On Statue Toppling

And just for the record, I do not condone these crowds -- mobs, really -- that have been toppling statues.  Yes, it is preferable to mobs smashing windows and looting, but toppling statutes ought not to be confused for peaceful protests.  Toppling statues is still mob action, and a low-level form of riot.

And yes, some of these statues deserve to be taken down.  But taking down statues should be done through official action, following public debate.  Condoning toppling statues is capitulating to mob rule, and mob rule is never good.

And, incidentally, as our moral guardians are increasingly treating any criticism of the protesters as out of bounds, I am beginning to fear the we are succumbing to a sort of intellectual mob rule as well.

PS:  And it should go without saying, but none of this is to deny that police brutality and institutionalized racism are serious issues that should be addressed. I would just prefer a more rational and deliberative pace.  Haste is apt to lead to ill-considered actions.  A backlash is inevitable and must be endured, but ill-considered actions will give the backlash legitimate grievances that I would rather it not have.

COVID in New Mexico

I live in New Mexico, a state that has been ahead of the curve in COVID testing.  We have had some of the best testing from early on during the outbreak, and have now reached the point of having enough tests for anyone who wants one.  Our state posts daily statistics, which I have been closely following and eventually started a spreadsheet on. 

A few comments on what I have observed.

Our number of tests performed has been increasing at an impressive rate.  When I started the spreadsheet (May 9), we had slightly under 100,000 tests done.  The number is now nearing 300,000.  In a population of 2.1 million, that will amount to one test per seven people.  (Although some people may be tested more than once).  In the time I have been keeping track, the number of people being tested has typically risen by something more than 4,000 people per day.  In the meantime, the typical number of positive tests has been rising by around 100 to 150 per day.  On good days, we have had less than 100 positive tests and on bad days more than 150, but I have seen only very few days with increases over 200 and only two with increases over 300.

The effect has been that our rate of positive tests have fallen, even as the number of positives continues to rise at a fairly steady rate.  The rate of positive tests was nearly five percent (4.92%) when I started my spreadsheet and has since fallen below for percent (3.6% today).  The positivity rate in new tests has been noisy, but consistently less than the total positive rate, so the cumulative positive rate continues to fall.

That being said, I do not believe that our increase in testing is uncovering a lot of mild or asymptomatic cases that were going undiagnosed at the beginning.  The reason I think that is that if we were uncovering more mild or asymptomatic cases than before, one would expect the mortality rate or hospitalization rate (as a percentage of infected people) to go down.  Instead, the mortality rate has been holding steady at about 4.5% of infected people and the hospitalization rate has been holding steady at about 17% of infected people.*

The infection rate has been unequal across the state.  Unsurprisingly, Bernalillo County, the county that includes Albuquerque, and by far the most populous county in New Mexico, has counted for a considerable share of the infections, but less than its share of the population.  With approximately 30% of the population of New Mexico, Bernalillo County's share of the total infections has fallen from 23% on May 23 to 17% today.  Positivity rate has fallen from about 3.5% to under three percent.  There does not appear to be any significant increase following the protests, but I am still warily watching.

Dona Ana County is New Mexico's second most populous with about 10% of the population.  Although Dona Ana County originally appeared to be doing well, it had a recent outbreak among its colonias (roughly rural slums).  I am not fully confident that the outbreak is behind us, but at least it does not appear to be running out of control.  The total positive rate in Dona Ana County is now below 3%, with the positive rate among new tests noisy, but rarely above 5%.

Santa Fe County, with a population of about 150,000, has had over 18,000 tests and only 196 positives, for a rate slightly over 1%.  Santa Fe County is doing fine.

The hardest-hit counties in New Mexico have not been its urban areas, but San Juan County (population 124,000) and McKinley County (population 72,000), two counties in the northwest of the state with large Navajo populations.  Both have greater absolute numbers of cases than the much more populous Bernalillo County.  Positive test rates have run as high as 15% in San Juan County and perhaps even 19% in McKinley.  It should also be noted that McKinley County, despite its smaller population, has had more tests done than San Juan County -- the number exceeds 20,000, or about 28% of the population.  There is some sign that the worst may have passed in San Juan County; positivity is noisy but has fallen to single digits for something over a week.  But McKinley County continues to have positive rates in double digits.

Sandoval County also deserves mention.  Home to many Indian Pueblos, it looked alarming early on during the outbreak.  It was showing positive cases far in excess of its population (slightly smaller than Santa Fe County), with a rate of about 7%.  There are now only a handful of new cases per day, and the positive rate fell below 3% for the first time today.  I don't know what the pueblos have done, but it appears to have worked.

The other (mostly rural) counties are doing well.  And, incidentally, not all Native American populations have been hit hard.  Rio Arriba County has the Jicarilla Apaches and Otero County has the Mescalero Apaches and both are doing fine.

Deaths and recoveries are also interesting, although the recovery rate comes with the warning that the number of recoveries may be understated because not everyone who has recovered informs the Health Department.  Recovery rate is useful, because it tells us when the worst is past.  The recovery rate for the state as a whole is currently 44.34%.  For Bernalillo County the rate is 62.88%.  The overall death rate has consistently been around 4.5%.  That rate has not gone down with increased testing, suggesting that increased testing has not uncovered a lot of mild or asymptomatic cases that were being missed. 

San Juan County's mortality rate has been 7%, which seems excessive.  I thought this might be a sign that we were missing cases in that state, but the positivity rate is going down, and the recovery rate is up to 52/4%.  These are signs that the worst may be passed, yet the mortality rate remains high.  McKinley County's death rate is edging up and now exceeds 5%.  Nor is the worst over.  Positivity remains high in new tests, despite extremely widespread testing.  And, worse, only 35.5% of all people diagnosed with the disease are known to have recovered.

Meanwhile, Dona Ana County's mortality rate remains anomalously low, at less than one percent, or six deaths out of 718 total cases.  When the outbreak began there, I waited for a upsurge in deaths, but so far it has not materialized.  And a little over half the people diagnosed in Dona Ana County have now recovered.  This would seem like a hopeful sign, that we have become more effective in treating this disease, except that death rates continue to rise in San Juan and McKinley Counties.

There has definitely been a recent upsurge in cases in New Mexico, focused on a prison in Otero County, though without apparent spread to the general community.  There have been 828 positive tests in a very short period of time.  Only six people have died so far, but only ten have recovered.  Today the prison diagnoses were 30% of total new cases and 15% of all active cases. 

Finally, although 1,746 people have been hospitalized for COVID in New Mexico, there have never been more than 223 active hospitalizations at a time, which is manageable.  The number of active hospitalizations peaked on May 15 and has been steadily declining since June 10.  But I expect an increase soon as a result of the prison outbreak.

Stay tuned.

______________________________________________
*There has been a recent drop in the hospitalization rate to 16.53% of infected people, but i suspect that is because of a recent surge in cases at a prison, with hospitalizations still lagging diagnoses.

Will There Be a Secondary COVID Outbreak?

Will there be a secondary COVID outbreak?

Yes.

Every other country that has opened up (or suppressed the disease without closing) has had secondary outbreaks, so I see not reason to believe we will be an exception.

The question is how bad it will be.  I have no idea.

But I can make a few more predictions.

The vast majority of seemingly risky activity will not lead to secondary outbreaks.  All we go well -- until it doesn't.

Sooner or later something will lead to a secondary outbreak.  (Or multiple outbreaks).   No one has any way of foreseeing what will lead to the secondary outbreak, or when or where.  (Riots and demonstrations are a good candidate, though).

The real question will be whether we have a good enough test-and-trace system in place by then to suppress the outbreak quickly.  And whether we have learned enough about what is and is not safe to do so without too much disruption.  I am optimistic on the second question.

I have no idea about the first.

Miscellaneous Comments on the Riots

Things that I condemn (all at once)

Racism

Police brutality

The needless and senseless killing of George Floyd

Rioting, burning, looting and vandalism

Blocking traffic as protest tactic

Excess force in response to riots

Inflaming anger

Police armed, dressed, looking, and acting like an occupying army

Private citizens armed, dressed, looking and acting like a private army

(Private armies in general)

Things that I applaud

Reports of police calming protests by conciliatory actions.

Things I unhappily condone

Curfews, martial law, and summoning the National Guard to maintain order when nothing else works.  In Minneapolis in particular, the police clearly are not going to be able to calm the situation by conciliatory action, so there is little choice but to resort to force.  And, much as I hate to say it, I do agree with Donald Trump that the authorities there should have acted two days earlier.

Stiff penalties for rioters.  Letting riots go unpunished just encourages them.

Things I regard with deep skepticism

Reports of outside agitators, left or right.  I do not deny the possibility that such agitators exist, but usually people who blame outside agitators are ones who don't want to admit just how bad things are in their communities.

Black Lives Matter is a just cause, but it can't control its rowdy element.  Until it can, it should stay off the streets and find some other way to protest.  Come to think of it, they should stay off the streets anyhow, in light of corona virus.  Evidence is growing that non-crowded outdoors activities are safe, and that even crowds may be safe if all persons wear masks are are generally inactive.  But shouting, chanting and cheering in crows is most definitely not safe. 

Further thoughts

These riots are really, really bad.  We haven't seen anything like them since the 1960's.  And by this I mean, nothing so widespread.

Yes, there were riots in Ferguson and Baltimore four years ago.  But they were mild, short-lived, and localized.  Activists made a concerted effort to restrain the riots, with some success.  There were also the Rodney King riots of 1992, which were worse than anything we have seen so far this time.  But the Rodney King riots were a local phenomenon and did not spread all over the country.  To see multiple riots breaking out all across the US, you would have to go back to the 1960's. 

The duration is also alarming.

Why now?  Seriously, why were there minor, highly localized riots in Ferguson and Baltimore, then no riots for four years, and suddenly much worse riots, and much more widespread? 

I don't think it is outside agitators.  Nor can we blame social media.  After all, there were social media at the time of the mild and localized Baltimore and Ferguson riots but not when the 1960's riots broke out all over the country.

Is it Trump's fault?  I suppose his inflammatory remarks, together with the difference between hopeful protesters who see Washington as an ally and despairing protesters who see Washington as an enemy may have made some difference.  But I don't think you can blame it all on Trump.

Economic conditions?  Possible, I suppose. 

The very recent anti-lockdown protests?  Note that those did NOT escalate into violence, but neither did the protesters pretend that they were heavily armed because their intentions were so peaceful.  The threat of violence if they didn't get their way was definitely there.  Maybe resentment that white people could get away with it was a factor.

Are right wingers justified in claiming media bias?  After all, treatment of the anti-lockdown protests was markedly hostile and warned against further corona virus outbreaks.  Outbreaks of disease got a lot less emphasis this time, and much of the media was initially sympathetic to the protesters and more outrages and police actions and Donald Trump's inflammatory tweets than vandalism, looting, and arson.  I also thought it somewhat annoying to hear that "protests" were breaking out when what was really breaking out were riots.  Yes, the riots were offshoots of larger protests, but the distinction should be made.

On the other hands, reports of damage and fires are mincing no words.  And when the governor of Minnesota and mayor of Minneapolis claimed that most people being arrested were outsiders, new media investigated the claim, found it to be false, and said so.

I think what we are really seeing, both in alarms over reopening causing further outbreaks and in reports on the riots is above all a sensationalism bias.  Nothing new there.

And finally does this help Trump?  After all, riots go a long way toward promoting a law and order message.  And there is the usual rally-round-the-chief effect in times of crisis.  I am inclined to think this does help Trump, though he can easily overplay his hand and have it backfire. 

Now It's Rand Paul

Maybe I need to make a new label for beards.  Rand Paul is the latest addition.

Rand Paul without beard

Rand Paul with beard

COVID-19: A Personal Account

Wow!  It has been a long time since I did a post.  Not just in the sense that it has been a month and a half, but that it has been a long, eventful month and a half.

So, when did I start taking COVID-19 seriously?  Obviously not during December or January, while the impeachment was going on.  I think I can be excused for that.  Most Americans were not paying attention at the time.  I would say I started becoming conscious of the outbreak some time in February.  I started becoming concerned in late February and early March.  And it overwhelmed everything else in mid-March.

Looking at my blog posts, none up till now so much as mention COVID-19.  For February I have one post on the popularity of beards in male leaders, and one mocking quiz on real American-ness.  My sole post for March is about the primary (remember that?).

I have heard the recommendation that you keep a Corona Virus journal, but that is too late for me.  Nonetheless, looking through work logs, I can piece together something like a chronology of growing awareness that this was a problem.

During February, China was in lockdown, and Donald Trump was saying this was the latest hoax to make him look bad, that the virus would disappear in April, that we had 15 cases and would soon be down to zero, and that we had it contained.  It seemed obvious to me that China was not going to shut down large portions of its economy just to make Trump look bad, but at the same time, I was thinking of the disease as an economic, rather than a public health, issue.  Clearly there was going to be economic disruption as a result of disrupted supply chains, but I still thought of the disease itself as something that was happening to China.  But the US economy continued to boom and the stock market seemed unconcerned. 

On the weekend of February 15-16 (based on looking back through accounts), Japan recorded a 6% year-over-year decline in its economy -- comparable to the worst quarter in 2009.  I read that in the news and thought that the stock market would drop the following week (February 17-21).  It did, but not as much, I thought, as the situation warranted.  The following week (February 24-28), the stock market did start taking the situation seriously, and did seriously drop. 

Some time around then, probably February 23, I had dinner with my aunt and welcomed the respite from the general grimness.  On February 27, I met with a new client.  We shook hands at the end of the meeting and he commented that shaking hands might  not be safe much longer.

On either February 23 or March 1, an epidemiologist in my Shakespeare reading group (it meets on Sundays) warned us to wash our hands thoroughly, and to keep them away from our faces.  She recommended hand sanitizer, but other members said that it was nowhere to be found.  She said soap was good enough. 

On one of those days, I went to a laundromat because my apartment laundry room was not working.  I passed the time waiting for my laundry by reading the newspaper and saw the shocking news that the South Korean city of Daegu was locked down, just like China. That was when the news hit home for me that this outbreak was not confined to China; it was spreading.  Other people at the laundromat also started discussing the outbreak, and they were all alarmed.  One proposed that we drop nuclear weapons on the affected areas!  Another suggested that this was a bioweapon that the Chinese had released to get rid of their old people.  And the attendant said that if the outbreak hit here, she was quitting her job and staying home.  She also said that an epidemiologist had been by and warned that we had no idea how bad it would be.

It seemed unduly alarmist to me, but that was when I started taking a lockdown seriously.  As in "I know it won't happen here, but -- ."  I feared a Wuhan style shutdown, with everyone completely confined to their homes, not even being allowed to go walking or to the laundry room.  Would I be locked inside, washing my clothes in the sink?  South Koreans were told not to venture out without a mask.  Would I not even be allowed to open the window to let my cats out?  That could be painful.  Would people with dogs not even be allowed to walk them?  What would happen to the homeless?

Nonetheless, I marked February 29-March 1 with a Facebook post wishing everyone a happy leapday and showing one baby goat jumping over another. 

On March 1, I bought a pair of sports sandals.  On March 2, I went on my first fear-based buying binge.  I bought cat food, kitty litter, toilet paper, Kleenex, soap, shampoo, house cleaners, latex gloves, and lots of rubbing alcohol.  Hand sanitizer, and Clorox and Lysol cleaners had vanished from the shelves.  About the same time, I ask the bank that has my business account about getting online banking.

March 6, my first Covid related post on Facebook.  I repeat an account giving New Mexico advice on hand washing.  Wash your hand like you just peeled a sack of green chiles and have to take out your contact lenses.  (As anyone who has touched their eyes after peeling chiles knows, it hurts. 

On March 8, I publish the cartoon above.  I also show it to the epidemiologist at our Shakespeare group, but she doesn't get it.

March 10, I am at work planning a Sunday Scottish dance in Santa Fe.

March 11, FOLKMADS (my square and contra dancing group) announces that it is cancelling it scheduled April 4 ball at St. John's College because the college is shut down.  Other events are still on.  A client comes in and shakes hands at the end of the meeting.  I am conscious that we should not be doing that.

March 12, FOLKMADS cancels all events up through the end of April.  International dancing also cancels until further notice.  A member of our Scottish dance group suggests that we cancel.  Another dismissed the idea as "hysteria."  I propose a middle ground.  We are a small group, so let's meet this week, reconsider each week.  Weight Watchers sends out a notice assuring everyone that meetings are safe.

March 12, I have an eviction hearing in the town of Bernalillo.  Between an upset stomach, heavy traffic slowed by road construction, and just plain procrastination, I arrive late.  The courtroom is crowded, as it usually is on eviction days.  The judge has dismissed the case because of my late arrival, but allows me to move the court to reopen.  I move the court to reopen.

March 13, New Mexico public schools shut down. A client comes in and exchanges an elbow bump instead of a handshake.  Sunday Scottish dance in Santa Fe cancelled.  Scottish dancing for that night is on.  I go to a restaurant near work, conscious that doing so is a reckless indulgence.  Everyone in the restaurant is talking about the virus.  As I walk through the neighborhood, everyone out of their houses shows a sort of grim sense of uncertainty.  Even a homeless man tells me to stay safe.  When I arrive, it turns out the meeting hall has cancelled dance.  We all sit around for a while, say our farewells, and go home.  The member who dismissed the whole matter as hysteria says that she is going to a restaurant.

March 14 (Saturday), I attend a Weight Watchers meeting, and then go out on another buying binge.  I buy a vinyl sheet to cover our conference room table and make it easier to clean. (I also buy a new rolling mat and new earbuds, not because of Covid, but just because the old ones are wearing out).  By the end of the day, Weight Watchers sends out an announcement that all workshops will be online from now on.  Just a few weeks earlier we were joking about what we would do if the meeting was not available.  Indivisibles (a political, anti-Trump meeting) announces that future meetings will by by Zoom.

March 16 (Monday)  we celebrate my 70 year-old assistant's birthday with pizza and ice cream.  One client cancels a will signing, concerned about contagion.  Another client, a doctor, has a surgery cancel, and holds a will signing on the same day.  I go to Metropolitan (small claims) court and find that filings are now being taken outdoors and guards are restricting who may come in.

March 18, restaurant dining rooms, health clubs, movie theaters, malls, and flea markets are closed.

March 19, mediator who is scheduled for mediation on April 9 offers teleconference as an alternative.  My boss makes clear that he intends to appear in person.

March 23, I attend an eviction hearing in Albuquerque.  Guards outside are asking about symptoms before letting anyone in.  Very few people are allowed in the courtroom at a time.  The tenant does not show up.  The judge grants an eviction, postpones it till March 10 because of the emergency.  Shelter-in-place order issued.  All non-essential businesses are to close.  My boss makes clear that he is not closing.  Our firm is too small to matter.

March 24, New Mexico Supreme Court announce that enforcement of eviction will be stayed if the tenant can prove inability to pay.  About this time my assistant starts working from home.

March 26, rehearing of the eviction in Bernalillo.  Traffic is much lighter.  Only five people are allowed into the courtroom at once.  Judge enters order of eviction but stays.  She makes clear that she is automatically staying all evictions for non-payment.  Do I feel bad for letting my client down or good for not throwing a vulnerable person out on the street?

March 27, a client comes in to sign a will.  We hold the signing in the lobby as roomier and better ventillated than the conference room.

March 30, rehearing on the Albuquerque eviction.  This time it is held by telephone.  Again the tenant does not show up.  The judge denies, makes clear he requires actual proof of inability to pay before he will stay eviction.  A scheduled mediation is moved from the mediator's office to a teleconference.

April 3, I start working from home.

April 9, I come to the office for the scheduled mediation.  Otherwise I am not much use, since I am working from home.

April 13, a second rehearing of the eviction.  Judge says the tenant clearly does not have the ability to pay and orders the eviction.  I have misgivings about that.  I go to the sheriff's office and find them closed. 

April 14, I go to sheriff's office, call, and am admitted.  Employees are wearing masks.

This is a personal chronology of everything going from normal to very, very strange. 

Memo to New Organizations on Super Tuesday

Memo to all news organizations on Super Tuesday:

Please stop talking about which state any particular candidate "won." 

I get that the Electoral College is winner-take-all, so winning a state is a thing.

I get that the Republican primary also works that way.

But the Democratic primary is not winner-take-all.  It is proportionate. 

Winning a state can make sense to some degree if just one state is voting.  But when numerous states are voting on the same day, winning any particular state is meaningless.  It is the total delegate count that matters.