ADVERTISEMENT

43% Of COVID-19 Deaths Are In Nursing Homes & Assisted Living Facilities Housing 0.6% Of U.S.

KnighttimeJoe

KnighttimeJoe

Todd's Tiki Bar
May 29, 2001
21,805
11,134
113
Nursing homes and assisted living facilities: The #1 COVID problem

2.1 million Americans, representing 0.62% of the U.S. population, reside in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. (Nursing homes are residences for seniors needing help with activities of daily living, such as taking a shower or getting dressed, who also require 24/7 medical supervision; assisted living facilities are designed for seniors who need help with activities of daily living, but don’t require full-time on-site medical supervision.)

According to an analysis that Gregg Girvan and I conducted for the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, as of May 22, in the 39 states that currently report such figures, an astounding 43% of all COVID-19 deaths have taken place in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapo...ation-43-of-u-s-covid-19-deaths/#2912ba2874cd
 
Take out new yorks numbers altogether and it goes up to 51% even with some states not delineating their numbers.
 
fried-chicken said:
With what, reclassifying the deaths to pneumonia so he can open the theme parks in NY?
Click to expand...
Well you're on record saying that new york deaths from covid are underreported. I guess instead of 29% of all deaths in the US happened under his watch, it might be 33-35%.
 
Crazyhole said:
Well you're on record saying that new york deaths from covid are underreported. I guess instead of 29% of all deaths in the US happened under his watch, it might be 33-35%.
Click to expand...

Ignore him. He cheerleaded death tolls and he’s butthurt that a GOP Governor has led a fantastic response while his DNC heroes have utterly failed. Now he’s all in on conspiracy theories
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne and Ucfmikes
UCFKnight85 said:
Ignore him. He cheerleaded death tolls and he’s butthurt that a GOP Governor has led a fantastic response while his DNC heroes have utterly failed. Now he’s all in on conspiracy theories
Click to expand...
Desantis has done a fantastic job at keeping Covid19 deaths down and reopening quickly. Now if they could only figure out why everybody is now dying if “pneumonia”*
 
Exactly, even if 3500 of the 5k pneumonia cases were Covid19m The death #s still dwarf NY. My guess is the extra pneumonia deaths are mostly due to people not going to doctor's early with symptoms, Elderly people tended to stay inside and social distance much more than most, and getting medical care has not been easy since Wuhan broke out.

Dr. Fauci even talked of unintended medical consequences of not opening back up.
 
OK so let's run through a quick scenario. Care facilities are unique. I can't think of any other type of facility (except maybe prisons) where people share recirculating air with each other 24/7. Even at work or school, you're looking at 1/4 the exposure time. With work or school, you might stay home if you know your sick, but of course at a care facility nothing changes. The first known cluster in the US was a care facility. So all the evidence suggests that the reproductive rate in this population (care facilities) is going to be higher then the general population. Obviously this population is more vulnerable (age and health conditions), so it's a perfect recipe to lead the charge during an epidemic.

So let's make some simple assumptions.
  • Let's assume a mortality rate of 10% in care facilities, and 0.5% for the broad public.
  • Let's assume 2 million Americans in care facilities, and 320 million in the broad public.
Now let's explore 2 different points in time of the same epidemic. Point 1 has a 20% attack rate of care facility patients, and a 2% attack rate of the public at large. Point 2 assumes herd immunity, with a 100% attack rate in care facilities and 70% of the public at large.

Time Point 1:
  • 20% attack rate of 2 million care patients = 400,000 infections.
  • 10% mortality rate = 40,000 deaths in care facilities.
  • 2% attack rate of 320 million people = 6,400,000 infections
  • 0.5% mortality for the broad public = 32,000 deaths
Time Point 1 Headline: Care facilities account for over 50% of deaths, even though they make up just 0.6% of the population.

Time Point 2: Herd immunity - 70% broad public attack rate, 100% attack rate in care facilities
  • 2 million x 10% mortality = 200,000 deaths in care facilities
  • 320 million x 70% attack rate x 0.5% mortality = 1,112,000 deaths
-----------

This could be evidence that (1) you controlled the epedemic pretty well. If care facilities account for a large chunk of deaths, then you did a good job preventing widespread public infection. (2) It could also simply be an artifact of timing - if you're going to hit herd immunity eventually, then there's an inflection point where the % of deaths in care facilities will peak and then start declining. While I wont' defend NY's counting methods, it's reasonable to assume that if you got hit hard enough, your percentage of care-facility deaths would be lower than states not hit as hard (you'd have higher absolute numbers, just a lower percentage).

Interesting data for sure.
 
Boosted87 said:
OK so let's run through a quick scenario. Care facilities are unique. I can't think of any other type of facility (except maybe prisons) where people share recirculating air with each other 24/7. Even at work or school, you're looking at 1/4 the exposure time. With work or school, you might stay home if you know your sick, but of course at a care facility nothing changes. The first known cluster in the US was a care facility. So all the evidence suggests that the reproductive rate in this population (care facilities) is going to be higher then the general population. Obviously this population is more vulnerable (age and health conditions), so it's a perfect recipe to lead the charge during an epidemic.

So let's make some simple assumptions.
  • Let's assume a mortality rate of 10% in care facilities, and 0.5% for the broad public.
  • Let's assume 2 million Americans in care facilities, and 320 million in the broad public.
Now let's explore 2 different points in time of the same epidemic. Point 1 has a 20% attack rate of care facility patients, and a 2% attack rate of the public at large. Point 2 assumes herd immunity, with a 100% attack rate in care facilities and 70% of the public at large.

Time Point 1:
  • 20% attack rate of 2 million care patients = 400,000 infections.
  • 10% mortality rate = 40,000 deaths in care facilities.
  • 2% attack rate of 320 million people = 6,400,000 infections
  • 0.5% mortality for the broad public = 32,000 deaths
Time Point 1 Headline: Care facilities account for over 50% of deaths, even though they make up just 0.6% of the population.

Time Point 2: Herd immunity - 70% broad public attack rate, 100% attack rate in care facilities
  • 2 million x 10% mortality = 200,000 deaths in care facilities
  • 320 million x 70% attack rate x 0.5% mortality = 1,112,000 deaths
-----------

This could be evidence that (1) you controlled the epedemic pretty well. If care facilities account for a large chunk of deaths, then you did a good job preventing widespread public infection. (2) It could also simply be an artifact of timing - if you're going to hit herd immunity eventually, then there's an inflection point where the % of deaths in care facilities will peak and then start declining. While I wont' defend NY's counting methods, it's reasonable to assume that if you got hit hard enough, your percentage of care-facility deaths would be lower than states not hit as hard (you'd have higher absolute numbers, just a lower percentage).

Interesting data for sure.
Click to expand...


I'll condense this for you:


Nobody has any clear cut answers other than old people are more likely to die, so its basically just like the flu.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Crazyhole said:
I'll condense this for you:


Nobody has any clear cut answers other than old people are more likely to die, so its basically just like the flu.
Click to expand...

And that Andrew Cuomo sent thousands of COVID patients back into homes with extremely high at-risk elderly people.
 
UCFKnight85 said:
And that Andrew Cuomo sent thousands of COVID patients back into homes with extremely high at-risk elderly people.
Click to expand...
They were probably going to die this year anyway. Yes, that sounds harsh but looking at the numbers it's only increased the chance of death by 5%. Thats the same as getting on the interstate and driving 85 instead of 70 and getting in an accident. For comparison, illegal opioid users have a 3000% higher chance of dying than they would have otherwise.
 
UCFKnight85 said:
And that Andrew Cuomo sent thousands of COVID patients back into homes with extremely high at-risk elderly people.
Click to expand...
Not to mention the fact that he allowed all his sick people to travel to south Florida. Imagine if he had stopped the flow from New York to Fl. We would have had like 5 cases in all of Florida.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back