overwhelming majority of cases are asymptomatic or very mild symptoms. We accept a certain mortality rate for dozens/hundreds of other diseases, IMO we have to do the same here.
Here is something I came across to play with regarding modeling infection rates and what the infection growth curves should look like depending upon the various input parameters: gabgoh.github.io/COVID/index.html I was simply saying that chasing herd immunity as a magic bullet was not a solution. I believe that we should work on ways to live with and mitigate the risks (proper hygiene, distancing when possible, masks as needed, etc) and protect the most vulnerable in our society (which is actually a pretty reasonable way to live life in general). I think we mostly agree on that point - the question is how do we respond to that as a society? But with that comes all the politics that screws things up, so it is of course not so simple.
|
|