Any inside info as to whether Michigan DoH is amenable to it being less than two weeks?
Has the state put out an official press release or are there any Michigan Department of Health orders? I've checked the DoH Twitter, .GOV website, nothing.
I'd like to read the written order though which the DoH has communicated to the University, as opposed to press releases.
That being said, I don't see the logic of shutting it down for two weeks if everyone in the associated AD Programs -
1) Self isolates for five days
2) Is tested daily
3) If after five days of consecutive negative tests, they are allowed to resume activities with the following criteria
4) They avoid common study/tutor areas and take things online
5) Access to facilities is isolated to that program (easy for football/hockey/swimming, not sure about others)
6) If there are shared facilities between two different athletic programs (weight lifting), their access is scheduled and subsequent cleaning takes place between each group accessing the facility (this is probably already being done today)
January 24th, 2021 at 12:42 PM ^
I had posted earlier that the CDC now recommends from 10 to 14 days. Would think since the basketball and hockey teams did not have any direct cases the 10 days would apply?!
CDC currently recommends a quarantine period of 14 days. However, based on local circumstances and resources, the following options to shorten quarantine are acceptable alternatives. Quarantine can end after Day 10 without testing and if no symptoms have been reported during daily monitoring.Dec 2, 2020
January 24th, 2021 at 12:47 PM ^
Did the student with B117 go to a common area? Was there actual exposure to athletes in other Programs that would warrant quarantine? Unknown.
Has the University recommended to all Michigan athletes to install the Michigan DoH contact tracing app for iOS/Android, which uses the system level bluetooth API for detection (which is the most robust tracing protocol in the field) - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1527644912
Unknown.
If that app was used by all University athletes, you can very quickly perform contact tracing, and if they could show they had no exposure and took the precautions which I've cited, I think that would be a strong SCIENCE/FACT BASED (lol) argument for resuming sooner than two weeks.
January 24th, 2021 at 1:12 PM ^
Has anyone here read Huxley's Brave New World ?
January 24th, 2021 at 2:10 PM ^
...that it is...
January 24th, 2021 at 12:47 PM ^
It's all pretty fungible.
January 24th, 2021 at 12:49 PM ^
This seems like an appropriate time to ask the age old question: who is the fungus among us?
January 24th, 2021 at 1:08 PM ^
Props to Indy Pete, haven't heard this one in along time.
January 24th, 2021 at 12:50 PM ^
State of Michigan has been consistent at being very aggressive at trying to defeat this virus with shutting things down or overly cautious depending on how you view it. The one thing they have not done is changed any orders once they are out. If it says 2 weeks, it's going to be 2 weeks and the majority of the time they are going to add another 2 weeks. Hopefully everyone stays healthy and this works better than all of the other shutdowns.
January 24th, 2021 at 12:53 PM ^
Despite this aggressiveness- Michigan has the 13th highest death rate per 100,000 out of the 50 states. This terrible virus is relentless.
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/us-coronavirus-deaths-by-state-july-1.html
January 24th, 2021 at 2:18 PM ^
It really is. I would add that those numbers being cumulative aren't completely representative of the current state of the virus vis-a-vis efforts to limit the spread. States like NY, MI, MA, etc. were hit hard early on and had to dig out of significant waves of infections; they've been better as the restrictions and efforts to mitigate the spread kicked in. Still not great, but (for example), MA being #2 on that list is 100% due to what happened in March, April, and May of 2020 and not the current state of things.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:56 PM ^
The states with the highest death rates did not do enough to protect elderly patients in nursing homes, despite knowledge that morbidity was highest among older demographic groups.
January 24th, 2021 at 3:04 PM ^
That may be true initially but I'd argue states like NY and MA have tamped down their death rates because of a renewed focus on limiting exposure to these vulnerable people.
And more generally, morbidity in all states is disproportionately titled toward older people, oftentimes those in community homes with insufficient protections in place. Like, there isn't a state where all the old people are safe and a bunch of 40-year-olds are all dying.
January 24th, 2021 at 4:09 PM ^
And it still seems to be highly tied to obesity and poor general level of health. Poor ability to perform normal daily actions due to health conditions seems to be the highest indicator of people who have died. But whether or not people get actually sick is still a crap shoot. Anecdotally half my sister's family had it, half didn't. They didn't quarantine from everyone else in the house. My cousin had it and was quite ill, 2 weeks of lethargy and a week of 100+ degree fevers but his 85y.o. parents barely had symptoms...
January 24th, 2021 at 9:21 PM ^
But have things improved because of the restrictions or just because it had already torn through the most populous area of the state and hence had far fewer people left to infect? Most likely the latter.
It's why NYC, New Orleans and other areas hard hit early haven't really had significant spikes since. Has little to do with the measures / behavioral changes.
Conversely, it's why Los Angeles has been hit hard in the last couple months. For whatever reason (weather most likely), it hadn't been hit hard and now it's getting crushed despite the strictest restrictions in the country.
We're very bad at this in America. When restaurants are shut down, we just have friends over to eat. When we should wear masks, we throw a fit.
January 24th, 2021 at 12:53 PM ^
Sounds like a JH game-plan, no adjustments at half-time...
January 24th, 2021 at 1:00 PM ^
Less than 24 hours in and you want an adjustment...maybe evaluate at least a couple of days??
January 24th, 2021 at 3:54 PM ^
From SI quoting the Daily;
There are five confirmed cases of the new variant on Michigan athletic teams and 15 more presumed positives throughout the athletic department, according to the Daily. The strain is believed to stem from a Michigan athlete who recently traveled to the United Kingdom in the beginning of the semester.
This issue isn't just Michigan athletics; It relates to the non-athletic component of the University as well as the Ann Arbor community being susceptible to this new strain.
January 24th, 2021 at 12:54 PM ^
Just trust whatever they say, they know what they are doing and all of our best interest is what they will make decisions based off, I am absolutely sure of it. Trust the Science...
January 24th, 2021 at 1:52 PM ^
I’m really hoping this is sarcasm.
January 24th, 2021 at 1:00 PM ^
Just remember - it's the B1G conference. The B1G will get involved an somehow manage to screw this up and kill all the momentum we had!
January 24th, 2021 at 1:10 PM ^
If it’s going to be shutdown for at least five days, why not just stick with the more conservative 14 days. What does cutting corners and opening it up 9 days early buy for the risk?
January 24th, 2021 at 1:17 PM ^
...because if the AD had half a brain and recommended to the the Programs/athletes to install that contact tracing app and took the precautions I've cited (an immediate 24 hour cleaning of all facilities as well), you could actually have a science/fact based counter argument that the quarantine is not justified and there was no actual exposure and reopen up things in a day or two.
Or the AD was incompetent and didn't follow through on recommending that the athletes install the contact tracing app last November/early December (when it was released by the Michigan DoH) and the programs can be shut down for two weeks.
If you're an athlete on the team, which outcome sounds better -
1) (Assuming the AD has half a brain and the Teams/Athletes installed the contact tracing app, God I hope so) - Reopening up things in a day or two because (+ daily testing to get through this period, just in case) you have a verifiable proof that there was no actual exposure + the common area facilities went through a deep cleaning
2) Shut things down for two weeks.
SCIENCE!
January 24th, 2021 at 2:03 PM ^
Or just play it safe for only an extra week and a half when it’s the new more transmissible variant that was found because the apps and testing aren’t 100%. Seriously why cut corners, what is nine days or even just five if you take the lower end of the cdc recommendation in the grand scheme of this whole thing.
January 24th, 2021 at 3:05 PM ^
That's a slippery slope - life occurs at the margins, and if every situation is treated with a preponderance of extreme caution, people will start start whipping themselves into a hysteria - altering behavior for a billion+ people for months on end has serious psychological/economic impact if the survival rate for those under 75 is 99.995%. Was it worth it?
If you're going with science, go all the way - a targeted approach yields the best results. I stand by what I said - if the AD did its job, the Programs should be back playing by the end of this week. The science would back this approach up, because in this scenario you could prove there was no exposure to the B117 variant.
January 24th, 2021 at 3:26 PM ^
It’s not a slippery slope. It’s following the cdc recommendation.
We just have a fundamental disagreement here. I get that the death rate is low for those under 75, but more people have died than in world war 2, more people are dying daily then in 9/11. Hospital systems are overwhelmed. I feel like small sacrifices like keeping an athletic dept closed for the full cdc recommendation is worth the societal responsibility.
January 24th, 2021 at 3:43 PM ^
400K may sound like a big number, but remember - almost 3 million people die in the US every year, and the total deaths in 2019 vs 2020 don’t suggest that COVID really moved the mortality needle.
If you have mortality data to suggest otherwise, I’d be interesting in reading it.
No offense, I think you just tipped your hand with respect to the rush to hysteria by referencing 9/11 and WW2 without looking at the mortality data for the country on a year to year basis.
To play fair I am going to look for more data on how many additional people died of suicides, overdoses, or putting off necessary medical procedures. My gut is that it’s, as a percentage, those three causes as a percentage are higher in a YoY comparison vs that of the general YoY mortality in 2019 vs 2020 for the country.
January 24th, 2021 at 4:05 PM ^
*Hint
This is about available hospital beds in the middle of a pandemic not about WWII. That might narrow down the data set.
January 24th, 2021 at 4:13 PM ^
...if you're implying the lack of hospital beds would move the needle for the mortality rate, that didn't show up in the data.
Again, it's on the people making these calls (to shut things down) to show that shutting everything down has more benefit in this scenario vs. the unintended consequences of suicides, overdoses, etc.
January 24th, 2021 at 4:10 PM ^
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/4215586001
2020 had about 14% more deaths than 2019.
im not sure what you mean by tipping my hand, I’m not trying to hide any feelings.
Anyway I was just using those examples to show how events with significantly lower deaths counts have altered societal behavior.
Whatever, I wasn’t posting to try and get into some protracted internet argument. I just think the cumulative effect of people not willing to make the small sacrifices (like keeping an athletic dept closed for 10 or 14 days instead of 5) has played a big part in the toll the pandemic has taken on this country.
January 24th, 2021 at 8:36 PM ^
And that is with traffic deaths way down due to lower traffic, and flu deaths way down due to social distancing.
January 25th, 2021 at 9:04 AM ^
This. Thank you.
January 24th, 2021 at 9:02 PM ^
How do you know that contact tracing is the reason why the whole department is shut down? Perhaps the infected were going a lot of places where players go in and out and this is why the entire place is shut down?
I don't blame Warde for that. I blame Warde for allowing players to go to UK and comeback without any quarantine. How dumb do you have to be to allow that to happen these days? We have no one to blame for this other than ourselves.
January 24th, 2021 at 7:01 PM ^
This sounds like a complete shutdown - not only are games postponed but the team can’t practice or lift either. Two full weeks of that will leave the team unready to play beyond that point. We’ll need another week just to get our conditioning back. If there’s no reason to believe anyone in the program has Covid a week from now, it should be allowed to restart. We still probably won’t play a game for a few days.
January 24th, 2021 at 1:12 PM ^
Here’s the memo from MDHHS that resulted in Michigan athletics being shut down. To clarify from last night, U-M shut down based on these recommendations, so technically not a state order. Story will be updated @michigandaily. pic.twitter.com/VrpmzIm3EZ
— Ethan Sears (@ethan_sears) January 24, 2021
January 24th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
Thank you.
I read it - the only reference to pervasiveness of the B117 spread is the citation that it has spread to different Programs, plural. But there is a tweet out there that has referenced this spread has not infected anyone associated with the the Basketball/Hockey (according to an AD source/some connection to the two teams), I can't recall who in Michigan twitter shared this but that's out there.
January 24th, 2021 at 1:12 PM ^
Not exactly insider info, but easily found. From the article:
All sports in season, including men’s and women’s basketball, will be affected, including practices, training sessions and games. The shutdown is until further notice and up to 14 days. Athletes, coaches and team staff had to isolate starting Saturday until further notice, up to 14 days, according to the Michigan release.
While we’re on the topic, my pet peeve isn’t “follow the science” clones or the “covid truthers”. it’s the lack of actual FACTS and context. When the stare of MI announces “221 more deaths” and 206 of them are from a “”review of previous records” it pisses me off. (Numbers are from memory and may bot be exact. From a few days ago.)
How the heck can we get a handle on trends when people are manipulating numbers!? Number id positive cases should always be reported in the context of total tests. And new deaths should be NEW. I get that total deaths matter, but that should be a footnote- not the lead. It FEELS like the state is trying to justify actions based on manipulated data.
Transparency. Transparency. Transparency.
If someone can share a link outlining how the state reviews records that would be great. I’m particularly interested in knowing how far bak the reviews go and whether it’s by county, by date, whatever.
It’s the age of (too much?) information and we’re getting half the story.
This is why I get so fed up with the “follow the data and science” narrative.Nobody tells us WHAT the targets are and there’s little consistency in reporting.
Dismounting from my soapbox now...
Signed, someone who considers themself a fiscal republican and social democratic!
January 24th, 2021 at 1:22 PM ^
"Up to 14 days", meaning 14 days is the "Max". Does not address if the CDC guidelines could apply, 10 to 14 days, meaning less than 14 days, if all is good/safe.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:09 PM ^
When the stare of MI announces “221 more deaths” and 206 of them are from a “”review of previous records” it pisses me off. (Numbers are from memory and may bot be exact. From a few days ago.)
How the heck can we get a handle on trends when people are manipulating numbers!? Number id positive cases should always be reported in the context of total tests. And new deaths should be NEW. I get that total deaths matter, but that should be a footnote- not the lead. It FEELS like the state is trying to justify actions based on manipulated data.
Transparency. Transparency. Transparency.
I don't know what you're quoting since you didn't link it--it's not in what you did link--but I don't understand what is not transparent here. They evidently reported how many were really new versus how many were old, because you seem to know it. This means they were transparent about it.
Sounds to me like your problem isn't lack of transparency, but a spin you disagree with. You want a different spin. Insofar as they have a good public health rationale for presenting information in a way that will maximize compliance with health recommendations, I'm not sure why your spin would be preferable.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:24 PM ^
Jon - sure, let’s agree that it’s the spin I disagree with. The HEADLINE (which is all most people read/remember) is stating 200+ deaths. Buried in the article is the “disclaimer”.
Where transparency is lacking is the 200+ number is what gets reported by Covid Tracking Project, Johns Hopkins, etc as that’s the official number for MI on that date.
So it paints an inaccurate picture with respect to trends at a minimum.
Apologies for no link. It’s a (very) regular occurrence in DETNEWS/FREEP headlines. Anytime you see a big jump in deaths, it’s almost a certainty that most are from a “records review”. Very frustrating as it doesn’t provide ANY context. Are these from April 2020? August 2020? Last 30 days only? A mix of all prior months? An audit of an entire county? The State of Michigan should have this info available on the health dept site. Haven’t found it.
To me, it just seems sloppy at best. And trust me, the state is using these deaths in its decision making and justification of same. I have no problem with that if they are RECENT.
Not even questioning IF/WHY they are changing the cause of death.
Transparency isn’t providing a portion of the info.
Stay safe!
January 24th, 2021 at 3:08 PM ^
The transparency is on the Michigan state COVID site, which explicitly outlines how that 206 deaths were computed. It isn't some weird voodoo or them trying to hide things.
I'll take the neg votes but I swear there are way too many people here who keep acting like a disease that has killed over 400k Americans is under a year is still some imagined threat and the media is somehow inflating the danger by reporting it.
January 25th, 2021 at 6:47 AM ^
I’ve known of two different deaths that were not Covid related, where the family was asked if Covid could be listed as the cause of death. I assume it wasn’t for political reasons, but rather for financial reasons. Nonetheless, the point is that the mortality #s are not accurate.
January 25th, 2021 at 9:04 AM ^
anecdotal evidence is always the best way to prove or disprove something.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:42 PM ^
Jon - i had a few minutea and did some quick research. This link refers to a very recent instance where daily deaths had 206 (?) included from a record review.
It also outlines the process. While it doesn’t explicitly state that they only review recent deaths, that would be my take away.
However, it does support the “numbers are inflated” crowd since it’s a simple matching of someone who died against those who tested positive.
https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98163_98173---,00.html
So YES, someone who is hit by a bus after testing COVID positive will be listed as a covid death as some have claimed.
Personally, I don’t think the numbers are SIGNIFICANTLY inflated, but it’s not an exact science. Nor can it be at this point.
January 24th, 2021 at 7:22 PM ^
At one point Florida and several other states had 5-6 times the normal amount of pneumonia deaths and those were not being classified as Covid. There is no way in hell it's been a one way street with only over reporting going on.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:21 PM ^
My "pet peeve" is all those who have never taken a 200 level science class nor given ethics more than a micro second of consideration whining and complaining about things of which they hold no significant knowledge.
January 24th, 2021 at 2:36 PM ^
I assume you mean this article (based on the 221 number). And the actual wording is:
Michigan added 1,601 new cases of the coronavirus and 221 deaths from COVID-19 on Saturday.
The deaths included 205 identified during a vital records review.
I assume what this means is that some of the deaths are being confirmed after the fact; that the number of deaths reported on a day are those that may include some from the recent past that had to be confirmed by whatever mechanism(s) the state has in place for collating and tabulating them.
Michigan's COVID-19 site says as much:
Note on deaths (01/23/21): Regular reviews of death certificate data maintained in Vital Records reporting systems are conducted by MDHHS staff three times per week. As a part of this process, records that identify COVID-19 infection as a contributing factor to death are compared against all laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the Michigan Disease Surveillance System (MDSS). If a death certificate is matched to a confirmed COVID-19 case and that record in the MDSS does not indicate the individual died, the MDSS record is updated to indicate the death and the appropriate local health department is notified. These matched deaths are then included with mortality information posted to the Michigan Coronavirus website. As a result of the most recent assessment, today’s data includes 205 additional deaths identified by this methodology.
If this has been the practice for some time I don't really see the harm; deaths are a bit of a lagging indicator of the spread of the disease and so if you deaths are (regrettably) a bit fungible in the data but the totals are the same then so be it. And we're dealing with an imperfect system here; it's why you see these weird fluctuations in states where a lot of people die during the week and then few on the weekend, as there are fewer people updating the relevant databases and checking the logs. So while it's a confusing statement, it's a factually correct reading of the imperfect system we've been using for almost a year now.
Also, you can find this data on Michigan's site; they aren't "hiding" anything as much as newspapers are sort of bad writing ledes. That's not the scientists' or the states' fault; it's on the media to become more fluent in understanding the numbers and conveying them properly.
January 24th, 2021 at 3:11 PM ^
How many of these deaths comprise 'demand being pulled forward' scenario where those individuals were immunocompromised or had a comorbidity of either diabetes, obesity, heart disease, or smoking?
That is say, what percentage of these C19 victims would have potentially passed away if they had caught the flu/pneumonia during a normal flu season?
Would very much like to find an article/paper that covers this.
For reference - in 2019, 2.83 million people died in the US. In 2020 3.1 million people died in the US. If you believe the data, 375K people in the US died of COVID in 2020.
January 24th, 2021 at 5:23 PM ^
Well, we know that in a normal year about 25-35k Americans die every year due to the flu; it varies somewhat but that's to be expected. So significantly more have died than would normally have on that front.
I would argue that comparing raw numbers ignores the underlying causes for those deaths. My guess is those numbers are going to be composed of significantly different causes than in past years. For example, we'll have to see what the final tallies in 2020 come out to but, on average, about 35k people die per year due to car accidents; I'm going to go out on a limb and assume there would be fewer this year due to far fewer people traveling to work, trips, etc. That said, apparently the people on the road are killing themselves at a higher rate due to less safe driving.
More generally, the 3rd-most common cause of death in the country is Accidents/unintentional injuries at around 167k deaths. Again, we'll have to see how those numbers look in 2020 but my guess is those will be lower overall. By comparison, I've heard and read anecdotal evidence from family in medicine that people who should be in hospitals for, say, heart issues, strokes, diabetes, etc. aren't getting treatment because they are afraid to go to a hospital, and so those causes of death might be up.
I agree it'll be morbidly interesting to see how those numbers come out for 2020.
January 24th, 2021 at 4:16 PM ^
Some of the states are infuriated the way numbers have been counted and are or were interested in revising their numbers down. There is no more data about influenza or pneumonia. ALL cases of these other infectous diseases are tied into Covid numbers on the CDC website. It would be nice to be able to parse data and get a feeling of where we actually are rather than just saying everything is covid.