Monday, November 22, 2021

COVID-19 Update

The Columbia County Department of Health has released its numbers for today. Since Saturday, there have been 52 new cases of COVID-19. The number of active cases being reported today is 64 more than on Saturday, which suggests there may have been an error in recording the numbers. There are 81 fewer county residents in mandatory quarantine today than on Saturday, but the number hospitalized remains the same. None of those hospitalized is in the ICU. There has not been a death from COVID-19 in Columbia County since Wednesday, November 17.

The New York Forward dashboard is reporting a positivity rate for Columbia County from Saturday to Sunday of 7.8 percent and a seven-day average of 9.1 percent. By comparison, the positivity rate for the same 24-hour period for the Capital Region was 5.9 percent and the seven-day average was 6.8 percent.

A year ago today, the CCDOH reported 3 new cases of COVID-19. The total number of cases was 922, and the number of active cases was 87. There were 424 county residents in mandatory quarantine, 17 were hospitalized, and 2 were in the ICU. The total number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 at this time last year was 45.


  1. Another error in the report?? Also, the "death" that was reported in the 11/17 County Report has still not been reflected in the NYS database, almost a week later.

    1. Please note: Peter M is not Peter Meyer.

    2. Carole, can you explain why, in this particular instance, you are concerned about the identity of a commenter? You have a commenting policy that allows people to post without revealing their identity to the community with which they are communicating. It's my feeling that this contributes to an unhealthy environment for public discussion. I don't expect you to make perfect sense all the time, of course, but an openness as to your reasoning would be appreciated.

    3. It's not just "in this particular instance," Peter Spear. Peter Meyer has more than once complained that the commenter who identifies himself as "Peter M" could be mistaken for him, Peter Meyer. For that reason, I and sometimes Peter M himself offer the clarification.

    4. Ok. Why do you feel it is important that we know the difference between "Peter M" and "Peter Meyer" when you do not feel it is important that we know the accurate identity of any of your other commenters?

    5. As someone who has been accused of posing as one of the candidates for President in the election of 1872 on this site while using my own surname, I don't think the quasi anonymous nature of comments helps the discourse very much.

      It's a small town and we're all trying to do our best to live in it together and govern ourselves well. Allowing pseudonyms just allows people to be more harsh and cruel than they would be in person. Anonymous comments are at best cowardly, and too often at worst a way to be nasty to ones neighbors without consequence.

      Nathan W.

      Not Peter Meyer
      Not Victoria Woodhull

  2. Thank you Not Peter Meyer! And, yes, I choose to be anonymous for what of course would be personal reasons, thank you. Now about the infection rate in our beloved county. Are the unvaccinated, very roughly 30%, purposely hanging out together and testing how contagious Delta is? Having fun to see how many vaccinated will get it if the bar is crowded enough? You win! A strange pastime indeed. Not much help from our health department or our retailers. Really, being sick is no picnic, so why! Staying way, way afar from you all, gratefully, anonymous me. And, fittingly in conclusion, not anonymously, "Hell is other people", Jean-Paul Sartre.