bones said:
I don't think anyone (or least I'm not) trying to make someone feel bad for not staying home. I'm just trying to understand. So qwerty has stated that he wears masks, believes they are somewhat effective (sorry I skim the forum so I'm not sure where you have landed on this issue but I think this is the case) and DOES NOT want to get COVID, then going to an indoor gathering with 15-20 people when cases are at an all time high isn't logical to me. If he says, he doesn't care if he gets it, then ok, I get why he's going. If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be laying super low for 10 days prior to said gathering, ok, cool, pretty low risk. If he says, everyone at his dinner party will be tested NBA style every day prior to eating turkey together, logical decision. Or even if he said, we know the risk, but we're going to wear masks and try to be 6 feet apart and keep the meal short/sweet/outdoors. But he's saying none of those things and his actions contradict what he's saying about COVID.
Sorry qwerty - you know I'm your number 1 fan. Just using you as an example because you volunteered your turkey day plans
But what is the real exposure risk? Public health impacts of lots of people gathering is very different than individual family outcomes,
If they are OC centric and it basically three families, the risk really is minimal. He has 1/3 rd exposure already in his own family.
Our 14 day case count is 8800 according to the State dashboard. If you assume 2 additional undiagnosed for every diagnosed, we are at 26,400. Of those, how many of the 8800 are sick and know it, how many of the 17,600 asymptomatic are no longer infectious very peak infectivity How infectious is a day 14 non-symptomatic person?
Hypothetically maybe 20,000 infective walking around. That?s out of 3.2 million. That?s 0.006, at 8 non family people that?s 5%. That, IMO, seems like a very high approximation of upper bound on risk. I suspect the risk closer to 1%, given the way families separate duties for exposing themselves to the grocery stores etc.
The risk profile is also lower, IMO, if all of their approaches are similar and not restaurant dining in, going to stores to browse shop versus get in, get out, maskers versus chin diaperer, etc.
Then if you are exposed, if they otherwise healthy 40-somethings, 2/3rds of the sick will be asymptomatic without noticeable impacts. Of the remaining 1/3rd, that are symptomatic, for 40-49 yo, their survivability is 99.6% (5770 deaths/ 1402000 cases)
So we are looking at 1-5% exposure risk, 33% noticeably infected, with a 99.6% survivability. That cranks out to a 0.007% risk of death for him, spouse and the kids are way less..
From a public health standpoint it is very different, that gathering represents 7% chance that 12 people have close contact and subsequent infection.
False confidence maybe, but if they are doing basic precautions what is the risk of a relatively small twelve person gathering.
JIMHO, local family gatherings are different than people traveling 100s or thousands of miles. 12/15 is very different than 30+.
Besides I drove by The district this afternoon, JIMHO, Q?s gathering isn?t going blow up our numbers, that District crowd will.
