Category Archives: Public safety

Some Useful Info about COVID-19

Note: I updated the post below on March 11, to reflect state guidance on when to call your doctor. Knowledge about the epidemic is changing rapidly, so other information in this blog post could become outdated at any time.

My wife and I had dinner last night with a long-time friend who is in active practice as a family practice physician. She shared some information about the COVID-19 coronavirus disease that I consider so helpful, I want to share it.

First, don’t panic! The vast majority of us, who have no preexisting illnesses that make us more vulnerable, will experience symptoms similar to influenza or a very bad cold if we’re infected by coronavirus 2019. That means fever, lots of coughing and sneezing, and possibly generalized body aches. It won’t be pleasant, but it won’t require hospitalization and certainly won’t be fatal — for most of us.

Data is still coming in with which public health experts calculate mortality and hospitalization rates. At the time of this writing, however, they think 10 to 20 percent of infected people will require hospitalization and around 3.8 percent (38 out of every 1,000 people infected) will die. Again, people who have other, chronic health problems, like cardio vascular disease or chronic, obstructive pulmonary disease, are much more likely to become seriously ill or die than those of us who are relatively healthy before the virus infects us.

Even if our symptoms are mild, if we are diagnosed with COVID-19, we be asked to isolate ourselves at home until our symptoms disappear. Our physician friend says her employer told her that if she contracts the disease, her employer will not allow her to return to work until 24 hours pass without a single symptom, including cough.

Isolation means isolation! We will be expected to make no trips to the grocery, drug store, or anywhere except a medical facility for care. When diagnosed, we’ll be told to go straight home, without stopping for supplies or medicines. Failure to adhere to such restrictions could put the health of more vulnerable people at risk.

Because none of us know when infection might happen, our physician friend told us she has made sure her house is stocked with everything she might need for two weeks of isolation: food, medicine, pet food, facial tissues, etc. Today, Peggy and I did the same thing. We purchased nonperishable foods that we can store for months, because we could get infected today or a couple months from now. We also stocked up on the same over-the-counter medicines we would use to treat a bad cold: acetaminophen (Tylenol®) for fever, diphenhydramine (Benadryl®) for sneezing and runny nose, pseudoephedrine hydrochloride (Sudafed®) for nasal congestion caused by swollen membranes, guaifenesin (Mucinex®) for chest congestion from excess phlegm, and dextromethorphan (Delsym®) for cough.

Another revelation I got from our physician friend regards seeking care for what might seem like a bad cold or flu, something I would not normally do. March 11, the Indiana State Department of Health tweeted about who should contact their healthcare providers when they become ill:

Previously, I reported that our physician friend suggested is that if I come down with a bad cough with fever, I should call my doctor, even though I wouldn’t normally do so for a viral illness like the cold or flu. Normally, if I experience such symptoms, I just treat them myself symptomatically, because I know there’s nothing my doctor can give me to cure a viral illness. But while the COVID-19 epidemic is still going on, we should change that practice and at least call our doctors if we have a fever and cough, so the doctor can decide whether to test us for COVID-19. Why bother with a test that won’t change the method of treatment? Because if we’re lucky and the test shows no COVID-19, isolation at home won’t be as important.

Now, it seems clear that relatively few people who contact their healthcare providers will even be eligible for a COVID-19 test. This is just one example of how information about this epidemic is changing by the day, and sometimes by the hour.

About the only things any of us can do to prevent infection is to stay away from infected people and wash our hands frequently. This is challenging enough as we go through our daily lives, but reports that some people can have the disease without having symptoms themselves further complicates the former tactic. To me, this means we should all expect to contract COVID-19 and prepare now for the isolation we’ll need to practice when it happens.

Are weather radar apps dangerous?

One well-known meteorologist thinks they can lead untrained users to draw unsafe conclusions

Dr. Kevin Kloesel shows archived radar data from the 2011 Indiana State Fair stage collapse tragedy. The white “X” on his slide indicates the location of the fairgrounds. An outflow boundary (thin, blue line) is depicted ahead of a line of severe thunderstorms.

Anyone who makes decisions based on radar data displayed on mobile apps is essentially “acting the part of a meteorologist without the background,” and that will result in deaths, asserted meteorologist and certified emergency manager Dr. Kevin Kloesel, during the Ohio State University (OSU) Severe Weather Symposium March 28.

Kloesel, who works in the University of Oklahoma Office of Emergency Preparedness, was the final speaker of the day-long symposium, organized by OSU meteorology students.

A non-meteorologist will most likely be using a simple phone app, and tend to focus on the “scary colors” and lowest elevation tilt of the radar, Kloesel told symposium attendees.

As a case in point, Kloesel discussed a 2011 incident at the Indiana State Fair, where winds in advance of a severe thunderstorm caused the collapse of a temporary structure that held spotlights and other equipment above an outdoor concert stage, killing seven people.

Kloesel showed archived radar data from that night, beginning with an 8:35 p.m. scan (see photo above) that depicted a line of heavy precipitation and ahead of that, a thin line representing an outflow boundary. Meteorologists know that such boundaries can indicate gust fronts with strong but usually sub-severe (less than 58 mph) straight-line winds.

Kloesel displays archived radar data from 8:53 p.m. the night of the Indiana State Fair stage collapse. This data shows an outflow boundary apparently right over the fairgrounds, which are represented in Kloesel’s slide by a white “X.”

Archived radar data depict the outflow boundary directly over the fairgrounds at 8:53 p.m (see photo above).

The deadly collapse, however, happened at approximately 8:46 p.m., much earlier than most untrained users of radar data might expect, in part because the “scary colors” had not yet arrived. Even non-meteorologists who recognize outflow boundaries likely don’t know that gust fronts on the ground occur ahead of where outflow boundaries appear on radar.

Kloesel reminds attendees that radar data shows what is happening at the height of the radar beam, which can be quite different than what’s happening directly below that point.

This is because a radar beam rises in reference to the ground as it travels from its source antenna (see photo above). Radar images therefore show what’s happening at the height of the radar beam, not at the ground

Trained meteorologists understand that they cannot assume that what’s happening on the ground will be indicated by what the radar depicts at beam height. Most other users of radar data on mobile apps probably lack that understanding, Kloesel said.

It’s too easy for people to rely on weather data via a mobile app, Kloesel said rather than seek expert consultation. The disconnect between the availability of data and the ability to correctly interpret such data is what led Kloesel to assert that radar app use can be dangerous.

This information is of particular importance to anyone who is responsible for the safety of people attending any outdoor mass gathering. All such events and venues should rely on trained meteorologists, versus others’ interpretations of what they see on mobile apps.

One way event leaders can get such support is through the National Weather Service’s Impact-based Decision Support Services (IDSS). The best way for event organizers to access IDSS is usually through a local emergency manager (i.e. director of an emergency management or homeland security agency).

Kloesel shared a quote from a lawyer involved in a weather-related injury case, who said that such incidents are “preventable with prudent caution and control of events in the face of available meteorological information.”

Do you really understand the danger of lightning?

lightning
PC: Mr. Shane Lear, Orange Australia. Creative Commons

We had a doozy of a lightning show in Fort Wayne tonight. Fortunately, it appears (at the time of this writing) that our immediate area sustained no significant storm damage. But tonight’s storm — and the way I saw people react to it — prompts me to share some life-or-death information about lightning.

All thunderstorms — including those that aren’t technically severe — produce lightning and are therefore dangerous.

Lightning kills

As of  this date, lightning has killed at least 15 people in the United States so far this year, according to National Weather Service (NWS) statistics.  They ranged in age from seven to 75. Three of the victims were women, The rest were men and a boy. Many were doing some kind of gardening, like mowing, tree trimming, etc. All had one thing in common; they were outdoors when lightning struck.

Needless deaths

Making these statistics even sadder is the fact that most lightning deaths are preventable. Rarely does a lightning bolt strike a person without lightning (and its accompanying thunder) first occurring some distance away. That’s why the NWS came up with the slogans, “when thunder roars, go indoors” and “see a flash, dash inside.” Many people who were killed by lightning simply didn’t seek appropriate shelter soon enough.

Important lightning facts

All thunderstorms — including those that aren’t technically severe — produce lightning and are therefore dangerous. So many thunderstorms happen every year that the NWS issues warnings only for those that it expects to produce damaging winds or gusts of at least 58 mph and/or hail of one inch or more in diameter. No matter how much lightning a storm produces, if it doesn’t have strong enough winds or big enough hail, it doesn’t get a severe thunderstorm warning. Nonetheless, it’s potentially deadly, because of its lightning.

Lightning can strike even if it’s not raining. In fact, it can strike as far as 10 miles from any rainfall.

If you can hear thunder, therefore, you are in danger, unless you are already in an appropriate shelter (see below).

Avoiding lightning strikes

Staying alive in a thunderstorm is relatively simple, according to an NWS brochure. If you hear thunder, even a distant rumble, seek safety immediately. Fully enclosed buildings with wiring and plumbing are best.

A hard-topped metal vehicle with the windows closed is also safe.

Sheds, picnic shelters, tents or covered porches do not protect you from lightning.

Stay inside until 30 minutes after the last rumble of thunder.

If you are at a sporting event and venue officials recommend taking shelter, do it. Many venues have access to lightning data and suspend competition and advise sheltering when the first strike is detected within a certain number of miles of the venue. Such policies, when heeded, help give spectators and participants adequate time to reach appropriate shelter.

Spread the word

Help stop needless lightning deaths by making sure your family and friends understand the danger and what to do. Share this helpful NWS website and/or one or more of the resources to which it links.

 

Why was a commercial tour boat on a Mo. lake during a severe thunderstorm warning?

Update: A grand jury has indicted the boat captain, reports the AP: https://apnews.com/97a50539272942bd9306a5937dc81cfb

I’m saddened and angered by an apparently weather-related tragedy in Branson, Missouri yesterday. News reports indicate that at least 11 people died when an amphibious, commercial tour boat capsized on Table Rock Lake during a warned severe thunderstorm.

Reports indicate that the incident occurred at around 7 p.m. CDT, well after the National Weather Service (NWS) office in Springfield, Missouri placed the area (shaded in yellow on the map above) under a severe thunderstorm warning at 6:32 p.m. The initial warning was in effect until 7:30 p.m., well after the incident occurred. The warning indicated that 60 mph wind gusts were possible as well as “damage to roofs, siding, and trees.”

This warning should not have surprised anyone, because the NWS Storm Prediction Center issued a severe thunderstorm watch for the area at 11:20 a.m. that was in effect until 9 p.m.

As I write this, I find no answers in news media reports to the following critical questions:

  • Did the amphibious tour boat enter the water before or after the NWS issued the severe thunderstorm warning?
  • Were operators of the tour boat aware of the severe thunderstorm warning before the boat capsized?
  • If the boat was already in the water when the NWS issued the warning, did it immediately head for shore at that time?
  • Does Ripley Entertainment, the company that owns the tour boat, have policies regarding how its operators become aware of and react to weather watches and warnings?

I hope investigators uncover and report answers to these questions. In the interim, this tragedy unfortunately reminds me of fatal incidents elsewhere in the country in which organizations apparently ignored severe thunderstorm warnings:

One would hope that incidents like those would teach organizations everywhere to enact and enforce severe weather policies and procedures, and to take severe thunderstorm warnings seriously. I fear that yesterday’s tragedy could be a sign that some organizations still haven’t learned this lesson.

Wait, what? Feds say warning us about military attacks isn’t their job.

Tweet sent by Hawaii's Emergency Management Agency after it sent a false missile attack alert via the Emergency Alert System Jan. 13, 2018.
Tweet sent by Hawaii’s Emergency Management Agency after it sent a false missile attack alert via the Emergency Alert System Jan. 13, 2018.

Well, this is interesting and a bit surprising. NPR reported today that federal officials say it’s not their role to warn the public about missiles.

If the feds are the ones who can detect an attack, aren’t the feds the ones who should warn us about it?

Ever since I was a kid in the 1960s, I expected to hear directly from the federal government if the United States came under attack.

In the early 1950s, the federal government established the CONELRAD system, in part to enable the feds to continuously broadcast enemy attack information to the public using radio or TV stations. I remember that one of the first electronic kits I ever built was a CONELRAD detector, which would turn on a light if a radio station to which it was tuned went off the air. It wasn’t intended to be practical, but began to teach me about electronics and emergency communications.

The Emergency Broadcast System (EBS) replaced CONELRAD in 1953. Its purpose was similar to CONELRAD’s; “to provide the President of the United States with an expeditious method of communicating with the American public in the event of war, threat of war, or grave national crisis.” This meant the federal government was still acknowledging a responsibility to communicate such information directly to the public, vs. expecting states to do it.

I don’t know when the federal government handed off to states the task of alerting the public to military attacks (if you do, leave a comment). Perhaps it happened when the EBS morphed into our current Emergency Alert System (EAS) in 1997.  It seems ridiculous to me, however, because the ability to detect such attacks lies with the Department of Defense (a federal agency). If the feds are the ones who can detect an attack, aren’t the feds the ones who should warn us about it?

Earlier this month, U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), and Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) introduced the Authenticating Local Emergencies and Real Threats (ALERT) Act (S.2385), legislation that would give the federal government the sole responsibility of alerting the public of a missile threat.  If you agree that military attack warnings should again come from the feds, drop a line to your U.S. senator and ask him or her to support  S.2385.

 

University demonstrates questionable understanding of tornado warnings

It’s really important that anyone who is in charge of the safety of an institution — a university campus, for example — maintain an updated, working knowledge of how weather warnings work. Tweets sent today by Indiana University today could lead one to believe that its campus safety staff could benefit from some education in that area.

At 1:19 p.m. EST, the Indianapolis office of the National Weather Service (NWS) issued a tornado warning that included a portion of southern Monroe County, Indiana.  The warning came with a polygon that clearly showed that the IU campus was not included.

Polygon associated with Nov. 5 tornado warning near Bloomington, IN. The National Weather Service issued the warning only for the area inside the red polygon.

In addition, the text of the warning indicated that “a severe thunderstorm capable of producing a tornado was located 12 miles northwest of Bedford, moving east at 30 mph.” In other words, the storm was not moving toward Bloomington or the IU campus (which is why NWS meteorologists drew the polygon as they did).

Six minutes after the NWS issued the warning, IU sent a tweet at 1:25 regarding what it called a “tornado warning for Bloomington.”

Cody Kirkpatrick, an IU lecturer in atmospheric science, attempted to clarify IU’s tweet:

The IU Twitter account replied:

Dr. Kirkpatrick knew what he was talking about. Those sending tweets on behalf of IU demonstrated ignorance of the National Weather Service’s “storm-based warning” system. When the NWS implemented that system a decade ago, it replaced the county-wide warnings to which IU’s tweet refers, with warnings based on polygons that indicate where the actual risk is.

In subsequent tweets, Dr. Kirkpatrick attempted to point that out, as well as the fact that IU’s original tweet was ambiguous. IU’s response:

But is warning people who are not at risk really better than warning only people who are truly at risk? Is doing so truly “safe,” or does it exacerbate existing challenges with getting people to respond appropriately to warnings?

The people at any institution like IU, who are in charge of disseminating public safety information, would do well to take full advantage of the informational resources that exist among their own faculty. Doing so could lead to better weather safety communications in the future.

What residents need to know about their new outdoor warning siren

Tornado siren. Outdoor warning sirens are not intended to be heard indoors.

Blogger’s note: Below is an article I submitted to the “The Waynedale News,” a neighborhood newspaper in Fort Wayne, Indiana. If refers to the installation of an outdoor warning siren in a neighborhood that had been without one for years. The newspaper published the article July 7, 2017.

The new outdoor warning siren that’s coming to Waynedale brings with it some true risks that area residents might not have considered. Chief among those risks are over reliance and desensitization. Continue reading