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

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 7/21/2020 @4:00 PM:

Total Tests: 3,331,844 (Up +61,947)

Total Viral Tests: 3,043,574 (Up +59,020)

Only 91.3% of Total Tests are Viral Tests the other 8.7% of tests are the useless Antibody Tests

Cases Reported: 341,739 (Up +9,305)

Texas is actively suppressing Positive Cases from FDA-approved "highly accurate" antigen tests and the daily case increases going forward are suspect.

Fatalities: 4,151 (Up +131)

Texas tests per 1M population are 114,907 (Up +2,136) which places Texas as the 14th 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 3,043,574 which works out to be 104,965 per 1M population so Texas is really the 10th worst state in testing
 
iroboto said:
78K infected cases daily
2496 intensive care units daily
5646 deceased daily?
did I read that right? that must be all total numbers. (yes, they are total)

The graphs show near 0

kivnnor and man are male and female ?
Click to expand...
Yes they are total.
Män are males and kvinnor are females.
Yes the graphs show near 0, that's good, that can however be some delay in reporting, so the number can get rise a bit.
 
Ohio is at 21.4K new tests.
Ohio is at +1527 new cases, with Cuyahoga County at +187 new cases.
Test Positivity rate is around 7.11% for these new tests.
Ohio has higher number of new cases and hospitalizations.

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_2020-7-22_15-15-14.png

Here is the raw data for the last few days:

upload_2020-7-22_15-14-29.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
2020-07-01;    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
2020-07-19 1,158,737 24,439 99,131 74,932 10,553 9,555 3,174 1,110 42 42
2020-07-20 1,177,696 18,959 100,753 76,168 10,713 9,610 3,189 1,236 55 15
2020-07-21 1,195,771 18,075 102,299 77,215 10,828 9,736 3,219 1,047 126 30
2020-07-22 1,217,262 21,491 104,137 78,742 11,015 9,864 3,235 1,527 128 16
 
2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php

July 22, 2020 - 43,439 confirmed cases - 567 deaths

43,439 confirmed cases up 413 and thirty new deaths
those 413 new cases represent a 1.0% increase over the last day

The number of new cases are dramatically decreasing while the number of deaths are doing the opposite.

The 1.0% daily case increase is an all time low and the last time the daily case increase was lower than today's +413 was June 25th.

Meanwhile the thirty new deaths is an all time high.

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%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 2.5%, 1.7% and now 1.0%

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, +1,031, +1,044, +1,026, +734 and now +413

As of 11:00am July 22, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 413 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 43,439, including 567 deaths.

The additional 30 deaths being reported today include:

  • A woman in her 40’s who was a resident of the City of Irving. She expired in an area hospital ED, 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 had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He was found deceased at home, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He was found deceased at home, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 50’s who was a resident of the City of Richardson. She had been critically ill in an area hospital, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A woman in her 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. 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 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 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 hospitalized, 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 a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. He expired in an area hospital ED, 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 Dallas. He had been critically ill in an area hospital.
  • 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 a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. He expired in the facility, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Mesquite. 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 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 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 Garland. He expired in hospice care.
  • A man in his 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He expired in hospice care, 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 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 Irving. He had been critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have 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 woman in her 80’s who was a resident of the City of Carrollton. She had been hospitalized, 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 hospitalized, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 90’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 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.
  • A woman in her 90’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. She expired in the facility.
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 remains high, with 26.8% of symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals testing positive 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 567 total deaths reported to date, about a third have been associated with long-term care facilities.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
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 7/22/2020 @4:45 PM:

Yes, Texas has finally stopper reporting Total Tests that mixed in the useless Antiboby Tests and are now only reporting Viral Tests.
A few days ago I tipped off the Dallas Morning News about this issue and it seems that because of that Texas will no longer be inflating test numbers.

Total Viral Tests: 3,104,148 (Up +60,574)

Cases Reported: 351,618 (Up +9,879)

Texas is actively suppressing Positive Cases from FDA-approved "highly accurate" antigen tests and the daily case increases going forward are suspect.

Fatalities: 4,348 (Up +197)

Texas tests per 1M population are 117,143 (Up +2,236) which places Texas as the 14th 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 still mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the worldometers report on total test numbers which reports 3,396,677 tests which is inflated by 292,529 Antiboby Tests.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 3,104,148 which works out to be 107,054 per 1M population so Texas is really the 10th worst state in testing
 
More information about a potential treatment:

https://www.theguardian.com/science...x-trialled-as-potential-coronavirus-treatment

Would be extremely useful if it could be proven to reduce hospitalizations greatly. It's looking likely that we'll be getting early vaccines which provide some protection against the virus with a number of treatments to help those who are most severely affected by it. Only question is, will both legs of this approach to treating the virus be ready before the winter when it seems pretty much all scientists think it will come back particularly strongly? I'm not putting any money on it and expect the remaining part of 2020 and early 2021 to be difficult.
 
Mariner said:
Promising data about the trials of a few vaccines have been released over the past week (good run down on: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/ ) and the interferon treatment, if it panned out would also be a massive bonus. Providing the vaccines have a good effect (if not providing complete immunity) and the interferon proves to be a good treatment, we would just need an early test to complete the tools to deal with the virus. Lots of ifs in there, of course, and I'm still expecting things to get worrying this coming winter/flu season. Not that they aren't worrying in plenty of countries right now. Hopefully, we can control and weather recurring waves during 2020 and look forward to a big improvement in 2021.
Click to expand...

Yes and more problematic is that it seems that vaccines may last very briefly for some people.
 
The current question is apparently about T-cells. The antibody levels seem to wane relatively quickly from both the early vaccines and among those who have recovered from the illness, but it might be that the T-cell response remains strong so immunity (or at least resistance to severe disease) can be achieved. Apparently, those who survived SARS 17 years ago still have a strong T-cell response to that virus which leads to some hope that antibodies aren't the only thing of importance for these novel Coronaviruses:

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/15/new-data-on-t-cells-and-the-coronavirus

The Pfizer early vaccine seems to show the strongest T cell response so far (and the 'right' sort of T cells according to the Pipeline blog), though the Oxford and Moderna trials also show some response in this area. Ultimately, it's going to be a case of large-scale testing of the vaccines in areas where the virus is running rife before we know if any of them confer immunity. Would be very helpful if they did, though the logistics of getting any vaccine or treatment produced and distributed in the necessary quantities are going to be mind-boggling.
 
Could there be a correlation of T-cell efficacy with the severity of the infection :?: i.e. some folks brushed off covid-19 compared to more severe cases.
 
Nobody knows appears to be the answer! My guess would be that we will know a heck of a lot more about the virus this time next year including why some are more at risk than others and perhaps have treatments to help these particular people. Only problem is that it won't help us a great deal if we don't know most of this stuff by the winter. Even if all the early vaccines have some efficacy, they aren't going to be making much of a dent in the spread of the virus around the world when there are likely to be many tens of millions of infections to deal with.

The interferon drug mentioned the other day which may potentially be very useful in treating severe infection is a case in point. The company blurb indicated they could ramp up production to perhaps 100,000 doses per month by the end of the year. How many doses are required to treat a patient? If it is a large number, we'll be hopelessly short for requirements around the world. Could this sort of drug be licensed by larger pharma companies to rapidly increase supply? Might be best for the world if they could, but not so good for the bottom line of the developers.
 
How politics, inequity, and complacency undermined Texas’s fight against Covid-19

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how-politics-inequity-and-complacency-undermined-texas-s-fight-against-covid-19/ar-BB176Oti

On Memorial Day weekend, the mood in Texas was optimistic.

It had been just over three weeks since Texas became one of the first states in the country to begin a phased reopening. Confirmed cases of Covid-19, the illness caused by the coronavirus, had been increasing only slightly for three months. Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, had allowed bars, restaurants, gyms, retailers, salons, and child care centers to reopen and sports to resume while capping capacity levels for most businesses.

But the warning signs were there, and some experts were already worried. Face masks were only encouraged — not required — in public places where maintaining physical distance from others wasn’t possible. Because Texas had imposed one of the shortest lockdowns nationwide, it hadn’t had much time to suppress cases and build up testing capacity. And it hadn’t achieved a two-week decline in cases, one of the key benchmarks states were supposed to hit before reopening.

Memorial Day weekend didn’t bode any better: Bars in Austin blew past their 25 percent capacity limits; mask-less patrons stood shoulder to shoulder. Partygoers crammed into a swimming pool at one club in Houston. City authorities there received more than 200 complaints about social distancing violations in matter of days.

“Early on, we fought this virus successfully. We did feel like we had made progress,” he said. “But then you started seeing images of people, especially young people, at parties and in pools and not respecting the fact that we were in the midst of a pandemic. ... If you just take your eyes off the ball for just a moment, that’s when it overwhelms the community.”

It soon became clear that transmission had reached alarming levels. On June 16, two and a half weeks after Memorial Day, Texas saw 4,200 new cases in a single day.

A month later, Texas, along with Arizona and Florida, has become a cautionary tale. The number of daily new reported cases is climbing: As of July 22, the state averaged 329 new cases per million residents over the past 14 days, compared to just 37 per million in New York. There have been more than 285,000 new cases reported since Memorial Day; over 4,000 Texans have died from the virus.

How did it get so bad, so quickly? Public health experts say it’s difficult to attribute the spike to any one factor or event, but it’s now clear that Texas’s reopening came too soon. And the politicization of the state’s response to the virus has made it difficult to pursue an effective public health strategy and reach the hardest-hit communities, they said.

Texas reopened too quickly, and cases got out of control

Gov. Abbott began the state’s reopening on May 1, with indoor and outdoor dining, retail, movie theaters, museums and libraries facing 25 percent occupancy limits in most counties. Cases did not spike immediately, but the state was also slow to resume activities: In the two weeks after reopening, seated dining recovered by only about 5 percent, according to state-level data from OpenTable.

On May 18, Abbott expanded the reopening to include many more businesses, including day care centers and, crucially, bars.

But it’s likely, experts say, that Covid-19 was spreading silently — it just wasn’t showing up in state data. Coronavirus has a long incubation period: Individuals show no symptoms for five days on average after infection, even though they’re contagious for part of that time. Some never develop symptoms at all. Widespread testing, combined with tracing the contacts of infected people, has overcome this challenge in other countries.

Had Abbott waited a bit longer, it would have been clear that Covid-19 transmission was reaching alarming levels. (His office did not respond to requests for comment.)

“It should have been enough time in conventional thinking,” Persse said. “We now know that this virus has a longer lag in how it’s going to respond. We now know better.”

In retrospect, Memorial Day weekend may have been the last moment of calm before the storm. By May 28, hospitalizations started going up. But the reopening continued.

Abbott ramped up capacity limits for restaurants and bars to 50 percent on June 3, allowing them to seat parties of up to six people. And on June 12, he increased restaurant capacity again to 75 percent, allowing them to seat parties of up to 10 people. The following week, amusement parks, including the Six Flags parks and Schlitterbahn water parks, and carnivals were permitted to open at half capacity.

Consumer activity followed across the state: Spending at restaurants and hotels increased almost 20 percent and merchandise spending jumped more than 25 percent from the beginning of reopening on May 1 to when Abbott started scaling back reopening on June 26.

Abbott has since expressed regret about opening bars, which became hot spots of transmission.

“If I could go back and redo anything, it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars, now seeing in the aftermath of how quickly the coronavirus spread in the bar setting,” he said during an interview with KVIA in El Paso.

But public health experts in Texas say the reopening should have been slower overall, and more tailored to the different needs of Texas’s 254 counties, recognizing that places with higher levels of transmission might need stricter rules than other parts of the state.

That’s a strategy Abbott has resisted. In April, Harris County issued a mandate that people masks in public. But the day the order was supposed to go into effect, Abbott overrode the restrictions, saying that the county couldn’t unilaterally impose fines on violators. He also prevented local jurisdictions from issuing their own stay-at-home orders as the state was reopening, effectively usurping the power of officials like Shah to manage the virus.

“Taking a one-size-fits-all approach does not work in a state like Texas, because you have large urban counties like ours, and you also have smaller jurisdictions,” Shah said. “And that’s why local ability to enact protections is the critical way to go forward, because we know our communities better than anybody else.”

Mask-wearing and reopening have become particularly politicized in Texas

Texas is a state that prides itself on individualism. In a pandemic that requires collective action to support everyone’s health and well-being, however, that has proved to be more of a vice than a virtue.

“It boils down to what kind of culture we have here. In the state of Texas, we have a very libertarian ‘me’ culture rather than a ‘we’ culture,” Terk said. “We have a tendency to be permissive for individuals to make their own choices and for more local determinations to burden the day. That’s not the case in places where good public health strategies have been articulated.”

Indeed, Abbott long resisted mandating that people wear face masks. He said in April that local governments can’t penalize people who don’t wear masks in public, even over the protests of nine Texas mayors, five of them Republicans, who had requested the authority to do so.

“We strongly recommend that everyone wear a mask,” Abbott said during a press conference at the time. “However, it’s not a mandate. And we’ll make clear that no jurisdiction can impose any type of penalty or fine for anyone not wearing a mask.”

By late June, as Texas was becoming a coronavirus hot spot, Abbott’s approval ratings had sunk to 44 percent, among the lowest of governors nationwide. He brought a halt to the reopening process, reversed his stance on face masks, and threatened another economic shutdown.

But the number of daily new reported cases has nevertheless stayed above 5,000 for weeks.
 
Ohio is at 23.4K new tests.
Ohio is at +1444 new cases, with Cuyahoga County at +191 new cases.
Test Positivity rate is around 6.17% for these new tests.
Ohio has higher number of new cases and hospitalizations.

The number of new hospitalizations is why the Ohio Governor has issued a mandatory mask mandate as well as travel advisory for all of Ohio, not just the counties in their Level 3 or higher risk assessments. This goes into effect tonight. https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/po...ne-issues-statewide-mask-order-travel-warning

STATEWIDE TRAVEL WARNING

Governor DeWine announced today a travel advisory for all individuals coming into Ohio from states reporting positive COVID-19 testing rates of 15 percent or higher.

Those traveling from one of the following states should self-quarantine for 14 days at home or in a hotel.
  • Alabama
  • Arizona
  • Florida
  • Georgia
  • Idaho
  • Mississippi
  • Nevada
  • South Carolina
  • Texas
The self-quarantine recommendation applies to those who live in Ohio and to people who are traveling into Ohio from any of these states.

"I know this will be hard and is a sacrifice, especially as summer vacations are in full force, but when we have a higher likelihood of being exposed, we should take precautions to limit the exposure of others," said Governor DeWine.​


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_2020-7-23_15-45-13.png

Here is the raw data for the last few days:

upload_2020-7-23_15-44-36.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
2020-07-01;    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
2020-07-19 1,158,737 24,439 99,131 74,932 10,553 9,555 3,174 1,110 42 42
2020-07-20 1,177,696 18,959 100,753 76,168 10,713 9,610 3,189 1,236 55 15
2020-07-21 1,195,771 18,075 102,299 77,215 10,828 9,736 3,219 1,047 126 30
2020-07-22 1,217,262 21,491 104,137 78,742 11,015 9,864 3,235 1,527 128 16
2020-07-23 1,240,659 23,397 106,139 80,186 11,206 9,968 3,256 1,444 104 21
 
2019 Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19) for Dallas County Texas
https://www.dallascounty.org/departments/dchhs/2019-novel-coronavirus.php

July 23, 2020 - 44,087 confirmed cases - 579 deaths

44,087 confirmed cases up 648 and twelve new deaths
those 648 new cases represent a 1.5% 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%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 2.5%, 1.7%, 1.0% and now 1.5%

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, +1,031, +1,044, +1,026, +734, +413 and now +648

As of 11:00am July 23, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 648 additional positive cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total case count in Dallas County to 44,087, including 579 deaths.

The additional 12 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 60’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 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 was found deceased at home, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
  • A man in his 60’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. He expired in the facility, 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 70’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. She had been hospitalized, 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 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 Rowlett. He had been hospitalized.
  • A woman in her 90’s who was a resident of a long-term care facility in the City of Dallas. 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 Richardson. He 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 critically ill in an area hospital, and did not have underlying high risk health conditions.
Over 1,200 children under 18 years of age have been diagnosed with confirmed COVID-19 during the first three weeks of July, including 29 children who have been hospitalized for COVID-19 during that timeframe. There have been 98 confirmed COVID-19 cases in children and staff reported from 65 separate daycares in Dallas County since June 1st, including 3 staff members requiring hospitalization.

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 remains high, with 26.8% of symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals testing positive 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 579 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 7/23/2020 @3:15 PM:

Total Viral Tests: 3,164,656 (Up +60,508)

Cases Reported: 361,125 (Up +9,507)

Texas is actively suppressing Positive Cases from FDA-approved "highly accurate" antigen tests and the daily case increases going forward are suspect.

Fatalities: 4,521 (Up +173)

Texas tests per 1M population are 119,502 (Up +2,359) which places Texas as the 14th 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 still mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the worldometers report on total test numbers which reports 3,465,070 tests which is inflated by 300,414 Antibody Tests.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 3,164,656 which works out to be 109,141 per 1M population so Texas is really the 10th worst state in testing
 
Ohio is at 22.5K new tests.
Ohio is at +1560 new cases, with Cuyahoga County at +198 new cases.
Test Positivity rate is around 6.92% for these new tests.
Ohio has higher number of new cases and hospitalizations.

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_2020-7-24_15-16-25.png

Here is the raw data for the last few days:

upload_2020-7-24_15-15-44.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
2020-07-04;    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
2020-07-19 1,158,737 24,439 99,131 74,932 10,553 9,555 3,174 1,110 42 42
2020-07-20 1,177,696 18,959 100,753 76,168 10,713 9,610 3,189 1,236 55 15
2020-07-21 1,195,771 18,075 102,299 77,215 10,828 9,736 3,219 1,047 126 30
2020-07-22 1,217,262 21,491 104,137 78,742 11,015 9,864 3,235 1,527 128 16
2020-07-23 1,240,659 23,397 106,139 80,186 11,206 9,968 3,256 1,444 104 21
2020-07-24 1,263,191 22,532 108,067 81,746 11,404 10,072 3,297 1,560 104 41
 
Coronavirus makes changes that cause cells not to recognize it

Published On: July 24, 2020

Discovery lays groundwork for designing novel antiviral drugs

With an alarm code, we can enter a building without bells going off. It turns out that the SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has the same advantage entering cells. It possesses the code to waltz right in.

On July 24 in Nature Communications, researchers at The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio (UT Health San Antonio) reported how the coronavirus achieves this.

The scientists resolved the structure of an enzyme called nsp16, which the virus produces and then uses to modify its messenger RNA cap, said Yogesh Gupta, PhD, the study lead author from the Joe R. and Teresa Lozano Long School of Medicine at UT Health San Antonio.

“It’s a camouflage,” Dr. Gupta said. “Because of the modifications, which fool the cell, the resulting viral messenger RNA is now considered as part of the cell’s own code and not foreign.”

Deciphering the 3D structure of nsp16 paves the way for rational design of antiviral drugs for COVID-19 and other emerging coronavirus infections, Dr. Gupta said. The drugs, new small molecules, would inhibit nsp16 from making the modifications. The immune system would then pounce on the invading virus, recognizing it as foreign.

“Yogesh’s work discovered the 3D structure of a key enzyme of the COVID-19 virus required for its replication and found a pocket in it that can be targeted to inhibit that enzyme. This is a fundamental advance in our understanding of the virus,” said study coauthor Robert Hromas, MD, professor and dean of the Long School of Medicine.

Dr. Gupta is an assistant professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Structural Biology at UT Health San Antonio and is a member of the university’s Greehey Children’s Cancer Research Institute.

In lay terms, messenger RNA can be described as a deliverer of genetic code to worksites that produce proteins.


https://news.uthscsa.edu/coronavirus-makes-changes-that-cause-cells-not-to-recognize-it/
 
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/072420-PressRelease-DallasCountyReports659AdditionalPositiveCOVID-19Cases.pdf

July 24, 2020 - 44,746 confirmed cases - 586 deaths

44,746 confirmed cases up 659 and nine new deaths
those 659 new cases represent a 1.5% 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%, 2.6%, 2.6%, 2.5%, 1.7%, 1.0%, 1.5% and now 1.5%

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, +1,031, +1,044, +1,026, +734, +413, +648 and now +659

DALLAS -- As of 11:00am July 24, 2020, Dallas County Health and Human Services is reporting 659 additional confirmed cases of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), bringing the total confirmed case count in Dallas County to 44,746, including 586 confirmed deaths.

The 9 additional deaths being reported today include:

A 5 year-old boy 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 40’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 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 50’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. He was found deceased at home, and had underlying high risk health conditions.
A woman in her 60’s who was a resident of the City of Dallas. 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 Dallas. 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, and did not have 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 did not have 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 did not have underlying high risk health conditions.

Over 1,450 children under 18 years of age have been diagnosed with confirmed COVID-19 during the first three weeks of July, including 29 children who have been hospitalized for COVID-19 during that timeframe. There have been over 98 confirmed COVID-19 cases in children and staff reported from 65 separate daycares in Dallas County since June 1st, including 3 staff members requiring hospitalization. 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 remains high, with 22% of symptomatic patients presenting to area hospitals testing positive in week 29. 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 586 confirmed 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 7/24/2020 @3:45 PM:

Total Viral Tests: 3,231,931 (Up +67,275)

Cases Reported: 369,826 (Up +8,701)

Texas is actively suppressing Positive Cases from FDA-approved "highly accurate" antigen tests and the daily case increases going forward are suspect.

Fatalities: 4,717 (Up +196)

Texas tests per 1M population are 122,067 (Up +2,565) which places Texas as the 14th 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 still mixing Viral and Antibody Tests in the worldometers report on total test numbers which reports 3,539,452 tests which is inflated by 307,521 Antibody Tests.

As of today the real number of Total Viral Tests for Texas is 3,231,931 which works out to be 111,461 per 1M population so Texas is really the 10th worst state in testing
 
3:01 a.m.: Hundreds of Texas bar owners pledge defiance to governor's order

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/soccer/coronavirus-updates-hundreds-of-texas-bar-owners-pledge-defiance-to-governor-s-order/ar-BB17aPMl

Hundreds of Texas bar owners say they'll defy Governor Greg Abbott's mandate that ordered them closed after a surge in coronavirus cases.

Approximately 800 bar owners have promised to participate in an event organized by Fort Worth bar owner Chris Polone called the "Freedom Fest" where bar owners have pledged to open their doors in defiance of the governor's orders which could place their state liquor licenses in jeopardy.

Abbott had previously allowed bars to reopen with restrictions but ordered them to close again on June 26 after the state experienced a resurgence of COVID-19 cases.

Bars must adhere to safety measures that include taking customers' temperatures before entering, maintaining social distancing, requiring face coverings and having hand sanitizer available.

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission is aware of the event and will be conducting inspections, said commission spokesman Chris Porter. Violators of the order could face a 30-day suspension of their liquor license.
 
30 day suspension of license? Lol they can't open anyway. They should at least face a fine as well IMO. This is assuming that they are rational and not committing crimes of passion so that deterrence actually has an effect, but I bet in this case deterrence would affect their decision making process.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top