[redis_mlc]

Nope, just checked the data on the Santa Clara hospitalizations link - only the number of tests is increasing, not admissions or mortality. Same for months.

The press is saying one thing, but the official stats say flat - month after month.

I guess newspapers value outrage over public service.

You would need a magnifying glass to see anything significant. Only 72 hospitalized patients today (2,278 more available), historical average is a little less.

https://www.sccgov.org/sites/covid19/Pages/dashboard.aspx

Shame on HN for letting non-technical people dictate public policy with a false narrative. If anybody told me that a technical group the size of HN in 2019 was this oblivious, I would have been skeptical. But here we are - the center of SV refuses to actually read a graph, month after month.

Can somebody explain that to me? Is everybody else incapacitated with fear, virtue signalling, mass hysteria, or what is behind that?

Dr. VDH, who noticed the above in parallel with me, said something like, "[We're captive to 1%'ers who have a nice life and feel it's unfair they could lose that.]"

Is that it? Destroy our economy for individual selfishness?

Do I need to make a video on how to read the graphs?

[hcknwscommenter]

Are you serious? You seem dangerously self-absorbed and misinformed. Your original comment referred to CALIFORNIA. Now you are arguing about Santa Clara hospitalizations (a very lagging indicator), which is many levels different from your original (and incredibly incorrect) point.

[m_mueller]

As always with the types of people who are in denial about environmental risks: They are constantly moving the goal posts when you try to argue with them. Not a psychologist but I think this is some sort of defense mechanism of the brain.

[IAmGraydon]

I'll just put the data in front of you and let you decide:

https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en/test

Go to the chart for California. Percent positive tests and hospitalizations are the most important factors here. Hospitalizations have gone up, undoubtedly (from 4,500 to now almost 6,000). That said, percent positive tests has remained flat. Deaths in CA also continue to trend down.

What conclusion do you draw from that? To me, it appears that the concentration of Covid in the population of California has not increased. At the same time, there are more hospitalizations. Perhaps Covid is not getting worse in CA, but more people are finding out that they have it due to increased testing and are then going to the hospital out of an abundance of caution.

As an aside, you and the guy you're replying to are obviously extremely emotional about this. Learn to recognize that and realize that if you're feeling emotional when looking at data, some part of your brain cares way too much to remain objective. Both of you are clearly biased.

[hcknwscommenter]

Your own data shows that you are just plain wrong. Percent positives at the beginning of the month are 4%. Number of tests have skyrocketed, if true cases are flat, then percent positive would plummet. Instead they have almost doubled to 7%. Your supposed lack of emotion is BS. You obviously have some internal or external motivation to believe there isn't a problem when there clearly is one. I live in the mountains in NorCal, there ain't a case around. However, as a one-time virologist (it's been almost two decades since I published a peer reviewed paper on SARS-1), I can assure you there is no chance that you are correct in your "hypothesis" that "Covid is not getting worse in CA."

[redis_mlc]

Santa Clara plus SF is 4 million people, and represents most of NorCal.

If what I said is incorrect, why don't you provide some actual data?

[EliRivers]

Hopefully this undermines your belief that technical people are in some way immune to all the biases, emotions, fears, hopes and general humanity of people at large. Frequently, they're worse; they believe themselves to be hyper-rational cyborgs driven purely by evidence, giving themselves carte blanche to assume they're unaffected and thus don't even need to examine their own thinking.

Yes, I too am a mental mess and use reasoning and convenient choice of evidence to justify decisions and opinions I already formed.

[hcknwscommenter]

The person you are approvingly replying to is overconfident and wrong.

[mikestew]

The person you replied to deserves for you to reread their comment if you think they are "approvingly replying".

[redis_mlc]

I gave you the official stats link. I check it twice per week, including today.

Wrong how? Or do you mean, "not-SJW enough for my taste"?

[hcknwscommenter]

Wrong how you ask? Wrong in the way that hospitalizations in SANTA CLARA only are a woefully inappropriate way to "support" your original contention that CASES in CALIFORNIA were flat.