Connect with us

Top News

Aug. 25 pandemic report: As 2-week case rate rises, Fayette reports 15 new cases

Published

on

Aug. 25 pandemic report: As 2-week case rate rises, Fayette reports 15 new cases


Here’s the Covid-19 pandemic report from the Georgia Department of Public Health as of 2:50 p.m., Aug. 25.

THE NUMBERS: Fayette cases — 1,434 (15 new cases more than the previous day’s reported total of 1,419). The single-day record for Fayette cases reported is 40 on July 23. The previous record for a single-day increase in Fayette was 36 on July 7. DPH has stopped reporting confirmed new cases covering the period of the past 2 weeks.

Fayette deaths — 36 deaths, unchanged from the previous report.

Fayette hospitalizations — 74, 1 more than the the previous report.

Fayette death rate per 100K — 30.6 persons per 100,000 persons.

Fayette new cases since May 1 — 1,257; average per day increase — 10.74. New cases since July 1 — 1,093. Fayette’s average since July 1  — 19.5 new cases a day.

GA total cases — 258,354 (+2,101 more than the previous report of 256,253). The single-day record increase of new case reports is 4,813 on July 24. The largest daily increase previously was July 18 with 4,689 new cases.

Advertisement

GA deaths — 5,262 (+106 more than the previous report of 5,156). The single-day record of report numbers is 122, set Aug. 11. Death rate of confirmed cases — 2.0%

ICU admissions — 4,322 (+50 more than the previous report of 4,272). The single-day record increase of Covid-19 admissions is 85 on July 24. The previous record single-day Covid-19 admissions number was 75, set July 21.

Hospitalizations (total) — 23,717 (+292 more than the previous report of 23,425), which is 9.18% of the total cumulative confirmed cases to date. The single-day record of hospital admissions for Covid-19 is 447 on July 21. The previous daily record was 442 admissions on April 7.

GEMA hospitalizations (as of Aug. 23) — 2,350 test-confirmed Covid-19 patients are currently occupying hospital beds across Georgia, 10 fewer patients than the previous report.

Total molecular tests — 2,230,850 (+25,669 more than the previous report of 2,205,181). (Antibody tests not included because they are not used to determine the number of confirmed cases.)


Georgia Emergency Management Agency on Aug. 24 reported 2,350 confirmed Covid-19 hospitalizations across the state, 10 fewer coronavirus patients than the previous report posted on Aug. 23. GEMA reported 466 critical care hospital beds available (16%) out of a total capacity of 2,945 beds, as well as 1,118 (39%) of the state’s available adult ventilators (2,895) in use. In addition, the state reported 1,780 (52%) available emergency room beds out of a total capacity of 3,429; and 3,413 (23%) general inpatient beds open out of a capacity of 14,964.


The graph below represents a Fayette County report of cumulative cases in Fayette over time (in blue) and cumulative deaths over time (the red line along the bottom of the graph). The second chart graphs the positive percentage of confirmed tests in Fayette over time.


The graph below shows statewide cumulative cases over time and cumulative Covid-19 deaths over time in Georgia. The second chart graphs the positive percentage of confirmed tests in Georgia over time.


Below is a current DPH chart of reported Covid-19-related deaths that have occurred in Fayette County since the start of the pandemic. The chart is updated to reflect the latest data — 36 deaths attributed to the coronavirus. The newest fatality is a white female, age 85, with no known underlying medical conditions.

Here’s the breakdown: 10 black males, ranging from age 63 to age 89; 10 white males, ranging from 67 to 90; 11 white females from 66 to 90; and 5 black females, ranging in age from 49 to 78. There are now 3 persons aged 90 — one white female and 2 white males — who are the oldest victims of Covid-19 in Fayette County.

Advertisement

The chart lists from left to right the age of the victim, the race, the sex, the county, and yes or no or unknown as to whether the victim had an underlying medical condition:


Fayette County: Confirmed infections — 1,434 (15 more new cases than the previous day’s 1,419). The single-day record reported increase of new cases for Fayette is 40 on July 23. Total Covid-19 deaths: 36, unchanged from the previous report. DPH has stopped reporting the number of confirmed cases over the past two weeks. Fayette’s confirmed case rate: 1,220 cases per 100,000 persons overall, and 219 for the past 2 weeks. Fayette death rate per 100,000 population: 30.6 persons. Hospitalizations: 74, 1 more than the previous report. Fayette has recorded 1,257 new Covid-19 cases since May 1. That’s an average of 10.74 new cases per day over the period since May 1. New cases since July 1 — 1,093. Fayette’s average since July 1 — 19.5 new cases a day. Fayette’s record daily increase so far is July 23 with 40 reported new cases.

Demographics of Fayette cases: 

Aug. 24, 2020 Cases by Age — Age 0 to 4: 9 (+0). Age 5 to 14: 41 (+0). Age 15 to 24: 241 (+3). Age 25 to 34: 187 (+1). Age 35 to 44: 199 (+0). Age 45 to 54: 269 (+3). Age 55 to 64: 233 (+0). Age 65 to 74: 122 (+3). Age 75 to 84: 75 (+0). Age 85 Plus: 35 (+0). Age Unknown: 23 (+5). TOTAL: 1,434.

Cases by Gender — Female: 757 (+8). Male: 651 (+7). Sex Unknown: 26 (+0).

Advertisement

Cases by Race — White: 359 (+11). Black: 335 (+2). Asian: 13 (+0). Other: 3 (+1). Race Unknown: 724 (+1).

Cases by Ethnicity — Hispanic/Latino: 52 (+2). Non-Hispanic/Latino: 541 (+21). Ethnicity Unknown: 841 (-1).

NEW METRIC — Percentage of positive tests in Fayette:

Last 2 weeks: 5.7% positive confirmations of all persons tested. Yesterday, it was 5.2%. The positive rate is increasing.

Overall since start of testing: 6.5%. Yesterday it was 6.4%.

Advertisement

Coweta County: Confirmed infections  — 2,041 (16 more cases than the previous day’s 2,025). DPH has stopped reporting the number of cases for the past two week, although it retains the 2-week case rate. Coweta is reporting 26 deaths, unchanged from the previous report. Coweta’s confirmed case rate: 1,343 cases per 100,000 persons overall, and 305 per 100K for the past 2 weeks. Coweta death rate per 100,000 population: 17.1. Hospitalizations: 107, unchanged from the previous report.

NEW METRIC — Percentage of positive tests in Coweta:

Last 2 weeks: 11.5% positive confirmations of all persons tested. Yesterday it was 11.2%, Sunday it was 10.8% and 3 days ago 9.9%. The positive rate is increasing.

Overall since start of testing: 8.2%. Yesterday it was 8.2% and 2 days ago it was 8.1%.

Covid-19 in neighboring counties

Advertisement

Fulton —  23,987 cases total, 497 deaths; Clayton — 6,124 cases, 128 deaths; Henry — 4,166 cases, 68 deaths; Coweta — 2,041 cases, 26 deaths; Fayette — 1,434 cases, 36 deaths; Spalding — 1,126 cases, 48 deaths.

Top 5 counties with most deaths: Fulton, 497; Cobb, 373; Gwinnett, 309; DeKalb, 287; Dougherty, 176.


The charts below demonstrates statistics about (A) who caught the coronavirus by age group, who was hospitalized by age group, and who died by age group; and (B) cases by race and by sex.


Below is the daily progression of cumulative reported Covid-19 cases and fatalities in Fayette County:

March 9 — 1 case, no deaths

Advertisement

March 13 — 5 cumulative cases, no deaths

March 17 — 5 cumulative cases, no deaths

March 19 — 9 cumulative cases, no deaths

March 20 — cumulative 9 cases, 1 death (male, 83, other medical conditions)

March 22 — 9 cumulative cases, 1 death

Advertisement

March 23 — 10 cumulative cases, 1 death

March 24 — 12 cumulative cases, 1 death.

March 25 — 12 cumulative cases, 1 death

March 26 — 14 cumulative cases, 2 deaths (no new details provided)

March 27 — 19 cumulative cases, 2 deaths

Advertisement

March 28 — 25 cumulative cases, 2 deaths

March 29 — 26 cumulative cases, 3 deaths (male, 83; male, 79; female, 77; all with underlying medical conditions)

March 30 — 32 cumulative cases, 3 deaths

March 31 — 44 cumulative cases, 4 deaths (female, 51, NO underlying medical condition)

April 1 — 48 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

Advertisement

April 2 — 52 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 3 — 58 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 4 — 62 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 5 — 67 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 6 — 74 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

Advertisement

April 7 — 79 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 8 — 85 cumulative cases, 4 deaths

April 9 — 89 cumulative cases, 3 deaths (one fewer than reported earlier, no explanation given by DPH, though likely a reclassification of cause of death of one person)

April 10 — 92 cumulative cases, 4 deaths (subtraction yesterday and addition today unexplained by DPH)

April 11 — 94 cumulative cases (#26 in state), 4 deaths

Advertisement

April 12 — 99 cumulative cases (#26 in state), 4 deaths

April 13 —105 cumulative cases (#26 in state), 5 deaths

April 14 — 112 cumulative cases, (#27 in state), 5 deaths

April 15 — 120 cumulative cases (#26 in state), 5 deaths

April 16 — 123 cumulative cases (#26 in state), 5 deaths

Advertisement

April 17 — 133 cumulative cases (#27 in state), 5 deaths

April 18 — 135 cumulative cases (#27 in state) with 5 deaths

April 19 — 139 cumulative cases (#27 in state) with 5 deaths

April 20— 140 cumulative cases (#27 in state) with 5 deaths

April 21 — 144 cumulative cases (#28 in state) with 8 deaths

Advertisement

April 22 — 145 cumulative cases (#28 in state) with 8 deaths

April 23 — 152 cumulative cases (#29 in state) with 8 deaths.

April 24 — 156 cumulative cases (#29 in state) with 8 deaths.

April 25 — 158 cumulative cases (#29 in state) with 8 deaths

April 26 — 161 cumulative cases (#31 in state) with 8 deaths

Advertisement

April 27 — 165 cumulative cases (#30 in state) with 8 deaths.

April 28 — 170 cumulative cases with 9 deaths; 29 hospitalizations.

April 29 — 171 cumulative cases with 9 deaths; 32 hospitalizations.

April 30 — 180 cumulative cases with 10 deaths; 33 hospitalizations.

May 1 — 177 (DPH revised number) cumulative cases with 10 deaths, 33 hospitalizations

Advertisement

May 2 — 180 cumulative cases with 10 deaths, 35 hospitalizations

May 3 — 182 cumulative cases with 10 deaths, 35 hospitalizations

May 4 — 188 cumulative cases with 10 deaths, 35 hospitalizations

May 5 — 185 cumulative cases (unexplained decline) with 10 deaths, 35 hospitalizations

May 6 — 194 cumulative cases with 10 deaths, 36 hospitalizations

Advertisement

May 7 — 188 cumulative cases (unexplained decline) with 11 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 8 — 190 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 9 — 194 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 10 — 199 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 11 — 200 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

May 12 — 201 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 13 — 202 cumulative cases with 12 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 14 — 201 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations (unexplained subtraction of 1 case, 1 death and 1 hospitalization from county totals).

May 15 — 205 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 16 — 206 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

May 17 — 207 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 18 — 206 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 19 — 211 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 20 — 214 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 34 hospitalizations.

May 21 — 215 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 34 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

May 22 — 213 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 34 hospitalizations.

May 23 — 217 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 24 — 220 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 25 — 221 cumulative cases with 11 deaths, 35 hospitalizations.

May 26 — 230 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

May 27 — 235 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 36 hospitalizations.

May 28 — 230 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 37 hospitalizations.

May 29 — 233 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 37 hospitalizations.

May 30 — 235 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 37 hospitalizations.

May 31 — 235 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 37 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 1 — 235 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 37 hospitalizations.

June 2 — 237 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 38 hospitalizations.

June 3 — 239 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 39 hospitalizations.

June 4 — 241 cumulative cases with 13 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 5 — 244 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 6 — 245 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 7 — 245 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 8 — 247 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 9 — 254 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 41 hospitalizations.

June 10 — 254 cumulative cases with 14 deaths, 41 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 11 — 258 cumulative cases with 14 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 12 — 259 cumulative cases with 14 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 13 — 260 cumulative cases with 14 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 14 — 261 cumulative cases with 14 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 15 — 261 cumulative cases with 15 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 16 — 270 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 17 — 271 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 18 — 271 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 40 hospitalizations.

June 19 — 278 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 41 hospitalizations.

June 20 — 279 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 41 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 21 — 280 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 42 hospitalizations.

June 22 — 292 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 43 hospitalizations.

June 23 — 299 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 44 hospitalizations.

June 24 — 305 cumulative cases with 16 deaths, 45 hospitalizations.

June 25 — 314 cumulative cases with 17 deaths, 45 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

June 26 — 322 cumulative cases with 17 deaths, 46 hospitalizations.

June 27 — 324 cumulative cases with 17 deaths, 46 hospitalizations.

June 28 — 326 cumulative cases with 17 deaths, 46 hospitalizations.

June 29 — 326 cumulative cases with 17 deaths, 46 hospitalizations.

June 30 — 341 cumulative cases (+15, single largest day increase of the pandemic so far) with 17 deaths, 48 hospitalizations; 106 new cases since June 1.

Advertisement

July 1 — 346 cumulative cases (+5) with 19 deaths, 48 hospitalizations.

July 2 — 363 cumulative cases (+17, single largest daily increase so far) with 19 deaths, 48 hospitalizations.

July 3 — 384 cumulative cases (+21, single largest daily increase so far) with 19 deaths, 48 hospitalizations.

July 4 — 408 cumulative cases (+24, new record daily increase) with 19 deaths, 48 hospitalizations.

July 5 — 414 cumulative cases (+6) with 19 deaths, 48 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 6 — 422 cumulative cases (+8) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

July 7 — 458 cumulative cases (+36 single largest daily increase so far for Fayette) with 19 deaths, 50 hospitalizations.

July 8 — 472 cumulative cases (+14) with 19 deaths, 50 hospitalizations.

July 9 — 476 cumulative cases (+4) with 19 deaths, 50 hospitalizations.

July 10 — 498 cumulative cases (+22) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 11 — 509 cumulative cases (+11) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

July 12 — 514 cumulative cases (+5) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

July 13 — 532 cumulative cases (+18) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

July 14 — 549 cumulative cases (+17) with 19 deaths, 49 hospitalizations.

July 15 — 565 cumulative cases (+16) with 20 deaths, 51 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 16 — 584 cumulative cases (+19) with 20 deaths, 52 hospitalizations.

July 17 — 612 cumulative cases (+28) with 20 deaths, 54 hospitalizations.

July 18 — 629 cumulative cases (+17) with 20 deaths, 56 hospitalizations.

July 19 — 654 cumulative cases (+25) with 20 deaths, 56 hospitalizations.

July 20 — 669 cumulative cases (+15) with 20 deaths, 56 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 21 — 693 cumulative cases (+24) with 21 deaths, 56 hospitalizations.

July 22 — 702 cumulative cases (+9) with 21 deaths, 56 hospitalizations.

July 23 — 742 cumulative cases (+40) with 21 deaths, 57 hospitalizations.

July 24 — 764 cumulative cases (+22) with 23 deaths, 58 hospitalizations.

July 25 — 788 cumulative cases (+24) with 23 deaths, 58 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 26 — 805 cumulative cases (+17) with 23 deaths, 58 hospitalizations.

July 27 — 825 cumulative cases (+20) with 23 deaths, 58 hospitalizations.

July 28 — 855 cumulative cases (+30) with 23 deaths, 58 hospitalizations.

July 29 — 873 cumulative cases (+18) with 24 deaths, 59 hospitalizations.

July 30 — 898 cumulative cases (+25) with 24 deaths, 61 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

July 31 — 918 cumulative cases (+20) with 24 deaths, 62 hospitalizations.

Aug. 1 — 949 cumulative cases (+31) with 25 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 2 — 970 cumulative cases (+21) with 25 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 3 — 980 cumulative cases (+10) with 25 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 4 — 994 cumulative cases (+14) with 25 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

Aug. 5 — 1,028 cumulative cases (+34) with 25 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 6 — 1,047 cumulative cases (+19) with 26 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 7 — 1,078 cumulative cases (+31) with 28 deaths, 63 hospitalizations.

Aug. 8 — 1,100 cumulative cases (+22) with 28 deaths, 64 hospitalizations.

Aug. 9 — 1,120 cumulative cases (+20) with 28 deaths, 64 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

Aug. 10 — 1,131 cumulative cases (+11) with 29 deaths, 64 hospitalizations.

Aug. 11 — 1,159 cumulative cases (+28) with 30 deaths, 65 hospitalizations.

Aug. 12 — 1,187 cumulative cases (+28) with 31 deaths, 67 hospitalizations.

Aug. 13 — 1,210 cumulative cases (+23) with 32 deaths, 67 hospitalizations.

Aug. 14 — 1,243 cumulative cases (+33) with 33 deaths, 68 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

Aug. 15 — 1,263 cumulative cases (+20) with 33 deaths, 68 hospitalizations.

Aug. 16 — 1,277 cumulative cases (+14) with 34 deaths, 68 hospitalizations.

Aug. 17 — 1,305 cumulative cases (+28) with 34 deaths, 68 hospitalizations.

Aug. 18 — 1,341 cumulative cases (+36) with 34 deaths, 71 hospitalizations.

Aug. 19 — 1,365 cumulative cases (+24) with 34 deaths, 71 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

Aug. 20 — 1,388 cumulative cases (+23) with 34 deaths, 73 hospitalizations.

Aug. 21 — 1,394 cumulative cases (+6) with 34 deaths, 73 hospitalizations.

Aug. 22 — 1,404 cumulative cases (+10) with 35 deaths, 73 hospitalizations.

Aug. 23 — 1,412 cumulative cases (+8) with 36 deaths, 73 hospitalizations.

Aug. 24 — 1,419 cumulative cases (+7) with 36 deaths, 73 hospitalizations.

Advertisement

Aug. 25 — 1,434 cumulative cases (+15) with 36 deaths, 74 hospitalizations.


Here’s what the raw numbers of new hospital patients across the state of Georgia  day over day look like:

• March 26 — 79 new patients, 20% increase over previous 24-hour period

• March 27 — 93 new patients, 19.9% increase over previous 24-hour period

• March 28 — 51 new patients, 9% increase over previous 24-hour period

Advertisement

• March 29 — 49 new patients, 7.9% increase over previous 24-hour period

• March 30 — 41 new patients, 6.1% increase over previous 24-hour period

• March 31 — 111 new patients, 15.7% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 1 — 134 new patients, 16.3% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 2 — 104 new patients, 10.9% increase over previous 24-hour period

Advertisement

• April 3 — 102 new patients, 9.6% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 4 — 81 new patients, 6.9% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 5 — 44 new patients, 3.5% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 6 — 48 new patients, 3.8% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 7 — 442 new patients, 33.1% increase over previous 24-hour period

Advertisement

• April 8 — 206 new patients, 11.6% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 9 — 179 new patients, 9% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 10 — 192 new patients, 8.8% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 11 — 128 new patients, 5.4% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 12 — 26 new patients, 1% increase over previous 24-hour period

Advertisement

• April 13 — 81 new patients, 3.29% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 14 — 183 new patients, 7% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 15 — 153 new patients, 5.5% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 16 — 118 new patients, 4% increase over previous day’s report

• April 17 — 284 new patients, 9.3% increase over previous day’s report

Advertisement

• April 18 — 96 new patients, 2.8% increase over previous 24-hour period

• April 19 — 44 new patients, 1.2% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 20 — 86 new patients, 2.4% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 21 — 229 new patients, 6.4% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 22 — 180 new patients, 4.7% increase over previous 24-hour period

Advertisement

• April 23 — 110 new patients, 2.7% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 24 — 152 new patients, 3.7% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 25 — 105 new patients, 2.4% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 26 — 33 new patients, 0.01% (one-tenth of 1 percent) increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 27 — 74 new patients, 1.6% increase over previous 24-hour period.

Advertisement

• April 28 — 345 new patients, 7.7% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 29 — 170 new patients, 3.5% increase over previous 24-hour period.

• April 30 — 162 new patients, 3.2% increase over the previous 24-hour period.

• May 1 — 108 new patients, 2.1% increase over the previous 24-hour period.

• May 2 — 122 new patients, 2.3% increase over the previous 24-hour period.

Advertisement

• May 3 — 53 new patients, 0.9% increase over the previous 24-hour period.

• May 4 —  36 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 0.6% over the previous day.

• May 5 —  145 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 2.6% over the previous day.

• May 6 —  135 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 2.4% over the previous day.

• May 7 —  86 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.5% over the previous day.

Advertisement

• May 8 —  91 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.5% over the previous day.

• May 9 —  95 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.6% over the previous day.

• May 10 —  13 newly hospitalized patients, increase of under 1% over the previous day.

• May 11 —  21 newly hospitalized patients, increase of less than 1% over the previous day.

• May 12 —  115 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.9% over the previous day.

Advertisement

• May 13 —  98 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.5% over the previous day.

• May 14 — 117 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.8% over the previous day.

• May 15 — 93 newly hospitalized patients, increase of 1.4% over the previous day.

• May 16 — 297 newly hospitalized patients; [new metric provided by DPH] new ICU admissions are 20, statewide.

• May 17 — 55 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 3, statewide.

Advertisement

• May 18 — 126 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 8, statewide.

• May 19 — 86 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 19, statewide.

• May 20 — 105 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 33, statewide.

• May 21 — 128 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 25, statewide.

• May 22 — 78 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 16, statewide.

Advertisement

• May 23 — 98 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 20, statewide.

• May 24 — 28 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 5, statewide.

• May 25 — 36 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 3, statewide.

• May 26 — 72 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 17, statewide.

• May 27 — 119 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 32, statewide.

Advertisement

• May 28 — 101 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 26, statewide.

• May 29 — 85 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 19, statewide.

• May 30 — 69 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 10, statewide.

• May 31 — 25 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 4, statewide.

• June 1 — 181 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 6, statewide.

Advertisement

• June 2 — 207 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 21, statewide.

• June 3 — 85 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 20, statewide.

• June 4 — 138 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 31, statewide.

• June 5 — 89 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 25, statewide.

• June 6 — 16 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 4, statewide.

Advertisement

• June 7 — 23 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 8, statewide.

• June 8 — 61 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 16, statewide.

• June 9 — 126 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 35, statewide.

• June 10 — 102 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 31, statewide.

• June 11 — 99 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 15, statewide.

Advertisement

• June 12 — 108 newly hospitalized patients; new ICU admissions are 15, statewide.

• June 13 — 43 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 8.

• June 14 — 24 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 5.

• June 15 — 74 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 9.

• June 16 — 132 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 22.

Advertisement

• June 17 — 89 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 19.

• June 18 — 120 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 25.

• June 19 — 109 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 13.

• June 20 — 65 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 18.

• June 21 — 27 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 4.

Advertisement

• June 22 — 89 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 11.

• June 23 — 170 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 19.

• June 24 — 190 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 32.

• June 25 — 144 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 16.

• June 26 — 148 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 22.

Advertisement

• June 27 — 84 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 17.

• June 28 — 22 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 7.

• June 29 — 113 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 21.

• June 30 — 227 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 34.

• July 1 — 224 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 34.

Advertisement

• July 2 — 225 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 32.

• July 3 — 153 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 24.

• July 4 — 90 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 12.

• July 5 — 32 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 4.

• July 6 — 144 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 12.

Advertisement

• July 7 — 307 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 30.

• July 8 — 274 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 31.

• July 9 — 106 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 17.

• July 10 — 331 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 46.

• July 11 — 268 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 45.

Advertisement

• July 12 — 54 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 11.

• July 13 — 217 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 22.

• July 14 — 209 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 19.

• July 15 — 417 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 59. The ICU admissions total of 59 is a new 1-day record.

• July 16 — 244 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 34.

Advertisement

• July 17 — 301 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 45.

• July 18 — 298 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 38.

• July 19 — 49 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 3.

• July 20 — 37 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 7.

• July 21 — 447 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 75. Both are new single-day records since the beginning of the pandemic.

Advertisement

• July 22 — 428 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 63.

• July 23 — 431 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 67.

• July 24 — 399 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 85. New daily increase record for ICU admissions.

• July 25 — 277 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 39.

• July 26 — 62 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 10.

Advertisement

• July 27 — 47 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 4.

• July 28 — 406 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 64.

• July 29 — 420 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 65.

• July 30 — 339 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 53.

• July 31 — 386 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 60.

Advertisement

• Aug. 1 — 306 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 61.

• Aug. 2 — 69 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 21.

• Aug. 3 — 60 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 16.

• Aug. 4 — 302 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 44.

• Aug. 5 — 362 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 60.

Advertisement

• Aug. 6 — 214 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 31.

• Aug. 7 — 280 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 53.

• Aug. 8 — 274 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 39.

• Aug. 9 — 72 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 13

• Aug. 10 — 48 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 15.

Advertisement

• Aug. 11 — 355 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 65.

• Aug. 12 — 348 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 97.

• Aug. 13 — 202 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 34.

• Aug. 14 —237 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 36.

• Aug. 15 —210 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 43.

Advertisement

• Aug. 16 —59 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 8.

• Aug. 17 —46 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 11.

• Aug. 18 —296 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 56.

• Aug. 19 — 235 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 26.

• Aug. 20 — 216 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 42.

Advertisement

• Aug. 21 — 245 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 33.

• Aug. 22 — 200 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 33.

• Aug. 23 — 44 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 14.

• Aug. 24 — 56 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 7.

• Aug. 24 — 292 newly hospitalized patients; new statewide ICU admissions are 50.

Advertisement

Read More

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Top News

EU’s Michel: Oil services price cap must hit Russia, not G7 and partners

Published

on

EU’s Michel: Oil services price cap must hit Russia, not G7 and partners

European Council President Charles Michel attends a news conference during a European Union leaders summit in Brussels, Belgium June 24, 2022. REUTERS/Johanna Geron

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

SCHLOSS ELMAU, Germany, June 26 (Reuters) – The Group of Seven nations will discuss a proposal to impose a price cap on services related to oil trading, European Council President Charles Michel said on Sunday, adding that any measures must minimise the impact on the G7 and its partners.

“If we go in that direction we will need the support of European Union members and we want to make sure the goal is to target Russia and not make our own lives more difficult,” he told a news conference at the G7 summit.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Phil Blenkinsop, writing by Thomas Escritt; editing by Matthias Williams

Advertisement

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read More

Continue Reading

Top News

In Texas, Mayra Flores is latest Latina to win big in politics. Can others do the same?

Published

on

In Texas, Mayra Flores is latest Latina to win big in politics. Can others do the same?

play

  • Latinas represent 9.1% of the total U.S. population but only make up only 2.8% of all lawmakers in Congress.
  • Twenty-seven Latinos have won primary battles for the U.S. House of Represenatives so far this election cycle. That’s up from 2018, when 20 Latinas won their primary contests.
  • “We have seen places like Texas, Arizona and Florida, more Latinas are running and winning,” said Anna Sampaio, a politics, race and gender professor at California’s Santa Clara University.

Republican U.S. Rep. Mayra Flores of Texas became the first Mexican-born woman to be sworn into Congress last week, the latest major victory for Latinas, who are increasingly running for political office – and winning.

Latinas represent 9.1% of the total U.S. population, according to the U.S. Census. But Latinas make up only 2.8% of all lawmakers in Congress, according to the Center For American Women and Politics. They are also underrepresented in local and state political offices. 

Recent election cycles, however, have shown Latinas clamoring to take up more space in U.S. politics. Twenty-seven Latinas have won primary battles for the U.S. House of Representatives so far this election cycle. That’s up from 2018 when 20 Latinas won their primary contests. 

Advertisement

play

Democratic Convention speaker: Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto

U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada delivers remarks on the first night of the Democratic National Convention.

USA TODAY

“We have seen places like Texas, Arizona and Florida, more Latinas are running and winning,” said Anna Sampaio, a politics, race and gender professor at California’s Santa Clara University. “There are several factors at work in both of those equations, but we see underrepresentation as well.” 

Advertisement

Political experts said Latinas are deeply underrepresented in political office for a variety of factors, including discrimination based on gender, ethnicity or race that can limit economic, education and other opportunities. Latinas are the most likely group of people actively discouraged from running by their political party, according to the National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators.

State Sen. Sonia Chang-Díaz, who was running for governor of Massachusetts before she dropped out Thursday, said the underrepresentation of Latinas holding political office correlates with multiple barriers, including psychological, financial, childcare and being a marginalized community member. 

“We know that you don’t have to raise the most money in order to win office, I’m living proof of that. But you need to raise enough to run a vetted campaign,” said Chang-Díaz, who became the state’s first Latina state senator in 2009. 

Advertisement

Stephanie Lopez, program director for LatinasRepresent, a national, nonpartisan organization focused on increasing the number and diversity of Latinas in public office, said many Latina candidates are still fighting off outdated assumptions about their electability. 

“It is incredibly difficult for Latinas to run for office, I think that needs to be said. A ton of barriers exist even before they decide to run,” Lopez said. “A lot of the time, they’re not receiving the support from major parties. So, what are the options, wait for them or run as independents?” 

Despite the barriers to a victorious Election Day, more Latinas have steadily won high-profile electoral contests in recent years, with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez becoming the youngest woman at the time to serve in Congress in 2019 and New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham becoming the nation’s first Latina governor in 2019. There’s also Elizabeth Guzmán and Hala Ayala, who in 2017 became the first Hispanic women elected to Virginia’s House of Delegates. That same year, Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) became the first Latina to serve in the U.S. Senate. 

“Communities realize that they need to be politically engaged,” said Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages, chair of the New York State Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic & Asian Legislative Caucus. “And right now, Latinas realize that they need the political power to change the dynamics in their community.”

Christina Bejarano, a professor of political science at Texas Woman’s University whose research focuses on Latinas in politics, said much of the growth of women of color running for political office stems from the growing networks of political and civic organizations aimed at helping such candidates.

Advertisement

Bejarano said Latinas sometimes can benefit at the polls by leaning on their identity to draw support and interest from multiple demographic groups, such as other women and people of color. 

“They often run as highly qualified candidates, likely due to the expected obstacles they will encounter running as women of color,” Bejarano said.

Flores’ campaign focused on her culture, pointing to her parents’ history of being migrant workers. Ocasio-Cortez, meanwhile, has celebrated her family’s links to Puerto Rico and aligned with other women of color in Congress. 

Sonja Diaz, founding director of the University of California, Los Angeles’ Latino Policy & Politics Institute, also said Latinas do not need to run in a Latino-majority district to win. 

Advertisement

“One thing that is true from our political science research and history is that Latinas are ideal candidates who can win districts that are a variety of voters from a different race or ethnic backgrounds,” Diaz said. 

Latinas candidates need more support

Kelly Dittmar, director of research at the Center for American Women and Politics, said the key for Latinas is to maintain political momentum. She said profound structural change must happen within the major political parties to bolster the success of Latina candidates.

“You need to create networks, what we call a support infrastructure, for women in ways that speak to their own distinctive experience,” said Dittmar. “There is also the potential to create a funding stream, reducing some of the financial barriers.” 

In November, the final midterm elections will show how well Latinas candidates perform this election cycle. Flores is likely to face a tougher road to victory when she faces off against Democratic Rep. Vicente Gonzalez in a redrawn district that leans overwhelmingly Democratic.

Advertisement

Whether Flores wins or loses, Chang-Díaz and others are hoping to see more Latinas in office in the near future. 

“I want to be clear; we should be encouraging more Latinas to run,” said Chang-Díaz. “Our country needs more Latinas in offices. We need to have people at the table who represent our country’s full breadth and diversity.”

Read More

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Top News

As an adoptive mother, I know adoption doesn’t fix a lack of abortion access

Published

on

As an adoptive mother, I know adoption doesn’t fix a lack of abortion access

“Your son is so lucky.”

As mother to an 11-year-old who came to our family via adoption four years ago, I hear this comment a lot. Friends and strangers alike tell me that my child is fortunate, that he “seems like such a happy kid” and “You would never know he’s adopted, he’s so well-adjusted!” Some say these things within earshot of my son or my biological daughter. 

I know that their comments are mostly well-meaning, so I usually just change the subject, not wanting to start a weighty conversation at the grocery check-out line or at school pickup. But what I want to say is, “He is not ‘lucky.’ He will never ‘adjust.’ Adoption is trauma, and no child — or birth parent — should ever have to go through it.”

It took me a year to find an adoption-literate therapist who could take us on (at $200 per week, no less) and longer to find a trauma-trained caregiver.

Advertisement

Yet ahead of the anticipated overturning of Roe v. Wade, many opponents of abortion rights held up adoption as an antidote for unwanted pregnancies. After the draft opinion leaked in May, Republican Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, in a typical comment, told ABC News’ “This Week” that his solution if abortion were outlawed would be “increase the services for maternal health, to increase the services for adoption services … We want to invest in those areas that will help those women with very difficult circumstances of the pregnancy.” He did not elaborate on what specific “adoption services” he would invest in, or how much, or where the money would come from. It’s almost like he hadn’t thought about that part.

He certainly didn’t acknowledge what those services entail, and how they can never compensate for the difficulties adopted children or their parents face. As life without Roe becomes a reality in the United States, lawmakers must understand the toll they are foisting on families if they don’t allow women to pursue abortions.

My son is funny, gregarious and wise, with arresting almond eyes that take up a third of his face and a killer jump shot. If anyone is lucky, it’s us; being his mom is one of the great joys of my life. But that joy comes with trauma — his, ours, his biological family’s — that has forever changed us. We chose to adopt and therefore accept the humbling, messy, demanding work of navigating the road toward healing and connection. Our son did not get to choose, and soon thousands of infants and birth mothers may not have a choice, either.

In my work as the director of a nonprofit supporting child welfare-involved youth and families, I’m well aware of how there is already a serious lack of accessible, effective trauma-healing resources for children, birth mothers and adoptive families in this country. But then I experienced this first hand after bringing our son home. 

Though my husband and I had ready access to experts in adoption and trauma via my work, a supportive network of family and friends, and the time, money and desire to provide every available resource to support our son’s healing, we struggled. It took me a year to find an adoption-literate therapist who could take us on (at $200 per week, no less) and longer to find a trauma-trained caregiver who we trusted to watch our son for even a couple of hours. 

We needed help addressing his intense rages, in which he punched himself and the walls while wailing from a place so deep inside that it sounded primal — which it was. He would fight in school and run away; he scrawled “I hat u mom and dade” in Sharpie on his bedroom wall. Despite being loved, wanted and safe, he was operating in fight-or-flight mode 24 hours a day, his pulse racing under my tentative fingers even as his eyelids drooped during book time. 

Advertisement

No amount of training or education could have prepared my husband and me for the force of his pain, but slowly, day by day, we inched forward. We threw “normal parenting” out the window, battling our own triggers so we could model calmness and safety even as he tantrumed. We patched the holes in the drywall without a word and stopped chasing him when he ran away. 

Over time our son’s nervous system came out of overdrive, and he stopped perceiving everything and everyone as a threat. We started to see glimpses of the compassionate, silly, creative boy trapped inside that shell of fear. Exhausted but hopeful, we stayed the course.

Not every adopted child will rage, but every one will carry trauma that manifests in diverse ways until it is faced and processed. The son of a friend, adopted at birth from a mother who experienced food insecurity, suddenly began hoarding food as a teen; an adult I know, adopted at two months old, was a self-described “happy, perfect child” until she left for college, when seemingly out of nowhere she began cutting herself, failing classes and fantasizing about suicide. The transition of leaving her safe hometown, where everyone knew her as so-and-so’s daughter, and going to college, where her dorm room photos raised questions about why her entire family was white though she was Asian, opened up the wound of her early trauma.

As for birth mothers, the young women who never wanted to be mothers in the first place, they also suffer complicated losses — the loss of their freedom to choose when and under what circumstances they give birth, the loss of the children they never intended to have.

Four years later after his adoption our son is thriving, though the impact of his past has changed him — and us — forever. He steps out of that shell of fear almost every day now, but it is always there, just as the ache for his first parents will always be there, too. He trusts and loves me but remains hypervigilant, anxiously asking “What’s wrong, Mom?” when he observes even the tiniest micro-expression of frustration or annoyance crease my brow. He wakes often at night and paces; at 11, he worries about the future.

Advertisement

Republican lawmakers are prepared to take away a woman’s right to choose without any sign that they’ve given earnest consideration to, let alone resources for, the long-term effects of such a decision. Adoption, a fraught reality for many that is made more complicated because it contains both beauty and pain, should never be propped up by lawmakers as the easy solution to a problem they created by wielding their outsized power over millions of Americans. 

Adoption requires a lifelong commitment, and serious patience, time and therapeutic interventions. It should never be forced on anyone. Lawmakers should strive to understand, plan for and fund trauma-healing support services for the thousands of youths and families in the United States already touched by adoption, instead of committing thousands of more Americans to it without their consent.

Read More

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 Newsline. Powered by WordPress.