COVID 19 deaths by day

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: kmax, SonomaCat, rtb

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:02 pm

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:50 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:42 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
I’m having a hard time lining up your questions with my comments. Can you explain what you’re getting at further please?
I'm having a hard time understanding why you aren't understanding what I said. See the bolded part in your statement above. What specific treatments or new remedies have been presented/used in the last 30, 60, 90 days that prevent death?

I'm not suggesting anything nor am I being flippant IAA, it's a serious question. It would be FANTASTIC news if we have discovered new techniques or remedies to decrease the death toll of COVID-19 (that isn't a vaccine). I just hadn't heard of it.
I didn’t think you were trying to be flippant. I just wasn’t able to wrap my head around what you were asking and why. Thanks for the explanation. I don’t have any specific dates and times for when new ideas and remedies came about. I just know that when this thing initially hit there were some serious mistakes Made. For example in New York where the mayor sent people with Covid to nursing homes. Huge mistake on his part. So things like that I’ve been learning experiences that have kept us from making this worse than it already has been. I’m not sure if that answers your questions completely.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:10 pm

“ One of the most immediate practical effects of Monday's action is that restaurants, which had been restricted to carryout and delivery service only, can return to offering outdoor dining.

Some in the restaurant industry, which has been largely critical of Newsom's clampdown on eateries, remained ambivalent about easing the rules.

"I hope we're not rushing into things and I hope everyone that is going to partake in outdoor dining is going to respect the rules and is going to do their best to ensure a safe environment for everyone," Cara Devereaux, assistant manager at Cato's Ale House in Oakland, told Reuters.

Nail and hair salons may also reopen on a limited basis, with masks required of staff and customers, while some youth sporting events are permitted to resume as well.

Newsom said California has tripled its pace of administering vaccines, giving more than 2.4 million doses out of 4.5 million doses shipped to the state as of Monday. He set a goal of administering 1 million more shots over the next 10 days.

As previously announced, Californians aged 65 and older are now eligible for vaccines along with healthcare workers, first-responders, food and agricultural workers, teachers and school staff. After that, immunization eligibility will be prioritized among the general public on the basis of age, Newsom said.”



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:14 pm

Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:56 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:17 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:00 am
iltc: your questions came off as snarky and sarcastic. If this was just the first time that I thought you were being that way I wouldn’t have said anything, but this that seems to be a common theme with you. You come across as someone who doesn’t want to think critically and that doesn’t understand how science works. Therefore you seem to be making fun of people who refer to science to back up their statements. I probably wouldn’t feel that way if you did post some links that support your thoughts on the subjects. But when I see you asking questions that can be easily answered I become suspicious about your intent
That's fine. You can interpret my questions however you'd like? I just find it funny that you don't have an issue with people "doing their own research" when you are gladly providing the stats, that's all.

Regardless, I'm glad things are so much better today than they were only a couple weeks ago. That is a great sign. Hopefully people start getting their lives back to normal. More importantly, hopefully kids can going back to getting a good education. Many are getting destroyed. So don't mistake my "snarkiness". I'm happy we're apparently doing so great fighting this virus.
I shouldn’t bring this up, but ILTC’s questions were fine and stated in a very respectful manner. Quite frankly, I think iaa should point out what was so snarky. I am really tired of iaa calling people snarky just because he disagrees with their opinion.
I don’t think they were disrespectful either. People use Snark in sarcasm all the time, but I don’t take that as a disrespect. I take it as they’re trying to make a point and want to put emphasis on it. Not a big deal at all.



User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3710
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: God's Country

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by BigBruceBaker » Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:33 pm

iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:02 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:50 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:42 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
I’m having a hard time lining up your questions with my comments. Can you explain what you’re getting at further please?
I'm having a hard time understanding why you aren't understanding what I said. See the bolded part in your statement above. What specific treatments or new remedies have been presented/used in the last 30, 60, 90 days that prevent death?

I'm not suggesting anything nor am I being flippant IAA, it's a serious question. It would be FANTASTIC news if we have discovered new techniques or remedies to decrease the death toll of COVID-19 (that isn't a vaccine). I just hadn't heard of it.
I didn’t think you were trying to be flippant. I just wasn’t able to wrap my head around what you were asking and why. Thanks for the explanation. I don’t have any specific dates and times for when new ideas and remedies came about. I just know that when this thing initially hit there were some serious mistakes Made. For example in New York where the mayor sent people with Covid to nursing homes. Huge mistake on his part. So things like that I’ve been learning experiences that have kept us from making this worse than it already has been. I’m not sure if that answers your questions completely.
Appreciate it, I was under the impression from your previous statement I had missed some sort of new drug/medicine that decreased the likelihood of death after contracting COVID-19. I was probably inferring something, I was excited.


I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3710
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: God's Country

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by BigBruceBaker » Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm

iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.


I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:00 am

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.
I don't think it's so much the difference as it is the trend. The cases were trending upward and continued to do so for a couple weeks, then stabilized, then began coming down steadily. Modelers probably predicted this and the bureaucrats reacted to those predictions, which have been fairly accurate based on the variables input. Yesterday there were 11,247 cases, which is the lowest since Nov. 26, but that is a huge drop of almost 50% and I suspect it is an anomaly and it will go back up to closer to 20,000 today, but hopefully not.

Yes, you can say that it's roughly the same number, but this is typically how virus spread works. It starts to increase and then peaks and holds, then comes down to a certain level and remains there. It typically doesn't fluctuate up and down dramatically over short periods of time. Could it peak again due to loosening restrictions? Absolutely, which brings us full circle on this conversation.



ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5061
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by ilovethecats » Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:47 am

iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:00 am
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.
I don't think it's so much the difference as it is the trend. The cases were trending upward and continued to do so for a couple weeks, then stabilized, then began coming down steadily. Modelers probably predicted this and the bureaucrats reacted to those predictions, which have been fairly accurate based on the variables input. Yesterday there were 11,247 cases, which is the lowest since Nov. 26, but that is a huge drop of almost 50% and I suspect it is an anomaly and it will go back up to closer to 20,000 today, but hopefully not.

Yes, you can say that it's roughly the same number, but this is typically how virus spread works. It starts to increase and then peaks and holds, then comes down to a certain level and remains there. It typically doesn't fluctuate up and down dramatically over short periods of time. Could it peak again due to loosening restrictions? Absolutely, which brings us full circle on this conversation.
You seem to have a good idea on all this stuff which is appreciated. Your explanation above makes perfect sense.

I think for the average joe like myself, and how politicized this virus has become, the timing of easing restrictions just APPEARS kind of odd. Not suggesting anything funny is going on, or we're being manipulated or anything. But in light of the year we've had, business closures, school closures, curfews, etc., it definitely makes you wonder.

We're nearing the end of the deadliest month we've ever had, only surpassing last month that was the deadliest month we've had. So to see some cities and states decide now, third week into the deadliest month we've had, to start limiting restrictions warrants questions.

As I said, I'm happy they ARE easing things back into a normal way of life. If I had my druthers they'd eliminate them all together and let people make their own choices. I can't wait for that to be the case. So I'm not complaining. I fully expect Bozeman to eliminate their curfews next weekend like the rest of the state has done. That's great! But I can't shake the feeling that this whole thing has become more political than it needed to, and the victims were all of us.

Thanks for the info. Makes sense the way you explain it.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:13 am

ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:47 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:00 am
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.
I don't think it's so much the difference as it is the trend. The cases were trending upward and continued to do so for a couple weeks, then stabilized, then began coming down steadily. Modelers probably predicted this and the bureaucrats reacted to those predictions, which have been fairly accurate based on the variables input. Yesterday there were 11,247 cases, which is the lowest since Nov. 26, but that is a huge drop of almost 50% and I suspect it is an anomaly and it will go back up to closer to 20,000 today, but hopefully not.

Yes, you can say that it's roughly the same number, but this is typically how virus spread works. It starts to increase and then peaks and holds, then comes down to a certain level and remains there. It typically doesn't fluctuate up and down dramatically over short periods of time. Could it peak again due to loosening restrictions? Absolutely, which brings us full circle on this conversation.
You seem to have a good idea on all this stuff which is appreciated. Your explanation above makes perfect sense.

I think for the average joe like myself, and how politicized this virus has become, the timing of easing restrictions just APPEARS kind of odd. Not suggesting anything funny is going on, or we're being manipulated or anything. But in light of the year we've had, business closures, school closures, curfews, etc., it definitely makes you wonder.

We're nearing the end of the deadliest month we've ever had, only surpassing last month that was the deadliest month we've had. So to see some cities and states decide now, third week into the deadliest month we've had, to start limiting restrictions warrants questions.

As I said, I'm happy they ARE easing things back into a normal way of life. If I had my druthers they'd eliminate them all together and let people make their own choices. I can't wait for that to be the case. So I'm not complaining. I fully expect Bozeman to eliminate their curfews next weekend like the rest of the state has done. That's great! But I can't shake the feeling that this whole thing has become more political than it needed to, and the victims were all of us.

Thanks for the info. Makes sense the way you explain it.
Yes, I agree. That works well for people who aren't worried if they get the virus and spread it around to other people, who also aren't worried if they get it and spread it around. But for those of us who are trying not to get the virus, it becomes more difficult to not get it. Currently I feel fine going to bars, restaurants, grocery store, recreational activities. I like supporting those businesses. However, I would not if they eliminate them. If they eliminate them I wouldn't be able to patronize any of the local bars and restaurants in person. Everything would need to be takeout, but that's if the restaurants I like have owners that continue to stay open in that scenario.

I don't think the scenario you're describing would work out very well for the majority of people. A lot of people who said they weren't worried about the virus, got it and then had a change of heart. Also, I don't know that it would be a net gain for businesses. Hard to say how many would want to stay open.



ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5061
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by ilovethecats » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:28 am

iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:13 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:47 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:00 am
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.
I don't think it's so much the difference as it is the trend. The cases were trending upward and continued to do so for a couple weeks, then stabilized, then began coming down steadily. Modelers probably predicted this and the bureaucrats reacted to those predictions, which have been fairly accurate based on the variables input. Yesterday there were 11,247 cases, which is the lowest since Nov. 26, but that is a huge drop of almost 50% and I suspect it is an anomaly and it will go back up to closer to 20,000 today, but hopefully not.

Yes, you can say that it's roughly the same number, but this is typically how virus spread works. It starts to increase and then peaks and holds, then comes down to a certain level and remains there. It typically doesn't fluctuate up and down dramatically over short periods of time. Could it peak again due to loosening restrictions? Absolutely, which brings us full circle on this conversation.
You seem to have a good idea on all this stuff which is appreciated. Your explanation above makes perfect sense.

I think for the average joe like myself, and how politicized this virus has become, the timing of easing restrictions just APPEARS kind of odd. Not suggesting anything funny is going on, or we're being manipulated or anything. But in light of the year we've had, business closures, school closures, curfews, etc., it definitely makes you wonder.

We're nearing the end of the deadliest month we've ever had, only surpassing last month that was the deadliest month we've had. So to see some cities and states decide now, third week into the deadliest month we've had, to start limiting restrictions warrants questions.

As I said, I'm happy they ARE easing things back into a normal way of life. If I had my druthers they'd eliminate them all together and let people make their own choices. I can't wait for that to be the case. So I'm not complaining. I fully expect Bozeman to eliminate their curfews next weekend like the rest of the state has done. That's great! But I can't shake the feeling that this whole thing has become more political than it needed to, and the victims were all of us.

Thanks for the info. Makes sense the way you explain it.
Yes, I agree. That works well for people who aren't worried if they get the virus and spread it around to other people, who also aren't worried if they get it and spread it around. But for those of us who are trying not to get the virus, it becomes more difficult to not get it. Currently I feel fine going to bars, restaurants, grocery store, recreational activities. I like supporting those businesses. However, I would not if they eliminate them. If they eliminate them I wouldn't be able to patronize any of the local bars and restaurants in person. Everything would need to be takeout, but that's if the restaurants I like have owners that continue to stay open in that scenario.

I don't think the scenario you're describing would work out very well for the majority of people. A lot of people who said they weren't worried about the virus, got it and then had a change of heart. Also, I don't know that it would be a net gain for businesses. Hard to say how many would want to stay open.
That makes sense. People shouldn't do anything if they aren't comfortable with it. I fully support that.

I'd be curious how many people would still choose to wear masks and abide by the current guidelines even without mandates? Obviously there will be a number of people who will never wear a mask again once the mandate is lifted, but I feel like there are enough people passionate that they will continue wearing them for a long time.

The other thing that will be interesting to see as we go forward is how lifting the restrictions will impact businesses. I'm sure there are many people such as yourself that won't be comfortable being out and about when the restrictions and curfews are lifted. From my current perspective bars and restaurants are hopping. Most weekends there are waitlists for any place we try and grab dinner. Though there are less tables available so that's a big part of that. But I wonder what the trade off is with people no longer going to these establishments, versus people finally going to these establishments?

For instance, I know of some people who haven't been in a bar or restaurant since last March. Will they start going out? I also know some very stubborn people who have refused to go anywhere where a mask is required simply because they are stubborn. Which is asinine to me because you literally have to wear it from the door, to your table 20 feet away. But they refuse to do it. Hell, I have a buddy who past up a great trip to Vegas a couple weeks ago because he refuses to wear a mask on a plane. :roll: How many more people are out there just like him that will flock to bars and restaurants now that their not being kept down from the man?! :lol:

These coming months will be interesting to observe has more places open up, kids go back to school, vaccinations keep rolling, etc.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:35 am

ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:28 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:13 am
ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:47 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:00 am
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:09 pm
Cataholic wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:51 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:08 am
“Bingo!! And now we are being told that the true indicator of Covid is the number of cases going down, not the number of deaths that some have been so quick to emphasize.“

I don’t think this is true at all. I think ultimately the worst thing is deaths. But we’ve been being told that a good indicator of how things are going is cases. Logically so, but as new remedies come available to prevent death it isn’t necessarily the case. For quite awhile we’ve been able to anticipate increases and decreases in deaths based on increases and decreases in cases. This is nothing new, but it is never a sure thing. I would anticipate a down turn in deaths by next week.
I might have missed something, i've been swamped with work. What are we doing differently as a country now vs. 15 - 45 days ago. Even 60-90 days ago? From what I know, no additional treatments are revolutionizing the treatment of Covid-19. We are seeing more at risk people getting the Vaccine which is excellent for the people wanting it, but we are well short doses in a lot of states (or all).
Another great observation. We haven’t been doing anything differently. Now, many jurisdictions that mandated business restrictions (and were primarily Democratic), are all of a sudden loosening restrictions. The only thing that has changed is that the election is over. On January 25, Calif reported 17,000+ cases. Back on Nov 25, they reported 14,000+. Why were restrictions on businesses necessary 60 days ago at fewer cases, but now they can loosen restrictions at at a higher number of cases?
'NOT OUT OF THE WOODS'

California's stay-at-home restrictions, among the most stringent constraints on business and social life imposed anywhere in the country, were triggered in early December when available space in hospital ICUs reached maximum capacity.

Governor Gavin Newsom said infection rates and hospital admissions in California, the most populous U.S. state with 40 million residents, have since declined dramatically, and projections show available ICU capacity climbing well above minimum thresholds over the next month.

"But we are not out of the woods," Newsom added, urging continued adherence to mask-wearing requirements and social distancing until collective immunity can be achieved through vaccinations.

The stay-at-home rules lifted on Monday had required residents to remain largely indoors and avoid travel around the clock, except as necessary for permitted activities such as grocery shopping, medical appointments, individual outdoor exercise and dog walks.

Those constraints were lifted on Monday for Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the state's largely agricultural San Joaquin Valley. The greater Sacramento area was excused from the order two weeks ago, and the extreme northern California region was never under it.

The governor stressed that lesser restrictions imposed in November remained in effect for most of the state - a nightly curfew on all indoor social gatherings and non-essential activities outside the home from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m.

He said 54 of California's 58 counties remain under that curfew for now as part of the state's color-coded purple tier of the strictest COVID-19 public health measures.”
To be fair infection rates have not "declined significantly" in California since early December. They have absolutely declined but are roughly the same level over the last week as they were for the first week of December.

I'm glad he included that the restrictions were put in place because of ICU's being at max capacity. This is an argument I can get understand the need for restrictions. I can't get behind the difference in cases being the reason.

Thanks for posting this IAA.
I don't think it's so much the difference as it is the trend. The cases were trending upward and continued to do so for a couple weeks, then stabilized, then began coming down steadily. Modelers probably predicted this and the bureaucrats reacted to those predictions, which have been fairly accurate based on the variables input. Yesterday there were 11,247 cases, which is the lowest since Nov. 26, but that is a huge drop of almost 50% and I suspect it is an anomaly and it will go back up to closer to 20,000 today, but hopefully not.

Yes, you can say that it's roughly the same number, but this is typically how virus spread works. It starts to increase and then peaks and holds, then comes down to a certain level and remains there. It typically doesn't fluctuate up and down dramatically over short periods of time. Could it peak again due to loosening restrictions? Absolutely, which brings us full circle on this conversation.
You seem to have a good idea on all this stuff which is appreciated. Your explanation above makes perfect sense.

I think for the average joe like myself, and how politicized this virus has become, the timing of easing restrictions just APPEARS kind of odd. Not suggesting anything funny is going on, or we're being manipulated or anything. But in light of the year we've had, business closures, school closures, curfews, etc., it definitely makes you wonder.

We're nearing the end of the deadliest month we've ever had, only surpassing last month that was the deadliest month we've had. So to see some cities and states decide now, third week into the deadliest month we've had, to start limiting restrictions warrants questions.

As I said, I'm happy they ARE easing things back into a normal way of life. If I had my druthers they'd eliminate them all together and let people make their own choices. I can't wait for that to be the case. So I'm not complaining. I fully expect Bozeman to eliminate their curfews next weekend like the rest of the state has done. That's great! But I can't shake the feeling that this whole thing has become more political than it needed to, and the victims were all of us.

Thanks for the info. Makes sense the way you explain it.
Yes, I agree. That works well for people who aren't worried if they get the virus and spread it around to other people, who also aren't worried if they get it and spread it around. But for those of us who are trying not to get the virus, it becomes more difficult to not get it. Currently I feel fine going to bars, restaurants, grocery store, recreational activities. I like supporting those businesses. However, I would not if they eliminate them. If they eliminate them I wouldn't be able to patronize any of the local bars and restaurants in person. Everything would need to be takeout, but that's if the restaurants I like have owners that continue to stay open in that scenario.

I don't think the scenario you're describing would work out very well for the majority of people. A lot of people who said they weren't worried about the virus, got it and then had a change of heart. Also, I don't know that it would be a net gain for businesses. Hard to say how many would want to stay open.
That makes sense. People shouldn't do anything if they aren't comfortable with it. I fully support that.

I'd be curious how many people would still choose to wear masks and abide by the current guidelines even without mandates? Obviously there will be a number of people who will never wear a mask again once the mandate is lifted, but I feel like there are enough people passionate that they will continue wearing them for a long time.

The other thing that will be interesting to see as we go forward is how lifting the restrictions will impact businesses. I'm sure there are many people such as yourself that won't be comfortable being out and about when the restrictions and curfews are lifted. From my current perspective bars and restaurants are hopping. Most weekends there are waitlists for any place we try and grab dinner. Though there are less tables available so that's a big part of that. But I wonder what the trade off is with people no longer going to these establishments, versus people finally going to these establishments?

For instance, I know of some people who haven't been in a bar or restaurant since last March. Will they start going out? I also know some very stubborn people who have refused to go anywhere where a mask is required simply because they are stubborn. Which is asinine to me because you literally have to wear it from the door, to your table 20 feet away. But they refuse to do it. Hell, I have a buddy who past up a great trip to Vegas a couple weeks ago because he refuses to wear a mask on a plane. :roll: How many more people are out there just like him that will flock to bars and restaurants now that their not being kept down from the man?! :lol:

These coming months will be interesting to observe has more places open up, kids go back to school, vaccinations keep rolling, etc.
Yes, I'm just hoping this is the end of it. That it'll go down, stay down and vaccinations will all be effective and we can continue to lift sanctions until it's over, hopefully by this fall, and move on.



User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3710
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: God's Country

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by BigBruceBaker » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:19 pm



I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5061
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by ilovethecats » Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:15 pm

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:19 pm
Brutal info out of NY

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny-und ... te-ag-says
Terrible look to what was already a very bad look. :roll:



User avatar
wbtfg
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10729
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 12:52 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by wbtfg » Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:26 pm

ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:15 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:19 pm
Brutal info out of NY

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny-und ... te-ag-says
Terrible look to what was already a very bad look. :roll:
Weren’t people accusing NY (and other states) of over reporting Covid deaths?

That said, I agree. Not only a bad look, but just heartbreaking.



User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3710
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: God's Country

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by BigBruceBaker » Thu Jan 28, 2021 2:28 pm

wbtfg wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:26 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:15 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:19 pm
Brutal info out of NY

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny-und ... te-ag-says
Terrible look to what was already a very bad look. :roll:
Weren’t people accusing NY (and other states) of over reporting Covid deaths?

That said, I agree. Not only a bad look, but just heartbreaking.
From what I remember people were saying just about every state/locality and group was over reporting covid deaths due to the extra money available for treating "covid" patients. But its been a long time since i thought of that, could be mistaken.

Heartbreaking indeed, super tough to read.


I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5061
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by ilovethecats » Thu Jan 28, 2021 2:52 pm




iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:26 am

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 2:28 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:26 pm
ilovethecats wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 1:15 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:19 pm
Brutal info out of NY

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny-und ... te-ag-says
Terrible look to what was already a very bad look. :roll:
Weren’t people accusing NY (and other states) of over reporting Covid deaths?

That said, I agree. Not only a bad look, but just heartbreaking.
From what I remember people were saying just about every state/locality and group was over reporting covid deaths due to the extra money available for treating "covid" patients. But its been a long time since i thought of that, could be mistaken.

Heartbreaking indeed, super tough to read.
Here's more details about this:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/number-ny-nur ... d=75541464



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Fri Jan 29, 2021 11:40 am




User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5070
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by RickRund » Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:46 pm

A pretty poor choice of words from guv cuomo. I think he should return his emmy. Also some really poor estimates. Purposeful???

https://www.theblaze.com/news/andrew-cu ... Daily%20PM



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 6369
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: COVID 19 deaths by day

Post by iaafan » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:05 am

I'm not sure what February has in store, but hopefully nothing like Dec/January. The 36 worst days of Covid were in those two months.

1. 4,374 - January 20
2. 4,363 - January 21
3. 4,281 - January 12
4. 4,134 - January 7
5. 4,100 - January 6
6. 4,098 - January 13
7. 4,069 - January 14
8. 4,005 - February 3
9. 3,980 - January 26
10. 3,919 - January 28
11. 3,917 - January 22
12. 3,916 - January 27
13. 3,914 - January 8
14. 3,882 - December 30
15. 3,822 - January 15
16. 3,717 - December 29
17. 3,685 - January 29
18. 3,644 - February 2
19. 3,543 - January 5
20. 3,539 - December 31
21. 3,538 - December 16
22. 3,472 - January 16
23. 3,438 - January 23
24. 3,401 - December 23
25. 3,376 - December 22
26. 3,238 - January 9
27. 3,107 - December 10
28. 3,031 - December 11
29. 3,001 - December 15
30. 2,960 - December 8
31. 2,922 - December 3
32. 2,901 - January 30
33. 2,873 - December 2
34. 2,835 - December 24
35. 2,802 - January 19
36. 2,794 - December 18



Post Reply