Covid-19 in OKC (coronavirus)

[PoliSciGuy]

Highest single, non-backlog-impacted day of cases: 1,401

From https://twitter.com/KassieMcClung/st...77559866990593

Daily #COVID19 update via the state Department of Health:

Highest number of new cases* reported and new high in the 7-day avg., which is over 1,000 for first time.

- 32,686 cases (+1,401)
- 496 deaths (+0)
- 625 hospitalizations, as of 7/24
- 6.4% positive rate as of 7/24

This is definitely not flattening

[Pete]

1,410 new cases today.

Another daily record and a huge total for a Monday in particular.

[Timshel]

Is there anywhere to find the number of total tests tied to the 1,410 positives (i.e., the positivity percentage tied to this number) or does that only come in the end-of-week reports? Here's to hoping this number ties to a huge number of total tests (I remember seeing something saying there were a large number of tests pending late last week).

At least no deaths and it looks like the "currently hospitalized" is down 3 from Friday. Still not good though.

[Pete]

^

We typically have very few deaths reported on Mondays for some reason.

Last 8 Mondays: 0, 1, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1

Tuesdays are usually much higher: 9, 4, 5, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5

[Timshel]

To respond to my own question, Dillon Richards tweeted that the state reported 43,103 negative tests today, "on a day of the week that the state often reports no new negative tests at all." Even with this number of positives, the two-week positivity rate actually decreased today. Not in any way saying today's number is good or that we're out of the woods in the slightest, but today isn't as bad as the raw 1,410 number would have us believe.


This thread is what I'm referencing: https://twitter.com/KOCODillon/statu...415887877?s=20

[kukblue1]

1,500 for sure tomorrow. Do I hear 2,000. Watch out Nation Oklahoma is coming for that number one spot. We have a governor that don't seem to care and a shut down or even a roll back is never going to happen. We get this Oklahoma. WERE NUMBER 1 WERE NUMBER 1.

[Libbymin]

Google just announced they are giving most employees the option of working from home until July 2021.


I really wonder how much the pandemic will change the way companies work. The move to telecommuting has been very slow but this might end up being a huge tipping point.

As an employer, I can tell you we spent a small fortune on rent and utilities plus other office-related costs. I personally like going into an office every day and working with people face-to-face, but it may be paying for all that might not be the best investment.

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

[PoliSciGuy]

To respond to my own question, Dillon Richards tweeted that the state reported 43,103 negative tests today, "on a day of the week that the state often reports no new negative tests at all." Even with this number of positives, the two-week positivity rate actually decreased today. Not in any way saying today's number is good or that we're out of the woods in the slightest, but today isn't as bad as the raw 1,410 number would have us believe.


This thread is what I'm referencing: https://twitter.com/KOCODillon/statu...415887877?s=20

That's good context, and helps cut the urgency of the numbers a tad. We'll have to see what tomorrow holds, as Tuesdays are usually the worst day.

[Pete]

Just under a month ago, we had never had more than 478 cases in one day.

Today, we had 3X that amount.


We are doing more tests because more people have symptoms and/or have had exposure. I have never thought the positive % was a very meaningful number -- unless we were to test everyone every single day.

[jerrywall]

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

I know my company has been very happily surprised with the results of working from home. I know that many of the managers have been resistant to working remotely, including my boss, but they've changed their tunes. We've hit records every month we've been working from home. I'm sure there's some extra motivation on some folks part (who wants to be unemployed right now) but I think it will hold long term. It's nuts with our company how much we've been paying for facilities for several hundred folks, when 95% can work remotely with absolutely no difference in their jobs.

[PhiAlpha]

1,410 new cases today.

Another daily record and a huge total for a Monday in particular.

Sorry, this Xbox meme came to mind immediately upon reading the headline. No laughing matter but couldn’t help myself.

[Pete]

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

I came to terms with productivity vs. attendance a long time ago.

I used to be a COO for a huge financial company and when the Internet started to really take off, there was all types of hand-wringing among senior execs about employees wasting time and they wanted me (I was in charge of IT) to block out a ton of sites and content.

I explained to them that this was a management issue, pure and simple. That as managers the job was to make sure the staff understood the hill to climb and not stand over them and tell them how to climb it (unless there was a problem, then that's a whole different conversation).

And I also explained that even if they were shopping or paying bills they were learning to do things that would ultimately help built skillsets for their jobs. Were we going to block them from talking on the phone as well or doodling on a notepad?

There has to be trust until that it is violated. And I know that even though I do laundry, run to the store and constantly play with my dogs, I am a buzzsaw of productivity when working from home even if I take frequent breaks to live my life.

[C_M_25]

Is there anywhere to find the number of total tests tied to the 1,410 positives (i.e., the positivity percentage tied to this number) or does that only come in the end-of-week reports? Here's to hoping this number ties to a huge number of total tests (I remember seeing something saying there were a large number of tests pending late last week).

At least no deaths and it looks like the "currently hospitalized" is down 3 from Friday. Still not good though.

yeesh.

I'm going to be in the "take it with a grain of salt" crowd for a while longer. Hoping that these are backlogged tests...

[Pete]

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

[C_M_25]

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

Oh, I'm definitely concerned. There's no denying that this is a serious escalation of cases; however, the issues with the data do allow a shred of possibility that these cases me just be temporarily artificially high. It's a "hope for the best, plan for the worst" mentality for this data.

[jccouger]

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

[securityinfo]

ROMEO
Have courage, man. The wound can’t be that bad.

MERCUTIO
No, ’tis not so deep as a well nor so wide as a church-door, but ’tis enough, ’twill serve. Ask for me tomorrow, and you shall find me a grave man.

[dankrutka]

A vast majority of Americans want a national mask mandate: https://thehill.com/homenews/coronav...k-mandate-poll

We just have a failure of leadership.

[FighttheGoodFight]

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

I actually agree with that. I think we could have 200 deaths a day and people who still think it was nothing to worry about. We are still 6 to 8 months away from a vaccine at the absolute earliest. This is going to be a very tough year.

[PoliSciGuy]

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

Eh we see some change with the data. The vast majority of Americans are concerned about Covid, with a significant jump in the percentage of folks "very" concerned as this new spike emerged

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/coronavirus-polls/

[Pete]

I actually agree with that. I think we could have 200 deaths a day and people who still think it was nothing to worry about.

Many would employ the myriad of rationalizations that keep getting trotted no matter how nonsensical: 'They are counting everything as a Covid death'. Or, 'The numbers are manipulated.' Or, 'It's still only an X% death rate'. Or, 'People die all that time.' Or, 'People are shooting each other in Chicago and why aren't we talking about that??'.

[Bill Robertson]

I just saw on Oklahoma Source’s FB page that they confirmed with OSDH that rapid tests are now being counted in the daily totals. They’ve seemed to be a pretty reliable source of information. Any way anyone on here with contacts could verify or discredit that report? If rapid tests started being included last week then that would make the numbers a little better. Still really concerning but at least a little better.

[C_M_25]

I just saw on Oklahoma Source’s FB page that they confirmed with OSDH that rapid tests are now being counted in the daily totals. They’ve seemed to be a pretty reliable source of information. Any way anyone on here with contacts could verify or discredit that report? If rapid tests started being included last week then that would make the numbers a little better. Still really concerning but at least a little better.

If that is true, then that screws any type of trend analysis we can do with this data. They essentially changed the goal posts mid-way through the game.

I wonder if the can retroactively add back in the positive tests from the rapid testing going back to when they were implemented.

[jedicurt]

If that is true, then that screws any type of trend analysis we can do with this data. They essentially changed the goal posts mid-way through the game.

I wonder if the can retroactively add back in the positive tests from the rapid testing going back to when they were implemented.

i must be missing something. as long as they give us the total tested included in that, how does this change the goal posts and make any trend analysis vastly scewed? the rapid tests would still be tests done, just moved from a future day to today... not like it isn't still a tested number and a positive number.

[C_M_25]

i must be missing something. as long as they give us the total tested included in that, how does this change the goal posts and make any trend analysis vastly scewed? the rapid tests would still be tests done, just moved from a future day to today... not like it isn't still a tested number and a positive number.

Unless I misunderstand, these rapid tests haven't been included into our daily totals to date. If you suddenly add them, then your daily case line will shift up dramatically. It makes it really difficult to determine whether we are continuing to climb, plateauing, or coming down. If you can add them in retroactively, then no big deal.

You also have the issues of false positives from those tests.