Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) (SARS-CoV-2) [2020]

2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php
https://www.dallascounty.org/Assets/uploads/docs/covid-19/press-releases/july/071620-PressRelease-DallasCountyReports1027AdditionalPositiveCOVID-19Cases.pdf

July 16, 2020 - 37,996 confirmed cases - 501 deaths

37,996 confirmed cases up 1,027 and sixteen new deaths
those 1,027 new cases represent a 2.8% increase over the last day

Increases (by percent) since March 27, 2020 :
21.0%, 19.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%, 14.9%
-- Month of April 2020 --
15.8%, 13.7%, 10.8%, 10.2%, 9.6%, 3.9%, 9.2%, 5.0%, 8.2%, 7.3%, 7.0%, 4.8%, 3.8%, 5.0%, 5.8%,
4.0%, 6.0%, 6.1%, 4.5%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 3.6%, 3.0%, 4.3%, 3.5%, 5.3%
-- Month of May 2020 --
5.3%, 4.9%, 6.0%, 5.7%, 5.9%, 5.3%, 5.2%, 4.9%, 4.7%, 4.5%, 4.3%, 3.9%, 3.8%, 3.6%, 2.9%, 3.0%,
2.8%, 3.0%, 2.9%, 2.4%, 2.3%, 2.5%, 2.0%, 2.1%, 1.9%, 2.1%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.3%
-- Month of June 2020 --
2.2%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.6%, 2.7%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%,
2.1%, 2.8%, 2.6%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.7%, 2.6%, 2.2%, 2.2%, 2.7%, 2.9%, 2.9%, 2.8%, 2.9%
-- Month of July 2020 --
2.5%, 3.2%, 4.8%, 4.7%, 4.3%, 4.7%, 4.0%, 3.7%, 4.1%, 3.8%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.3%, 2.9%, 2.9% and now 2.8%

Increases (by count) since March 27, 2020 :
+64, +72, +49, +61, +82
-- Month of April 2020 --
+100, +100, +90, +94, +97. +43, +106, +63, +108, +105, +107, +79, +65, +89, +109,
+80, +124, +134, +104, +84, +90, +81, +80, +71, +75, +105, +91, +135, +112, +179
-- Month of May 2020 --
+187, +181, +234, +237, +253, +246, +251, +249, +250, +251, +253, +236, +243, +235, +199, +214,
+205, +224, +225, +186, +183, +204, +172, +178, +171, +190, +197, +202, +200, +219, +228
-- Month of June 2020 --
+228, +257, +239, +285, +298, +289, +263, +254, +298, +300, +312, +328, +345, +302, +305,
+306, +413, +392, +394, +395, +408, +454, +445, +391, +403, +496, +561, +570, +572, +601
-- Month of July 2020 --
+544, +708, +1,085, +1,103, +1,062, +1,214, +1,077, +1,029, +1,201, +1,164, +1,101, +1,174, +1,114, +1,000, +1,055 and now +1,027

DALLAS -- As of 11:00am July 16, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 1,027 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 37,996, including 501 deaths.

The additional 16 deaths being reported today include:

A man in his 30’s who was a resident of the City of Grand Prairie. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 40’s who was a resident of the City of Mesquite. He expired in an area hospital ED, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 40’s who was a resident of the City of Garland. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Irving. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Irving. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Lancaster. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A woman in her 70’s who was a resident of the City of Grand Prairie. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been hospitalized.
A man in his 70’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Cedar Hill. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A woman in her 80’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. She expired in the facility, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A woman in her 90’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. She had been hospitalized, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A woman in her 90’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. She had been hospitalized, and had underlying high risk health conditions.

An increasing proportion of COVID-19 cases in Dallas County are being diagnosed in young adults between 18 to 39 years of age, such that of all cases reported after June 1st, half have been in this age group. Reports of cases are continuing to be associated with multiple large recreational and social gatherings since the beginning of June. Of the cases requiring hospitalization to date, more than two-thirds have been under 65 years of age. Diabetes has been an underlying high-risk health condition reported in about a third of all hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

The percentage of respiratory specimens testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was 30% among symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals in week 27. Of cases requiring hospitalization who reported employment, over 80% have been critical infrastructure workers, with a broad range of affected occupational sectors, including: healthcare, transportation, food and agriculture, public works, finance, communications, clergy, first responders and other essential functions.

Of the 501 total deaths reported to date, about a third have been associated with long-term care facilities.
Click to expand...
 
State of Texas complete COVID-19 data breakdown

75af1a2d-68d9-450a-9ce9-ccd60b8fbfe3.png


https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83
https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/0d8bdf9be927459d9cb11b9eaef6101

Data as of 7/16/2020 @4:00 PM:

Total Tests: 2,992,102 (Up +67,814)

Total Viral Tests: 2,699,855 (Up +57,656)

Only 90.2% of Total Tests are Viral Tests the other 9.8% of tests are the useless Antibody Tests

Cases Reported: 292,656 (Up +10,291)

Fatalities: 3,561 (Up +129)

Texas tests per 1M population are 103,191 (Up +2,339) which places Texas as the 12th worst State.

Click this link: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us and on the page click the Tests / 1M pop column twice to sort from worst to first

They are using roughly 28.996 million as the population of Texas.

Texas is mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the total test numbers which is very bad as Antibody Tests are useless in determining if someone has the Coronavirus.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 2,699,855 which works out to be 93,111 per 1M population so Texas is really the 10th worst state in testing
 
iroboto said:
I had read an article that some other tests they believe only 11-15% of their population was infected. So I guess not enough samples taken.
Click to expand...
Using which test? The T-Cell test suggests 2x as many people have been infected than the antibody presence suggests. It may be the antibodies are pretty short lived, specially in the asymptomatic who possibly dealt with the disease quickly and don't need persistent protection to keep it out again as it can be easily dealt with.

Reading a bit around this, I've never been comfortable with the fascination with antibodies for protection. It seems that's the basis for many vaccines, to have the body generate antibodies to prevent an infection, but in those cases, the body likely isn't learning to defend against the disease itself, and when there are no antibodies from a vaccine, you have no protection. Even now, articles on Covid19 resistance are talking about only a part of the system. eg:

Recently, researchers at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology looked at T cell responses in what they considered “average” cases of the disease—people who got sick but didn’t need to be hospitalized. In a study published in Cell in May, they found that all of their subjects developed helper T cells, and 70 percent had killer T cells.​

Like, obviously. What the hell else did they think happened? None of the immune cells did anything and the virus just ran wild? That's how the immune system works. Antibodies are part of the ammunition used by the immune response but they're a tiny part of the overall immune system. But you still don't get anyone talking about the Memory-T cells or the basic immune response. All infections see a ramp up of active immune components, and then these disappear! They aren't needed any more, so why would you have antibodies or Killer T-cells? It's a waste of resources to make them, so yeah, they'll disappear after every disease. Where are people's controls? Why aren't they referring to standards known from other diseases?

It's like everything every degree-level grad (even student. You don't need to pass with a degree in Biochem to remember the basics) ever knew has been forgotten, and this disease is being presented like some weird, alien creation, and I don't get it. "Your antibodies are short lived so you might get reinfected." The immune system doesn't rely on antibodies for long term resistance; never has, and we've known this for decades. "We've found T-cells that may help rid the disease (no shit, Sherlock!) but they may not offer long term protection." Just grab a book! Biochemistry, Zubay, 3rd edition is what I had at University. Read up how the human immune system actually works and then start reporting on what you're finding in relation to that fundamental understanding.

All this hoo-ha-ing about antibodies and resistance, and I've been slightly caught in the middle having the seeds of doubt sown because these guys are all experts, right, and what do I know, and it's complete FUD and we could do with someone laying out the rudiments.

Basic disease goes:
  • new antigen
  • immune response including production of lymphocytes and antibodies
  • immune system is trained
  • repeat antigen
  • existing immune memory reactivated and the response is incredibly quick and 100x more effective than the first response.
Without evidence to suggest this isn't happening (cytokine storm is a problem with the initial response), why fear immunity is going to be something different?

Just as I thought, all these vaccines are temporary. You're better off getting over the disease (in the absence of vaccines that generate a cellular response) if you want to actually be protected: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5192353/ (2016)

Annual influenza vaccination is an effective way to prevent human influenza. Current vaccines are mainly focused on eliciting a strain-matched humoral immune response, requiring yearly updates, and do not provide protection for all vaccinated individuals. The past few years, the importance of cellular immunity, and especially memory T cells, in long-lived protection against influenza virus has become clear. To overcome the shortcomings of current influenza vaccines, eliciting both humoral and cellular immunity is imperative.​

I'm like, what the fuck?! Why is it only the last few years people have realised memory T cells are important? We've known about them and the role they play for decades!
I suddenly feel like the scientific community is actually clueless. Actually, I felt that upon graduation; so many experiments and reports were just nonsense. But seriously, the public isn't going to understand SARS-Cov2 ever, likely, because it'll never be explained for real.

I'm now solidly convinced it's just a cold. Just like I don't get vaccinated for flu, I'm happy to catch it (if I haven't already) and train my body to resist it, using the incredible systems my body is designed to use instead of trying to Science some man-made protection. I think the spread has been just like a cold, and the response, the deaths, are very normal. We have the same rarer reactions and deaths to Flu and even the weak-as-fuck rhinoviruses. Hell, negative Covid19 responses are way below what other populations have suffered with germs that we consider harmless. The only reason we're seeing lots of deaths with what just a common cold is because for the first time in human history, with have large populations over 80 years old. Had SARS-Cov2 happened 50 years earlier, we wouldn't even know about it because all the potential over-80s were already dead from something else. Compare SARS-Cov2 to anything else looking at just the under 80s and that its largely harmless, passing through people with little reaction a normal immune response, and it's a titchy fraction of the population being affected.

I'll still wear masks for the benefit of others etc., but the maths on this thing, when you look at all of it instead of just the bits they show you, coupled with my own knowledge of the human immune system instead of listening to journalists writing about scientists writing about theories, points categorically to SARS-Cov2 being nothing special. People have just looked too closely. It's like when you're doing audio editing, and you hear the same clip over and over, and it starts to become noise instead of words. The narrative is built around fear of the unknown instead of common-sense application of what is well known and understood.
 
Last edited:
I agree. You should do your homework better and look at age statistics, as well as account for those that only survive because they were receiving life saving treatment. As soon as the hospitals are over capacity mortality rates jump upwards.

Even if Corona were like the flu except like a cold, that would be pretty bad. You generally don’t get the flu very often, just a few times in a lifetime, but you can get a cold up to twice a year.
 
green.pixel said:
No, Shifty, SARS-Cov2 is definitely NOT nothing special. That's just you being overconfident. If you were among the unlucky ones that had aforementioned terrifying symptoms lasting for months you would be telling a different story.
Click to expand...
But they are very much the minority. At the big picture level, it's a very normal disease. The only reason we have big death numbers is because with have an older population unlike any before. The way the disease operates and people recover is broadly the same as every other disease. Covid19 obviously has its quirks but it's not like an HIV that operates on a completely different level to other viruses.

And yes, if I was one of those people, I'd be very upset. I'd be upset if I got Leukaemia. Or if I was unlucky to have a reaction to rhinovirus that society was wandering around transmitting person to person. Life is full of shit. Sadly, we can't protect everyone from all of it. We can't live in lockdown forever to prevent anything bad happening to anyone. We have to pick our battles and balance our responses.

You can get together a big body of evidence of all the damage SARS-Cov2 has done, because it's been tracked at the minutiae level. But all the bits not tracked, the wider picture, not talked about because society is oblivious to it, is tens, hundreds of millions of people experiencing next to nothing. You won't find a count of how many people have Memory-T-Cells and a trained cellular resistance to SARS-Cov2 because it's never been measured and I don't think we even have a way to measure it, so that huge part of the equation is completely missing from the story. But worse than that, the media doesn't even talk about the human immune system in a complete and correct fashion. You'll find reports on the the presence of antibodies, and reports about how antibodies may not provide protection, but how many reports have you seen talking about the cellular immune response, the one responsible for long term immunity? Without that information, how can anyone make informed decisions about the disease??

Arwin said:
I agree. You should do your homework better...
Click to expand...
That homework is one sided. We've been tracking that for months in this thread, all the while only looking at the worst case aspects brought to light by a panicked society. Other diseases like Spanish Flu have decimated the population, hitting young and old alike. Covid19 barely touches these populations, and is only registering because of the huge population of humans pushed beyond normal lifespans to an age where the human immune system can't cope with new diseases. And even then, the significant numerical majority get over Covid19.

Does it suck to have your life ruined by a disease taking out your respiratory system? Yes. But should we lock down society and create significant social fallout if the number of people being impacted this way is just a handful?

It's a choice between two evils, but one that can only be made when the reality of the situation is understood, and it's been misrepresented to date because the experts having been paying attention to what they should have been. Everyone was using the PCR results to tracking the disease with 100% confidence in them. If it turns out PCR just isn't that reliable, all those decisions are based on misinformation, and it's looking more and more like that PCR reliance was wrong. At which point everyone should step back and try again with a less prejudiced understanding of the disease instead of sticking with viewpoints founded on misinformation.
 
Ohio's testing is at 27.2K for the day.
Ohio is at +1679 new cases, with Cuyahoga County at +230 new cases.
Test Positivity rate is around 6.15% for these new tests.
Ohio has its highest number of new cases ever.

Here is the trends which is using reported date and not arbitrary and incorrectly identified user reported onset date. This graphic is resized by ~ 75% and taken from the State's Current Trends page: https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/current-trends

upload_2020-7-17_14-35-39.png

Here is the raw data for the last few days, filling in the limited data that is available:

upload_2020-7-17_14-34-44.png

Code: 
Date; Total Tests; New Tests; Tests per 1M Population; Total Cases; Cuyahoga County Cases; Hospitalizations; Total Deaths; New Cases; New Hospitalizations; New Deaths
2020-06-26;    718,086;    21,886;    61,433;    48,638;    6,287;    7,570;    2,788;    987;    68;    16
2020-06-27;    741,353;    23,267;    63,423;    49,455;    6,429;    7,624;    2,804;    817;    54;    16
2020-06-28;    753,246;    11,893;    64,441;    50,309;    6,571;    7,681;    2,807;    854;    57;    3
2020-06-29;    770,860;    17,614;    65,947;    51,046;    6,694;    7,746;    2,818;    737;    65;    11
2020-06-30;    784,362;    13,502;    67,103;    51,789;    6,831;    7,839;    2,863;    743;    93;    45
2020-07-01;    788,403;    4,041;    67,448;    52,865;    7,013;    7,911;    2,876;    1,076;    72;    13
2020-07-02*;    789,704;    1,301;    67,560;    54,166;    7,013;    8,038;    2,886;    1,301;    127;    10
2020-07-03*;    824,481;    34,777;    70,535; 55,257;    7,392;    8,084;    2,903;    1,091;    46;    17
2020-07-04;    844,675;    20,194;    72,262;    56,183;    7,571;    8,111;    2,907;    926;    27;    4
2020-07-05;    865,069;    20,394;    74,007;    57,151;    7,724;    8,172;    2,911;    968;    61;    4
2020-07-06;    877,688;    12,619;    75,087;    57,956;    7,883;    8,249;    2,927;    805;    77;    16
2020-07-07;    892,731;    15,043;    76,374;    58,904;    8,048;    8,383;    2,970;    948;    134;    43
2020-07-08;    911,905;    19,174;    78,014;    60,181;    8,277;    8,489;    2,991;    1,277;    106;    21
2020-07-09;    931,834;    19,929;    79,719;    61,331;    8,518;    8,570;    3,006;    1,150;    81;    15
2020-07-10;    955,697;    23,863;    81,760;    62,856;    8,786;    8,701;    3,032;    1,525;    131;    26
2020-07-11;    979,149;    23,452;    83,767;    64,214;    8,979;    8,770;    3,036;    1,358;    69;    4
2020-07-12;    1,002,463;    23,314;    85,761;    65,592;    9,208;    8,842;    3,058;    1,378;    72;    22
2020-07-13;    1,020,811;    18,348;    87,331;    66,853;    9,359;    8,915;    3,064;    1,261;    73;    6
2020-07-14;    1,039,767;    18,956;    88,953;    67,995;    9,509;    9,049;    3,069;    1,142;    134;    5
2020-07-15;    1,058,599;    18,832;    90,564;    69,311;    9,784;    9,209;    3,075;    1,316;    160;    6
2020-07-16;    1,084,732;    26,133;    92,799;    70,601;    9,985;    9,324;    3,103;    1,290;    115;    28
2020-07-17 1,112,019 27,287 95,134 72,280 10,215 9,445 3,112 1,679 121 9
 
Florida is at 327,241 with +11,466 new cases. They started this surge with only 57,447 cases on June 2, 2020.
Arizona is at 138,523 with + 3,910 new cases.
Georgia is at 135,183 with +3,908 new cases.

North Carolina is at 95,477 with +1,916 new cases.
Louisiana is at 88,590 with +2,179 new cases.
Virginia is at 75,433 with +1,002 new cases.
Tennessee is at 73,819 with +2,279 new cases.
South Carolina is at 66,060 with +1,977 new cases.
Alabama is at 63,091 with +2,003 new cases.
Mississippi is at 40,829 with +1,032 new cases.
Nevada is at 33,295 with +1,380 new cases.
Oklahoma is at 24,140 with +699 new cases.
 
What went wrong in Florida's COVID-19 response? Timing, testing, tourism and mixed signals

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/w...testing-tourism-and-mixed-signals/ar-BB16RTfr

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Two months after Gov. Ron DeSantis boasted about proving the experts wrong by flattening the curve and getting COVID-19 under control, Florida has become the state that other states don’t want to become.

Even with an emergency order reversing the reopening of bars and nightclubs, Florida has witnessed unprecedented, record-breaking growth in the daily number of cases and deaths reported for the last two weeks.

With new cases averaging over 11,000 a day and a positivity rate hovering around 16%, Florida has become the new epicenter for the coronavirus pandemic not just in the US but globally, according to a Washington Post article.

“We don’t want to become Florida,” Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf said Wednesday as he announced new bar and restaurant closures to slow down a surge of COVID-19.

For a month, from April to May, Florida saw relatively stable data for infection and death rates. Hospital capacity was good and ventilators were kept in storage.

The curve had been flattened.

Numbers remained stable through May as the state's restaurants reopened during Phase 1.

But cases started spiraling upward as more businesses were allowed to reopen June 5. By June 26, the numbers had grown so exponentially that Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation Secretary Halsey Beshears issued an emergency order shutting the bars back down.

But the numbers kept growing, breaking several records for new cases and deaths, surpassing the 300,000 benchmark and posting higher daily case numbers than any other state.

Hospitals that once had plenty of beds are approaching capacity and running out of ICU beds. Florida is second behind Texas in number of current COVID-19 hospitalizations.

So, what went wrong? How did Florida go from being a model of containment praised by the White House to having a positivity rate regularly higher than New York ever posted?

'Not enough time'

Florida opened too soon, too fast.

“Ideally you want to give it time to see if the numbers change,” said Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist and professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Maryland.

“Start with the lowest risk activities. Give sufficient time to let data adjust to make sure you’re not heading in the wrong direction,” Nuzzo said.

And if there is a resurgence, you want to take action to slow things down, Nuzzo said. From May to June, Florida had several phased openings for different businesses in different parts of the state.

“Openings were clustered within two weeks of each other. That is not enough time,” she said.

Too many businesses opened too soon where people like to congregate and interact, said Julie Swann, the department head and the A. Doug Allison Distinguished Professor of the Fitts Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering at North Carolina State.

“Florida is allowing gyms open at full capacity, allows gatherings of up to 50 people, has bars open, and has no state mandate for face coverings," Swann said.

The travel bug

After being on virtual lockdown for four months, Floridians were itching to get out of the house, said Peter Ricci, director of the Hospitality and Tourism Management program at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton.

The state’s fortunes depend on tourism, Ricci said, but the state’s longtime reputation as a safe and family-friendly vacation destination could be permanently damaged if the virus does not get under control.

“We need to shut down back to where we were and deal with the financial consequences so we don’t have long term consequences for the state,” he said. “We’re doing a strong disservice to the tourism industry if we don’t take hold of this enemy.”

A Florida native who came up though the hospitality industry himself, Smith attributed it more to the pent up needs of people to socialize. Folks were impatient to return to hanging out in restaurants and bars with their friends, having a few drinks and losing their inhibitions and better judgment, he said.

'Mixed messages' on masks and social distancing

Many experts said Florida needs a statewide mask policy, instead of a patchwork of city and county ordinances across the state.

“I would have liked to see mask orders earlier. Unfortunately there have been a lot of mixed messages from many places about transmission and whether masks are useful,” Prins said. “We have learned more now than we knew at the start of the pandemic but we didn’t have a strong habit of mask use at the time of reopening.”

During a crisis, Swann said, it is also important to consistently communicate the risk to the public and what can be done to mitigate it.

"Behaviors are driving the outbreak, and deaths can be reduced if everyone adapts their actions based on known risks and known solutions," she said.

Not enough testing or contact tracing

With millions of people moving around there should be a bigger emphasis on testing, contact tracing and quarantining, said Dr. Leo Nissola, a clinical scientist, immunology specialist and investigator at National COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma Project.

Masks aren’t enough, he said.

“We need to trace every single case and be able to identify where the outbreaks are and how they are emerging,” Nissola said.

The positivity rate in Florida began increasing around June 9, which may reflect increased activity from Memorial Day forward, and now that rate is over 15%, Swann said.

“The rate in Florida suggests there is a significant amount of the virus spreading in communities,” she said.

The positivity rate is the early warning system that there is a high transmission rate in the community and many more infected who are not being identified, Nuzzo said.

"It's higher than it's ever been. It means we’re missing infected people and stopping them from infecting others," she said.

Young adults 'don't exist in a bubble'

The downward trend of the median age of people who have tested positive points to community interactions as a likely source of transmission rather than clusters in locations like nursing homes, Swann added.

“Younger people have a mistaken notion that their immune system is superior so they won’t get sick and they won’t spread the virus,” said Dr. John Lednicky, a virologist at the University of Florida who has studied different coronaviruses for decades.

People still don't know how the virus is spread from person to person, he said. Many people dismiss the notion that the virus can be spread by airborne transmission, because the emphasis from the Centers for Disease Control and World Health Organization has been on close contact and droplets spread by coughing and sneezing.

In confined spaces, like a restaurant or bar or gym, these plumes can stay adrift and infect passers-by, he said. And many bars, gyms and restaurants don’t necessarily follow social-distancing and mask-wearing guidelines, he said, especially among people under 40 “who believe the message that COVID-19 is just a nuisance.”

Those young people are infecting older and more vulnerable populations, Nuzzo said.

“It is harder for vulnerable people to protect themselves against the infected,” she said. “They don't exist in a bubble.”

'Not much hope'

It’s one thing for state leaders to reopen and warn people that COVID-19 is a real and present danger, and folks should be diligent about wearing masks and social distancing around crowded indoor spaces, she said.

It’s quite another thing to say “We’re back to business as usual” and not going to reissue shutdowns, she said. “That says, ‘Nothing to see here. No issues. Not a problem.'”

It’s also sending a mixed message when you say everything is under control but shut bars back down, she said.

“Nobody wants to see states shutting down again, but without testing, there is not much hope,” Nuzzo said. “Saying ‘No’ or ‘Stay home’ is not a sustainable strategy."
 
Last edited:
2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php

July 17, 2020 - 39,191 confirmed cases - 514 deaths

39,191 confirmed cases up 1,195 and thirteen new deaths
those 1,195 new cases represent a 3.1% increase over the last day

Increases (by percent) since March 27, 2020 :
21.0%, 19.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%, 14.9%
-- Month of April 2020 --
15.8%, 13.7%, 10.8%, 10.2%, 9.6%, 3.9%, 9.2%, 5.0%, 8.2%, 7.3%, 7.0%, 4.8%, 3.8%, 5.0%, 5.8%,
4.0%, 6.0%, 6.1%, 4.5%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 3.6%, 3.0%, 4.3%, 3.5%, 5.3%
-- Month of May 2020 --
5.3%, 4.9%, 6.0%, 5.7%, 5.9%, 5.3%, 5.2%, 4.9%, 4.7%, 4.5%, 4.3%, 3.9%, 3.8%, 3.6%, 2.9%, 3.0%,
2.8%, 3.0%, 2.9%, 2.4%, 2.3%, 2.5%, 2.0%, 2.1%, 1.9%, 2.1%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.3%
-- Month of June 2020 --
2.2%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.6%, 2.7%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%,
2.1%, 2.8%, 2.6%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.7%, 2.6%, 2.2%, 2.2%, 2.7%, 2.9%, 2.9%, 2.8%, 2.9%
-- Month of July 2020 --
2.5%, 3.2%, 4.8%, 4.7%, 4.3%, 4.7%, 4.0%, 3.7%, 4.1%, 3.8%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.3%, 2.9%, 2.9%, 2.8%,
and now 3.1%

Increases (by count) since March 27, 2020 :
+64, +72, +49, +61, +82
-- Month of April 2020 --
+100, +100, +90, +94, +97. +43, +106, +63, +108, +105, +107, +79, +65, +89, +109,
+80, +124, +134, +104, +84, +90, +81, +80, +71, +75, +105, +91, +135, +112, +179
-- Month of May 2020 --
+187, +181, +234, +237, +253, +246, +251, +249, +250, +251, +253, +236, +243, +235, +199, +214,
+205, +224, +225, +186, +183, +204, +172, +178, +171, +190, +197, +202, +200, +219, +228
-- Month of June 2020 --
+228, +257, +239, +285, +298, +289, +263, +254, +298, +300, +312, +328, +345, +302, +305,
+306, +413, +392, +394, +395, +408, +454, +445, +391, +403, +496, +561, +570, +572, +601
-- Month of July 2020 --
+544, +708, +1,085, +1,103, +1,062, +1,214, +1,077, +1,029, +1,201, +1,164, +1,101, +1,174, +1,114, +1,000, +1,055, +1,027,
and now +1,195

As of 11:00 am July 17, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 1,195 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 39,191, including 514 deaths.

The additional 13 deaths being reported today include:

  • A man in his 20’s who was a resident of the City of Grand Prairie. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 20’s who was a resident of the City of Grand Prairie. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 60’s who was a resident of the City of Lancaster. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 60’s who was a resident of the City of Garland. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He expired in an area hospital ED, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Rowlett. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 70’s who was a resident of the City of Irving. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 70’s who was a resident of the City of Rowlett. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 80’s who was a resident of the City of Rowlett. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 80’s who was a resident of the City of Garland. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 90’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 90’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been hospitalized, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
An increasing proportion of COVID-19 cases in Dallas County are being diagnosed in young adults between 18 to 39 years of age, such that of all cases reported after June 1st, half have been in this age group. Reports of cases are continuing to be associated with multiple large recreational and social gatherings since the beginning of June. Of the cases requiring hospitalization to date, more than two-thirds have been under 65 years of age. Diabetes has been an underlying high-risk health condition reported in about a third of all hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

The percentage of respiratory specimens testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was about 27% among symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals in week 28. Of cases requiring hospitalization who reported employment, over 80% have been critical infrastructure workers, with a broad range of affected occupational sectors, including: healthcare, transportation, food and agriculture, public works, finance, communications, clergy, first responders and other essential functions.

Of the 514 total deaths reported to date, about a third have been associated with long-term care facilities.
Click to expand...
 
State of Texas complete COVID-19 data breakdown

75af1a2d-68d9-450a-9ce9-ccd60b8fbfe3.png


https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83
https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/0d8bdf9be927459d9cb11b9eaef6101

Data as of 7/17/2020 @4:15 PM:

Total Tests: 3,067,620 (Up +75,518)

Total Viral Tests: 2,767,321 (Up +67,466)

Only 90.2% of Total Tests are Viral Tests the other 9.8% of tests are the useless Antibody Tests

Cases Reported: 307,572 (Up +14,916)

Fatalities: 3,735 (Up +174)

Texas tests per 1M population are 105,795 (Up +2,604) which places Texas as the 13th worst State.

Click this link: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us and on the page click the Tests / 1M pop column twice to sort from worst to first

They are using roughly 28.996 million as the population of Texas.

Texas is mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the total test numbers which is very bad as Antibody Tests are useless in determining if someone has the Coronavirus.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 2,767,321 which works out to be 95,438 per 1M population so Texas is really the 9th worst state in testing
 
Cases in Texas are exploding.

Total cases through May 31st was only 64,287, Total cases for the month of June was: 94,223
The month of June alone was 146.6% more than all the cases before June 1st.

Last seven day's case increases are 14,916, 10,291, 7,307, 10,745, 5,655, 8,196, 10,351

First day that cases exceeded 2000 was June 10th.
First day that cases exceeded 3000 was June 17th.
First day that cases exceeded 4000 was June 20th.
First day that cases exceeded 5000 was June 23th.
First day that cases exceeded 6000 was June 30th.
First day that cases exceeded 7000, 8000 was July 1st.
First day that cases exceeded 9000, 10000 was July 7th.
First day that cases exceeded 11000,12000, 13000, 14000 was July 17th.

The numbers of cases in Texas for each week since June 1, 2020 are :

June 1-7 : Total Cases 10,691 - Average of 1,527 per day
June 8-14 : Total Cases 12,876 - Average of 1,839 per day - 20% higher than the previous week
June 15-21 : Total Cases 22,271 - Average of 3,182 per day - 73% higher than the previous week
June 22-28 : Total Cases 37,127 - Average of 5,304 per day - 67% higher than the previous week
June 29-July 5 : Total Cases 46,511 - Average of 6,644 per day - 25% higher than the previous week
July 6-12: Total Cases 63,419 - Average of 9,060 per day - 36% higher than the previous week
July 13-17: Total Cases 48,914 - Average of 9,783 per day - 8% higher than the previous week - only five days for the week so far
 
Here we go again. Texas is now actively suppressing positive case counts much like they tried to boost testing numbers before (and currently continue to do).

Texas Erases COVID Cases—and Fans Conspiracy Theory Flames

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...and-fans-conspiracy-theory-flames/ar-BB16TAkx

HOUSTON–When health officials quietly removed nearly 3,500 COVID-19 cases from the official Texas total on Wednesday, it launched a deluge of conspiracy theories about inflated and unreliable data in the midst of a surging pandemic.

The 3,484 removed cases were diagnosed using FDA-approved antigen tests. The FDA has said positive results from antigen tests are “highly accurate,” and can be used to diagnose current COVID-19 infections. But state health officials pointed to the definition of a coronavirus case the CDC published in early April to explain why the cases were removed.

“The case data on our website reflect confirmed cases, and cases identified by antigen testing are considered probable cases under the national case definition,” said Chris Van Deusen, a spokesman for the Texas Department of State Health Services.

Under that definition, the CDC only considers cases “confirmed” if they are diagnosed using a molecular, often called PCR, test. Cases that are detected using antigen tests are classified as “probable.” If someone is diagnosed with an antigen test, Texas will not count their case among the state total.

The removed cases were from Bexar County, which includes San Antonio. The city’s mayor said Thursday that San Antonio was one of three cities in Texas that tracks antigen tests—and that the tests help local health officials “see the full picture” of COVID-19 in the area.

“The state wants an apples-to-apples comparison with all cities in their reports, so they're removing antigen counts,” said Mayor Ron Nirenberg. “It now means the State of Texas will not be counting thousands of FDA-approved positive COVID-19 tests in their reports. That's troubling—to say the least.”

The FDA approved the first COVID-19 antigen test in May. When you see a picture of COVID-19, you typically see a white ball with a bunch of red spikes coming off to it. A molecular (PCR) test looks for the virus’s genetic material in the white ball. An antigen test looks for proteins that make up the red spikes.

“Each category of diagnostic test has its own unique role in the fight against this virus,” according to the FDA. “PCR tests can be incredibly accurate, but running the tests and analyzing the results can take time. One of the main advantages of an antigen test is the speed of the test, which can provide results in minutes.”

While some jumped to the conclusion that the state’s removal was proof the record-high case numbers in the state were inflated and the whole virus scare overblown, it actually suggests the opposite. In a state that’s already struggling to keep up with testing demands and rising hospitalizations, Texas runs the risk of undercounting cases—and undermining trust—by not recognizing positive antigen test results, experts said.

Dr. Sarah Bezek, assistant professor of emergency medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said the most transparent way for the state to report cases would be to include data from each type of coronavirus test.

“Just say, ‘These are the number of positives from the PCR tests, these are the number of positives from the antigen tests, and these are the number of positives from the serological studies (antibody tests),” said Bezek, who works on the front line in Houston-area emergency departments. “That would be complete transparency of data.”

A positive antigen test result is reliable, Bezek argued. The two COVID-19 antigen tests the FDA has approved are very specific, meaning they can distinguish between COVID-19 and other respiratory viruses.

The legit knock on antigen tests is that they are less sensitive than PCR tests, which means they return more false negatives. But Bezek pointed out that even PCR tests aren’t 100 percent accurate, further hindering the ability of local health officials to conduct accurate contact tracing.

Depending on how and when a PCR test is administered, it, too, can return a false negative.

“We have patients that are having negative test after negative test,” Bezek said. “There’s certain constellations of symptoms that, after you see enough patients with coronavirus, that when you see somebody who’s testing negative you can say, ‘Well, I’m pretty sure this is coronavirus.’”

Those cases, she added, also aren’t counted by the state.

On Thursday, outrage over the case removals spread like wildfire online. But many of the responses weren’t from people concerned about reduced disease surveillance. Instead, they were conspiracy theorists suggesting the removals somehow indicated the crisis was overblown.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz got in on the action, sharing a misleading tweet suggesting that those 3,484 people whose cases were removed were never tested and that the San Antonio health department had made a mistake. Cruz added the comment, “Troubling.”

Local health officials were adamant that was not the case.

“Probable cases do not mean ‘maybe’ cases of COVID-19,” said Colleen Bridger, interim director of San Antonio Metro Health. “Antigen tests are FDA-approved, and positive tests are highly accurate.”

Dr. Seema Yasmin, director of the Stanford Health Communication Initiative, said moving to erase the cases like Texas did was the “worst thing” they could’ve done in a climate where mistrust is soaring.

“The last thing you need when you are seeing a surge is for people to suddenly think that the numbers are inaccurate and actually things aren’t as tragic and as at-a-crisis-point as they really are,” Yasmin said.

Because antigen tests return more false negatives than molecular (PCR) tests, there’s a good argument to be made for keeping molecular and antigen testing data separate so researchers can best determine the positivity rates of each (how often tests come back positive).

Joseph Petrosino, chairman of the department of molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, believes the data sets should be kept separate for the purposes of epidemiological research.

“You want to compare apples to apples,” Petrosino said. “SARS-CoV-2 tracking started with counting positive PCR tests. If additional testing methods of different levels of sensitivity are added, it can hinder tracing efforts and epidemiological studies such as where the virus is spreading the fastest and what individuals are at greater risk.”

Yasmin agrees that, behind the scenes, it makes sense to keep the two data sets separated. But when it comes to informing the public about infections, the total number of positive cases–diagnosed by molecular and antigen tests–should be reported, she argued.

“We make decisions about our lives and whether kids will go back to school or whether we will go to the grocery store often based on community transmission,” Yasmin said. “You need that transparency of data. When it comes to antigen tests, they’re a good indicator of if somebody is a case or not.”
 
Last edited:
Trigger Warning: News Article Snippets

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/18/health/texas-infants-coronavirus-trnd/index.html

85 infants under age 1 tested positive for coronavirus in one Texas county

Eighty-five infants under age 1 have tested positive for coronavirus in one Texas county. And local officials are imploring residents to help stop its spread as the state becomes one of the newest hotspots.

In Texas' Nueces County, where Corpus Christi is located, the number of new coronavirus cases skyrocketed in July after a flattening trend. The virus has infected dozens of babies and local officials are urging people to wear masks and practice social distancing.

Nueces County has the fastest growth in new cases on the seven-day average than any other metropolitan county in the state," said Peter Zanoni, the Corpus Christi city manager.​
 
Ohio's testing is at 22.2K for the day.
Ohio is at +1542 new cases, with Cuyahoga County at +223 new cases.
Test Positivity rate is around 6.92% for these new tests.
Ohio has its second highest number of new cases ever.

I think we're starting to see the impact of leading into the Fourth of July holiday weekend, where everyone threw caution to the wind.

Here is the trends which is using reported date and not arbitrary and incorrectly identified user reported onset date. This graphic is resized by ~ 75% and taken from the State's Current Trends page: https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/dashboards/current-trends

upload_2020-7-18_15-50-37.png

Here is the raw data for the last few days, filling in the limited data that is available:

upload_2020-7-18_15-49-32.png

Code: 
Date; Total Tests; New Tests; Tests per 1M Population; Total Cases; Cuyahoga County Cases; Hospitalizations; Total Deaths; New Cases; New Hospitalizations; New Deaths
2020-06-29;    770,860;    17,614;    65,947;    51,046;    6,694;    7,746;    2,818;    737;    65;    11
2020-06-30;    784,362;    13,502;    67,103;    51,789;    6,831;    7,839;    2,863;    743;    93;    45
2020-07-01;    788,403;    4,041;    67,448;    52,865;    7,013;    7,911;    2,876;    1,076;    72;    13
2020-07-02*;    789,704;    1,301;    67,560;    54,166;    7,013;    8,038;    2,886;    1,301;    127;    10
2020-07-03*;    824,481;    34,777;    70,535; 55,257;    7,392;    8,084;    2,903;    1,091;    46;    17
2020-07-04;    844,675;    20,194;    72,262;    56,183;    7,571;    8,111;    2,907;    926;    27;    4
2020-07-05;    865,069;    20,394;    74,007;    57,151;    7,724;    8,172;    2,911;    968;    61;    4
2020-07-06;    877,688;    12,619;    75,087;    57,956;    7,883;    8,249;    2,927;    805;    77;    16
2020-07-07;    892,731;    15,043;    76,374;    58,904;    8,048;    8,383;    2,970;    948;    134;    43
2020-07-08;    911,905;    19,174;    78,014;    60,181;    8,277;    8,489;    2,991;    1,277;    106;    21
2020-07-09;    931,834;    19,929;    79,719;    61,331;    8,518;    8,570;    3,006;    1,150;    81;    15
2020-07-10;    955,697;    23,863;    81,760;    62,856;    8,786;    8,701;    3,032;    1,525;    131;    26
2020-07-11;    979,149;    23,452;    83,767;    64,214;    8,979;    8,770;    3,036;    1,358;    69;    4
2020-07-12;    1,002,463;    23,314;    85,761;    65,592;    9,208;    8,842;    3,058;    1,378;    72;    22
2020-07-13;    1,020,811;    18,348;    87,331;    66,853;    9,359;    8,915;    3,064;    1,261;    73;    6
2020-07-14;    1,039,767;    18,956;    88,953;    67,995;    9,509;    9,049;    3,069;    1,142;    134;    5
2020-07-15;    1,058,599;    18,832;    90,564;    69,311;    9,784;    9,209;    3,075;    1,316;    160;    6
2020-07-16;    1,084,732;    26,133;    92,799;    70,601;    9,985;    9,324;    3,103;    1,290;    115;    28
2020-07-17 1,112,019 27,287 95,134 72,280 10,215 9,445 3,112 1,679 121 9
2020-07-18 1,134,298 22,279 97,040 73,822 10,438 9,513 3,132 1,542 68 20
 
The fine state of Louisiana has discontinued updating their site on Saturdays and potentially on Sunday as well. Nothing nefarious at all. :rolleyes:

Florida is at 337,569 with +10,328 new cases. They started this surge with only 57,447 cases on June 2, 2020.
Arizona is at 141,265 with +2,742 new cases.
Georgia is at 139,872 with +4,689 new cases.

North Carolina is at 97,958 with +2,386 new cases.
Louisiana is at 88,590 with +2,179 new cases. LDH has discontinued the daily update on Saturdays.
Virginia is at 76,373 with +940 new cases.
Tennessee is at 76,336 with +2,517 new cases. They will pass Virginia tomorrow.
South Carolina is at 67,396 with +1,336 new cases.
Alabama is at 65,234 with +2,143 new cases.
Mississippi is at 41,846 with +1,017 new cases.
Nevada is at 34,477 with +1,182 new cases.
Oklahoma is at 25,056 with +916 new cases.
 
2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php

July 18, 2020 - 40,222 confirmed cases - 523 deaths

40,222 confirmed cases up 1,031 and nine new deaths
those 1,031 new cases represent a 2.6% increase over the last day

Increases (by percent) since March 27, 2020 :
21.0%, 19.6%, 11.1%, 12.5%, 14.9%
-- Month of April 2020 --
15.8%, 13.7%, 10.8%, 10.2%, 9.6%, 3.9%, 9.2%, 5.0%, 8.2%, 7.3%, 7.0%, 4.8%, 3.8%, 5.0%, 5.8%,
4.0%, 6.0%, 6.1%, 4.5%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 3.6%, 3.0%, 4.3%, 3.5%, 5.3%
-- Month of May 2020 --
5.3%, 4.9%, 6.0%, 5.7%, 5.9%, 5.3%, 5.2%, 4.9%, 4.7%, 4.5%, 4.3%, 3.9%, 3.8%, 3.6%, 2.9%, 3.0%,
2.8%, 3.0%, 2.9%, 2.4%, 2.3%, 2.5%, 2.0%, 2.1%, 1.9%, 2.1%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.2%, 2.3%
-- Month of June 2020 --
2.2%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.6%, 2.7%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.2%, 2.1%,
2.1%, 2.8%, 2.6%, 2.4%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.7%, 2.6%, 2.2%, 2.2%, 2.7%, 2.9%, 2.9%, 2.8%, 2.9%
-- Month of July 2020 --
2.5%, 3.2%, 4.8%, 4.7%, 4.3%, 4.7%, 4.0%, 3.7%, 4.1%, 3.8%, 3.5%, 3.6%, 3.3%, 2.9%, 2.9%, 2.8%,
3.1% and now 2.6%

Increases (by count) since March 27, 2020 :
+64, +72, +49, +61, +82
-- Month of April 2020 --
+100, +100, +90, +94, +97. +43, +106, +63, +108, +105, +107, +79, +65, +89, +109,
+80, +124, +134, +104, +84, +90, +81, +80, +71, +75, +105, +91, +135, +112, +179
-- Month of May 2020 --
+187, +181, +234, +237, +253, +246, +251, +249, +250, +251, +253, +236, +243, +235, +199, +214,
+205, +224, +225, +186, +183, +204, +172, +178, +171, +190, +197, +202, +200, +219, +228
-- Month of June 2020 --
+228, +257, +239, +285, +298, +289, +263, +254, +298, +300, +312, +328, +345, +302, +305,
+306, +413, +392, +394, +395, +408, +454, +445, +391, +403, +496, +561, +570, +572, +601
-- Month of July 2020 --
+544, +708, +1,085, +1,103, +1,062, +1,214, +1,077, +1,029, +1,201, +1,164, +1,101, +1,174, +1,114, +1,000, +1,055, +1,027,
+1,195 and now +1,031

As of 12:00 pm July 18, 2020, DCHHS is reporting 1,031 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 40,222, including 523 deaths.

The additional 9 deaths being reported today include:

  • A man in his 30’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 60’s who was an inmate of a correctional facility in the City of Seagoville. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Mesquite. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 70’s who was a resident of the City of Mesquite. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 80’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 90’s who was a resident of the City of Richardson. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
An increasing proportion of COVID-19 cases in Dallas County are being diagnosed in young adults between 18 to 39 years of age, such that of all cases reported after June 1st, half have been in this age group. Reports of cases are continuing to be associated with multiple large recreational and social gatherings since the beginning of June.

Of the cases requiring hospitalization to date, more than two-thirds have been under 65 years of age. Diabetes has been an underlying high-risk health condition reported in about a third of all hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

The percentage of respiratory specimens testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 was about 27% among symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals in week 28.

Of cases requiring hospitalization who reported employment, over 80% have been critical infrastructure workers, with a broad range of affected occupational sectors, including: healthcare, transportation, food and agriculture, public works, finance, communications, clergy, first responders and other essential functions.

Of the 523 total deaths reported to date, about a third have been associated with long-term care facilities.
Click to expand...
 
State of Texas complete COVID-19 data breakdown

75af1a2d-68d9-450a-9ce9-ccd60b8fbfe3.png


https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83
https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/0d8bdf9be927459d9cb11b9eaef6101

Data as of 7/18/2020 @3:50 PM:

Total Tests: 3,153,623 (Up +86,003)

Total Viral Tests: 2,842,685 (Up +75,364)

Only 90.1% of Total Tests are Viral Tests the other 9.9% of tests are the useless Antibody Tests

Cases Reported: 317,730 (Up +10,158)

Texas is no longer reporting Positive Cases from FDA-approved "highly accurate" antigen tests so the case increase is being actively suppressed and suspect and probably higher than reported.

Fatalities: 3,865 (Up +130)

Texas tests per 1M population are 108,761 (Up +2,966) which places Texas as the 13th worst State.

Click this link: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us and on the page click the Tests / 1M pop column twice to sort from worst to first

They are using roughly 28.996 million as the population of Texas.

Texas is mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the total test numbers which is very bad as Antibody Tests are useless in determining if someone has the Coronavirus.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 2,842,685 which works out to be 98,037 per 1M population so Texas is really the 9th worst state in testing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top