Covid-19 in OKC (coronavirus)

[d-usa]

Thanks, I haven’t been able to take a good look at raw data. I was thinking that test positivity was still going down, but I wasn’t sure.

[FighttheGoodFight]

We are now 47th in new cases per 100k. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...e=articleShare

Good news all around.

[Pete]

238 new cases today; 7-day rolling average 239.

45 additional reported deaths; 7-day rolling average 13.7.

Hospitalizations are 185 (-4).

ICU is 44 (-4).

[Pete]

283 new cases today; 7-day rolling average 237.

8 additional reported deaths; 7-day rolling average 11.9.

Hospitalizations are 203 (+18).

ICU is 50 (+6).

[floyd the barber]

I think Oklahoma did a good job with the vaccine rollout. I was vaccinated before many friends and family in other states.

[Pete]

I think Oklahoma did a good job with the vaccine rollout. I was vaccinated before many friends and family in other states.

Rather than availability, the issue now becomes the large percentage of people who refuse to get it.

We need to reach at least 70% and we are still a long way from achieving that; I'm worried we may never get there.

[FighttheGoodFight]

Rather than availability, the issue now becomes the large percentage of people who refuse to get it.

We need to reach at least 70% and we are still a long way from achieving that; I'm worried we may never get there.

If we get 60 I'll be surprised. The pace is slowing wayyyy down.

[Pete]

If we get 60 I'll be surprised. The pace is slowing wayyyy down.

Yes, this is a big worry and was predictable due to the state's strong political leanings and how that is directly tied to people who are most likely to just refuse the vaccine.

I'd sure like to see our governor and other state leaders of the same party make a strong appeal to these people.

[Pete]

I just did some research and here are some numbers on Oklahoma's vax rate:

Population over 18: 3,003,341
Fully vaccinated population: 914,183

Percentage of Oklahoma adults that is fully vaccinated: 30.4%.



We've still got a very long way to go to reach that 70% threshold which is generally acknowledged as the required level for herd immunity.

[TheTravellers]

Yes, this is a big worry and was predictable due to the state's strong political leanings and how that is directly tied to people who are most likely to just refuse the vaccine.

I'd sure like to see our governor and other state leaders of the same party make a strong appeal to these people.

Would that actually work, do you think?

[Pete]

Would that actually work, do you think?

It would certainly help, but we have a very big hill to climb in this state.

[DowntownMan]

I think with vaccines and getting hold outs to take it needs to be less talk of what party they are in or name calling or anti-vax or words I’ve seen on here calling them irresponsible. That just creates more divide and will drive them to not take it. The message just needs to be clear on communication and help educate them of the benefits are greater than risks of not taking it. Calling people irresponsible for not getting it when you don’t know their reasons or not helping them understand the benefits isn’t going to drive them to sign up to get it. No one likes being called names and that won’t drive them to take it. Just my thoughts so try to be educational not confrontational to your community you know who haven’t had vaccine yet.

[Pete]

^

The fact remains that the main reason most won't get the shot is due to political rhetoric and their party affiliation. This has been demonstrated through countless scientific polls.

Therefore, those in that very large group are not going to listen to Fauci or anyone else they have decided not to trust, no matter the approach.

That means the party leaders have an opportunity and responsibility to reach out and send reinforcing messages. That is still not happening to any great extent while there is still tons of ridiculous disinformation and repeated falsehoods from sources a lot of these people follow. We see it on this site and thread almost every day. That has to be counteracted and it has to be done by people this group will listen to. There is no other way to persuade them.


In other words, this has much more to do with the messengers than the message.

[DowntownMan]

^

The fact remains that the main reason most won't get the shot is due to political rhetoric and their party affiliation. This has been demonstrated through countless scientific polls.

Therefore, those in that very large group are not going to listen to Fauci or anyone else they have decided not to trust, no matter the approach.

That means the party leaders have an opportunity and responsibility to reach out and send reinforcing messages. That is still not happening to any great extent while there is still tons of ridiculous disinformation and repeated falsehoods from sources a lot of these people follow. We see it on this site and thread almost every day. That has to be counteracted and it has to be done by people this group will listen to. There is no other way to persuade them.


In other words, this has much more to do with the messengers than the message.

Not disagreeing but it needs someone they trust to educate them and persuade like you say. But the others calling them irresponsible and other names will counteract the positive messaging towards these people. I just am saying that people don’t need to call them names but help educate them and persuade them in positive ways.

[BDP]

Not disagreeing but it needs someone they trust to educate them and persuade like you say. But the others calling them irresponsible and other names will counteract the positive messaging towards these people. I just am saying that people donÂ’t need to call them names but help educate them and persuade them in positive ways.

I agree with your characterization of the psychology of confirmation bias, but what do you educate them with?

They've clearly already rejected the science and any reputable source that studies vaccines and epidemiology. What is more positive than a safe and effective vaccine that, when taken en masse, will significantly control the spread of a highly infectious disease that has killed 3 million people worldwide? If an appeal to their OWN self interest, that of their loved ones, and their community as whole doesn't motivate them to participate in the efforts to control the disease and save lives, what would?

Is this another call to lie to them? Do we tell them there are electrolytes in the vaccines or free Viagra comes with your second does? (I believe free beer is actually already an option.) But that seems more irresponsible to me.

Of course, there is always going to be some hold outs or people that believe there's a Bill Gates tracking device in the vaccine, but having the people and leaders that have played politics with all of this from the start publicly encourage the vaccine, it could significantly undue the damage they did by downplaying other preventative measures and mocking the science for a year and a half. If they just spent as much energy "educating" people about the vaccine as they did misinforming people about the virus, we'd be able to hit the 70% target fairly quickly.

I think Pete's point that the messenger matters as much or more than the message is extremely valid, especially at this point in time, simply because that's more or less how this whole thing has played out.

[king183]

Not disagreeing but it needs someone they trust to educate them and persuade like you say. But the others calling them irresponsible and other names will counteract the positive messaging towards these people. I just am saying that people don’t need to call them names but help educate them and persuade them in positive ways.

I don't see any name calling; just facts. That is, they are being irresponsible and they have intentionally chosen to be immune to education on the topic. When someone drives 90 mph down a residential street with a toddler in the back seat without a car seat, they are being irresponsible. If I try to tell them why they're being irresponsible (i.e., they are endangering themselves and others by the actions they take or fail to take) and their defense of their behavior is an absurdity about Bill Gates microchips being implanted in people who drive slowly and safely, they will not be open to accepting fact-based arguments. It's a political disease that has overtaken their minds and, as of now, we know of no cure for intransigent ignorance and self-imposed victimhood.

[jn1780]

It doesn't help when one of the vaccines is at temporally placed on hold. That hurts with public trust.

[BDP]

It doesn't help when one of the vaccines is at temporally placed on hold. That hurts with public trust.

Which doesn't make a lot of sense.

This action only reinforces that they actually have scrutinized and are continuing to scrutinize the safety and efficacy of these vaccines.

[Pete]

It doesn't help when one of the vaccines is at temporally placed on hold. That hurts with public trust.

It shouldn't make any difference other than providing yet another excuse for those who had already decided not to take any vaccine for any reason.

That percentage was very high long before the potential issues with J&J.

[BDP]

True.

And you could try and educate them about what is actually happening with the J&J vaccine pause and the relative risk markers to date with something like this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...e-blood-clots/

But, it's mainly info supplied by physicians, the FDA, and the CDC in an article from the Washington Post.

That amounts to 4 strikes to an anti-vaxxer.

[Ginkasa]

I just did some research and here are some numbers on Oklahoma's vax rate:

Population over 18: 3,003,341
Fully vaccinated population: 914,183

Percentage of Oklahoma adults that is fully vaccinated: 30.4%.



We've still got a very long way to go to reach that 70% threshold which is generally acknowledged as the required level for herd immunity.

Is there a definition for how big or small a, uh, "herd" has to be in the herd immunity? And is there any data for the percentage of smaller segments of the OK population (like OKC and Tulsa metros alone)?

Not really trying to make a point, just want to understand at what point you define a population of a certain size having herd immunity. If the US gets to 70% vaccinated but OK stays below that, would someone in OKC be able to claim "herd immunity" as part of the US (I'm guessing not)?

If the OKC and/or Tulsa metros (or other individual towns or cities) individually reach the 70% mark could they claim herd immunity even if the remainder of the state is well below? If the larger population (whatever that is) hits 70% but a large ballroom is filled with only 30% vaccinated individuals is that now a danger? Smaller rooms or groups?

Again not trying to make any kind of point. To be clear as many people need to be vaccinated as possible. I'm just curious from an individual's perspective how much of WHAT needs to be 70% vaccinated to reach herd immunity for that person, if that makes sense, or maybe I'm just overthinking it.

[BDP]

I believe the idea is that without any other containment efforts, real herd immunity for something like COVID would be 70% immunity rate of the world's population. Without that, it would just mean your risk varies by location, much in the same way it would in the scenarios you laid out.

If you somehow could isolate a community that is 70% immune, then there'd be some sort of uniform immunity for that "herd", but everything changes for the group when someone from the outside enters it, and it would change for an individual when they leave that group.

So, the 70% number isn't based on the size of the herd, just the immunity rate of any given herd. Since this is a world wide pandemic, effectively the entire world is the herd. Yes, you're at a lot less risk in a place like New Zealand right now, but that's only because they haven't let you (or anyone) from the outside hang with their herd.

[Pete]

^

I would think 'herd' is the group that you interact with and live amongst.

I'm sure there would be a significant risk if Oklahoma City if we only reached 50% and the national average was to hit 70%. That would mean a very high percentage of people would be vaccinated in places where none of us live. And in turn, that would somewhat offset the well-vaccinated communities because those from low-vax communities still travel around and move.

So, you can never completely get it under control.

It's exactly why certain countries require specific vaccinations before you enter and why the U.S. is not going to just throw international travel open, especially in and out of countries with low vax rates.

[BDP]

It's exactly why certain countries require specific vaccinations before you enter and why the U.S. is not going to just throw international travel open, especially in and out of countries with low vax rates.

And there are so many different ways that different diseases spread, so some are easy to contain to a certain climate or ecosystem, requiring you to be vaccinated for those diseases based on geography alone.

COVID-19 has proven to be fairly persistent in any climate and spreads very easily in poorly ventilated areas. The high degree of asymptomatic transmission complicates it further.

It is truly different than anything the world has experienced in 100 years. The irony is that we are incredibly fortunate that the vaccine technology that was developed over the last couple of decades has brought about the possibility of containing it so quickly. That's what makes it so disappointing that many refuse to participate in that effort. And, as you have pointed out, the sad part is that a lot of the hesitancy is not really from the sort of "Jenny McCarthy" type anti-vax crowd, but are people motivated as much or more by the weird politics of all this.

[kukblue1]

I think it would help some if people seen and heard the real numbers. This is just an example. 310 cases today. Out of those 310 cases 1 was a break thru case. Or 1,100 case reported last week in Oklahoma only 5 of the cases were fully vaccinated people 35 deaths last week 0 from vaccinated people. Hearing something like that might just might say to some people hum maybe I will get the shot.

On a side note :https://www.kentucky.com/news/corona...250862594.html The main take away from the story. Still, though they tested positive, vaccinated people “were significantly less likely to experience symptoms or require hospitalization,” authors of the study wrote.