Deaths lag case counts by 2-3 weeks. 2-3 weeks ago case counts were near their nadir, so of course they'd be low right now. Hospitalization is spiking in many Sun Belt states, which means a death spike isn't that far away.

There are some signs to suggest the average age of the infected has dropped. This may be because even in states which have reopened a disproportionate number of older Americans are continuing to socially distance. However, young people do work in nursing homes, and it seems inevitable there will be more eldercare outbreaks if a very high proportion of a state is infected.

I honestly do not know why LA cases are exploding so much. They were locked down longer than in SD and Orange County, and from what I've seen people have been incredible responsible when it comes to wearing masks and restaurants limited capacity.

Could've been fueled by people from LA going to Orange County to avoid LA's lockdown.

This is the assumption. As long as most of the cases are in the 0-44 year old age group, then we won't see a spike in deaths like we saw in March and April when older age groups were heavily exposed and confirmed infected old people were sent back to long term care facilities.

Even if the average age of infection is now lower, if the epidemic grows large enough it won't matter. The exact same amount of elderly people are infected if it's 20% of a group of 30,000 or 10% of a population of 60,000 after all.

It's theoretically possible to keep the elderly socially distant until 70% infection rates (and herd immunity) is reached, but in practice it would be impossible without a heavy governmental lift, such as identifying "clean" people to deliver things to their homes. In addition, some old people just wouldn't listen, and when you get to the point (as you do with exponential growth right before herd immunity) where a huge proportion of the population are currently infectious, any interpersonal contact outside the home would be very likely to get a person infected (the difference between a 1 in 100 shot versus a 1 in 3 shot for a given encounter.

In addition, Arizona has already begun setting up protocols to ration care as its hospitals fill up in favor of the young and away from the elderly. Any area which has overwhelmed local hospitals turning the elderly away will have a larger mortality rate than the apparent 1%, which means a lot more elderly people dying even if they aren't being infected at as high a rate.

It could also lead to more deaths of younger people. We know that people of any age can develop serious health consequences from the virus, even if the percentage of serious consequences is lower in younger people. If the virus spins out of control in younger populations, it could still lead to a spike in deaths.

You are right, it would. If you increase the sample size and use the same multiplier no matter how low that multiplier is, then you will see an increase. There will be more deaths if 1 billion young people become infected compared to 1 million infected 0-44 year olds. To date, it has been rare for those in the age group of 0-44 (and with a comorbidity) to succumb to the virus. A spike of deaths in the 0-44 age group does not automatically mean there will be an overall spike in deaths so long as the population with the highest fatality rate stays diligent in their practices and general self awareness to reduce risk of exposure, like wearing masks, shopping at early pre-opening hours, social distancing, using hand sanitizer after each exchange and interaction with outside objects and people. The most important thing we have learned is to not send an old person back to communal living areas and nursing homes for treatment.

Brazil crossed today the 60,000 deaths barrier and São Paulo state 15,000.

Number of deaths are solidly above 1,000 daily and as it happening the US, new small hotspots keep appearing everywhere. This thing won't go away anytime soon.

Getting out of control in many western and southern cities. Hospitals filling up. Just because too many dunces won't social distance or wear masks. The Darwin Effect in action. Meanwhile New Zealand and Taiwan and S. Korea have practically eradicated it, and Europe is doing better. Individual freedom to be an idiot is vastly overrated. There is no freedom to be an idiot when the idiocy can have fatal consequences for those around you.

The biggest case increases are in poor Latino and black communities where housing is crowded and it is almost impossible to social distance as a result. Plus a lot of younger people aren't taking it as seriously as they should and are not social distancing or not wearing masks. They think they are immune but they can spread it like so many "Typhoid Marys". Now we are in a real mess.

I agree. We don't know the long term consequences of the disease. The young may have no symptoms or mild symptoms now, but might the disease have long term effects? We just don't know. The young who don't wear masks or reduce social contact might be playing Russian roulette with their health, and if they catch it they put their parents and grandparents at risk. Their parents should cut them out of their wills and kick them out of the house if they refuse to behave responsibly in a dangerous pandemic.

Once infected by COVID, it's later discovered that long-term effects include sterility or horrible birth deficits.

It would be something out of a horror movie, but I would not be surprised that there is another shoe to drop as scientists continue to study the virus. Not to mention any mutations that will appear this fall.

I personally think we're f**ked.

This post is a great example of the sort of ignorance-fuelled panic that has gripped people over this thing.

There are many known coronaviruses and they don’t cause sexual dysfunction or birth defects. And viral mutation is not only a constant process (SARS-CoV2 has been mutating this whole time), but tends to go in the direction of greater transmissibility but lesser morbidity and mortality for obvious natural selection based reasons.

If younger people are still living with their parents, then their parents are probably not old enough to be at serious risk from this virus either. Or they’re just losers.

You really aren't paying attention. Risk grows steadily with age...45, 50, and 55 are riskier than 40. A lot of people have kids at those ages.

Further, you just insulted a lot of cultures where extended families are common. Even ours could use more of that as a way to avoid the affordability problem. My generation moved out at 18/19 but it doesn't have to be that way.

The U.S. has had nearly 5 weeks of non mask wearing, non social distancing, highly populated protests that seeded and spread the virus all over the country.

Europe is doing "better" because they were hit first by the first wave, that then cascaded into the U.S. and is now ravaging Central America and South America. The first wave is nearing it's end in Europe, just as it has in New York. Overall, Europe was hit much harder than the U.S. in terms of deaths and the death rate. The worst hit countries in the world are European. 10 of the top 11 countries with the worst death rates are European. Outside of Europe, the first wave has spread to Latin America and South American countries. They're reporting/diagnosing capabilities are much more limited compared to Europe and the U.S. and even with that said, the reports of new deaths in that region is staggering. Mexico has just surpassed Spain in total deaths. Reports from Mexico are indicating that they are overwhelmed, expat Americans are crossing back into the states to receive treatment in American hospitals. The first wave hasn't peaked in much of Latin America and South America.

New York's peak 7 day MA in deaths was a staggering 956 deaths per day, it has dropped to 28 deaths per day and is seen as an incredible success at only 28 deaths per day!

Texas has about 11 million more people than New York, 7 day MA peaked at 38 deaths per day and is at 36 deaths per day today. Given the amount of attention you would think that Texas would be in a devastating situation that New York was in, but that is not the case. Florida, larger than New York, but closer in population to New York than Texas, 7 day MA peaked at 51 deaths per day. It is currently standing at 42.

Most protesters seem to wear masks, and most are outside. A connection between protests and infections hasn't been called a major driver of infections by anyone credible I've seen. Just the right-wing commentators.

Bars and restaurant on the other hand...lots of people not wearing masks, close together for long periods...

Are there people actually out there, that think that mass gatherings of people in tight spaces, not social distancing in the form of protesting for weeks on end won't result in more cases?

This is the reason why sporting events were cancelled, why July 4th fireworks were cancelled. With this reasoning, we could have a sold out baseball stadium as long as people wear a face covering and all will be well. It's not a right or left thing. Los Angeles mayor admitted to this yesterday after talking to LA County's director of health who is quoted as saying this: "In situations where people are close together for longer periods of time and it’s very crowded, we are certain that there is going to be spread. So, we’ve never said that there’s no spread from people who were protesting,".

If there is no rise of cases from 5 weeks of mass gatherings on every single day of the week and in cities across America, then everything should be reopened immediately and gatherings of all sizes should be acceptable and not limited to size because all we have to do is wear a mask and the virus is contained. If that is true, then this would be evidence that lockdowns did not work and resulted in higher cases. If that is true, then why did we and in some cases still have lockdowns in place?

I went to the mall yesterday, face masks are required, and I talked to the only clerk that was working in a store, the manager, and she told me that only 6 customers are allowed in the store at the same time. They have to sanitize everything that is touched. They have to shut the doors and clean after 6 people enter the store. I went to the Apple store and had my temperature taken before entering and had to verbally confirm I was not sick before entering. However, I also went to Target and the grocery store and none of these measures exist. Either every place should do this, or no place should. If mass gatherings of people don't result in the spreading of a virus, then why do we have these mandates in place?

It can't be true both ways.

Young people 0-44 years old will become infected with the virus and they will survive, develop immunity and the spread of the virus becomes more difficult to infect a new host and then disappears from existence. This is how humanity has gotten through pandemics of the past and this is how we will get through this pandemic.

You are correct. There has not been any data linking the protests to a surge in cases--but the people who hate the protests insist otherwise without any proof, because they hate the protests.

You're not reading carefully, thinking things through, or reading what experts say.

I didn't say there wouldn't be "more cases". I said it "hasn't been called a major driver of infections." As craigs has noted, there's no data to suggest otherwise.

Protests are also not social occasions with food and drink. People march for an hour or two, and reportedly most people wear masks. Those who don't wear them quickly hear from everyone else.

If there are strict rules about masks, a stadium might be ok. Some states appear to be thinking of partial occupancy scenarios, with social distancing and masks. Other states aren't. Being indoor vs. outdoor will be a factor. If 99% wear masks and keep them on, maybe this won't be a major driver of infections. If only 90% do, there will be problems.