On June 1, 2020, Florida had roughly 57k confirmed cases, and New York had over 391k. By October 1, Florida had 709k total confirmed cases, and New York had just 494k total confirmed. So, Florida added roughly 650k cases in a fourth month period, while New York only added 100k cases in the same period. New York and Florida are roughly the same population, so Florida's rate of infections was over 6 times the rate of infection in New York. That is not a good job. And, let's be honest, a good chunk of those NY infections probably came from Florida.

I got tested once or twice a week in Florida because it was free and easy. Was it as easy in NYC? How many tests were being done per week?

The percentage of positive test results is a slightly better metric than number of cases, by the way, although even that is skewed by selection bias (i.e., are you doing mass population screening or just testing people who come in with symptoms, in high risk jobs, etc).

Deaths are a further improvement (in terms of metrics), but even that isn’t an objective and easily comparable between jurisdictions because of the “deaths with Covid” versus “deaths from Covid” issue.

To date, New York has administered 52M COVID tests versus Florida's 27M.

Oh lord.... I could post sneezing guidance from the CDC.

I'll confirm it as meaningless, except for schools, medical facilities, and government buildings!
Florida didn't care about COVID anyway, and....are they hiding their true numbers? :runaway:

Florida's number of tests per capita is pretty close to the national average, so I wouldn't say they are deliberately hiding the COVID case count. They're definitely undercounting their COVID deaths, though. They're also obscuring how irresponsible their COVID strategy has been by comparing themselves to states that experienced early outbreaks. Tens of thousands of Floridians are dead today because of that.

Source? And is this just state administered tests or does it include private tests (CVS, Walgreens and the like)?

By autumn I’m pretty certain Florida would have had a much higher prevalence of Covid than New York, because New York went back into lockdown and Florida didn’t. I would also argue that it was worth it.

Type "covid tracker" into Google.

What's done is done, but if Florida and company hadn't become super spreader states, we probably could've done a better job getting this under control on a national level. If they had just spent a few weeks longer under a serious lockdown then the entire country could've avoided the worst of what happened over the past 14 months. If New York could have shut off its borders to travel from Florida, we would have mostly reopened last Fall.

California is around 60 million.

Florida's postitve rates are much higher than NY or California.
Same for Texas,.they decided to slow the testing down for political reasons..

You're saying here that even if temperature checking catches 50% of the infected people it's still pointless to spend 5 seconds per person checking temperatures? Because there is a binary "safe" or "unsafe" status in a given environment? Bizarre.

What's the point of wearing masks? Do you think they are > 50% effective at preventing infection in the wearer? That's exactly what the Danish mask study was powered to find if I recall correctly and it did not find that result. Yet you don't hear many people calling masks a pointless feel-good measure (I don't think they are a pointless feel-good measure, I think they're low cost and low to medium benefit).

You evidently don't understand how infection works. So let's put it in simplest terms. Masks work and have been shown to work:

https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/ng/ser...419766/enhance
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2776536

Temperature-taking doesn't work and has been shown not to work:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7361729/

Are the words "ineffective", "negligible" and "useless" clear enough?

I guess the CDC is full of idiots: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...iness-faq.html

They provide protocols both for self-screening by temperature check and on-site temperature checks. The WHO also comments at length on monitoring for fever.

If they are confused you can't blame me for not getting it! We can't all be so brilliant. Although I was not advocating for temperature checks, I was pointing out that your logic is flawed (plus you're not really clear on what the checks do? do they catch 1%? 50%?). If the temperature checks did reveal 50% of covid-positive individuals I think they would be worthwhile. Consider for example a community with a low incidence rate where there is say a dentist's office that checks people. That could be worth it even if bringing 1 covid positive individual infects the whole office, although I doubt that is true when employees are wearing PPE. I think the model of layered imperfect protection makes more sense than binary concepts of interventions working or not working or environments being safe or unsafe.

If you're having an orgy and intend on interacting with everybody in attendance, sure, maybe you really need to eliminate every case. Or choir practice might be like that. Lots of other scenarios don't result in 100% infection from one individual, and adding more infected individuals can make things worse.

Why are people comparing Florida to New York?

New Yorks governor had a policy that killed over 5,000 elderly people, then hid it from the public. No one in the media is interested in this story.

New York has more cases AND deaths per capita than Florida.

Currently, New York is BARELY doing better in cases for the last month and in deaths.


Any one saying Florida did sooo bad is just saying that because of Politics. Period.

Florida had, what, twice less testing than NY? Why is that? And most people don't believe DeSantis.

Ok, well deaths don't lie as well, do they?

Also, they don't believe him why again?


And people believe NY's governor?! LOL

Because he lost his shit publicly when the media hounded him about not locking down. And then maybe a week later Florida's shitty numbers dropped like a rock.
It's suspicious as hell.

As already pointed out, you can "Fudge " the numbers by calling it something else.
And why did NY and California double the testing of Texas and Florida?

So this is very interesting - Google has walked back a bit on forcing people back into the office.....

https://patch.com/california/paloalt...k-change-plans

As a permanent remote work advocate, I consider this a win for my side....

The tug of war continues....

I think because California was one of the first states to get hit and then New York was hit hard. Texas and Florida were spared until the summer with a false sense of security leading up to it. I was in California last spring when covid was beginning to be taken seriously in the US and there was panic already and same with New York while here, it was business as usual with few cases.

Once again: Give it a year. I predict not only will companies find more and more reasons to ask employees to come to the office for a day or a week, but the more ambitious employees will be coming in more and more on their own over time, finding it career-enhancing.

Politics (can we say it here?). A year ago, if you can recall, Trump was opposed to testing because finding more cases made him look bad. So of course, testing became a talisman of "blueness" and states like CA earned their blue cred by ramping it up fast and extensively. States where their own governments were more under the sway of the T-man were less interested in it (even covertly opposed to it). Now the politics seems to have been bleached out of testing in favor of mask and vaccine politics.