 Hi, I'm Jay Fidel. This is Think Tech. More specifically, this is Corona Watch where every week, sometimes more than once a week, we track on what's going on with the coronavirus because it occupies all of our time and thought these days here and everywhere in the world affecting our society, our civilization and our species. So today we're going to take a look at the coronavirus survey we put out. We called it Think Tech Hawaii Coronavirus Coverage Survey. It ended on April 15th. We had well over 100 responses, which is pretty good. And we'll have more surveys coming forward. And if you didn't catch on this survey, hopefully you'll catch on the next one and help us understand what's happening in the community. So this one was dedicated to coverage and to see what people have been looking at and what they would like to know about going forward. Catherine Norr, who is the host of Much More on Medicine, which plays on Wednesday afternoon, is here to help us analyze these results. Hi Catherine. Hello Jay, it's great to be here with you. Yeah, good. We had a good time doing this in the middle of the survey. Now it's the end of the survey. And there have been changes. It's not all the same as it was. But this is the final and we're taking a look and trying to draw some good analysis, good conclusions about these questions. There are 10 of them. Let's go through them. The first question is, what aspects of the coronavirus interest you the most? And the idea we asked them to check more than one. And the choices were how the disease progresses, how to avoid catching it, how it will affect my job, how it will affect my finances, how it will affect my quality of life, how it will affect the state, how it will affect the country. And you know, this is a, I guess it's not, how it will affect the world. Let's not forget. So we don't know exactly where the interest came from. I suspect a lot of them came from Hawaii. But some of them probably came from our, you know, those people on our mailing list, which is substantial in other places because more and more we, our audience includes people from other places. So the, just on looking at the raw numbers, the one that was the highest percentage of responses was how it will affect the state, 67% were most interested in that. And I guess that tells us we have a lot of, we have a lot of people locally who are responding to the survey. But it's interesting, you know, that we, there are others that are, you know, very robust also not quite as many. Let's see the next one in line would be how will affect the country that's a fair interest that's important. And then how to avoid catching it. I think that's really important actually, and how the disease progresses. Finally, see how it will affect my quality of life. And the rest of them were less than that. So what kind of conclusions do you draw from this Catherine. People are very concerned about how it will affect our state. We've heard that there's 37% unemployment. However, that figure seems to be a little inconsistent. I think that that's because our state relies on tourism as an industry and tourism has been shut down and it's getting more and more of a concern about how and when we can reopen or at least gradually reopen. I think that that's where those people are, are focusing on. Right, it's the opening question it's trying to get back to business. And, you know, if you consider that our mono economy is largely if not mostly in tourism and tourism is really stop cold. Maybe that's what they're really talking about. Maybe a lot of our responding, you know, responding people are in or near the tourism industry and that's what motivates this answer. I appreciate when they say they care about how it affects the country. 49, almost 50% were in that ballpark. And I think it's very important because how our country goes in large part goes our state. If the country is going to fall apart over this well, we'll feel it here no question about it. We can't escape that. Yeah, okay. I think, you know, this is not a bad set of answers on that one. I think we, we learn what what people want to know about. And I think their hearts are in the right place. Okay, next question is what kind of people would you like to, what kind of people would you like to hear from. What kind of, you know, talk shows, for example, talk show guests and hosts, what kinds of expertise would you like to tap into. And the possible answers were doctors and medical professionals, scientists and epidemiologists, political and government leaders, economists and business leaders, neighborhood and community leaders, leaders in other states and countries. And the far away, the far away runner, and this is not completely consistent with the answers to number one, the far away runners scientists and epidemiologists 80%. And that's consistent with our, our last, you know, our mid our mid course answers to, I guess the next one would be doctors and medical professionals that's not too far from scientists and epidemiologists for 60%. And the one after that, it's interesting people want to hear experts, economists and business leaders, again, I guess, an interest in the future of the economy, 55%, almost 56%. So, what does this tell us Catherine what are your reactions to those answers in this bar chart. Here's way too much from politicians and not enough from experts we want to hear what experts have to say whether it's an epidemiologist, a medical doctor, an economist we want to know what the facts are, we don't want spin, we want the facts. This is going to be directly relevant to your show, much more on medicine, because they, they want to hear from doctors and medical and even more scientists and epidemiologists. We've had several on our shows, we have talked to scientists, we have talked to epidemiologists we have talked to doctors we have talked to medical professionals, but I guess that's a, you know, the primary interest in the public who has responded. So, you know, this is something you might consider following for your show or anything. Absolutely one of the challenges that we have right now is that those people that we really would like to hear from are on the front lines and it's hard to take them away from their important work and have them appear on a show. However, I am hoping to have a nurse who practices in Hawaii, and who is volunteering in New York appear in a couple weeks I'm going to try to make that happen. Oh, that'd be great. Yeah, there's so much more that we can learn from talking to people far away where the crisis is all the more pronounced. Yeah, that'd be great if you did that and let me say I agree again with these answers. Most most of the stresses on science and medicine and economics. They don't want to hear so much about neighborhood and community leaders, and they don't want to hear too much about leaders in other states and countries. Although there's a robust number of people who indicated they wanted to hear about that. So we have our marching orders on that one. Okay, next one is the next question to our responding audience. How do you feel about the future select one. Extremely frightened somewhat frightened not at all frightened, generally optimistic. I don't know enough. I don't think coronavirus is what's the, I don't think her advice is a real concern. I'm really amazed. Oh, let me let me tell you what the answers are so you can extremely frightened 5% only somewhat frightened 44% not at all frightened 5% generally optimistic 37% I don't know enough 5% and I don't think coronavirus is a real concern, not quite 1% but the biggest one is I'm somewhat frightened and the second one is, I'm generally optimistic. Maybe it's how we frame the question that I really wonder if people really understand what's going on here. What are your thoughts. Your concern of the name, perhaps they don't know what's going on. There's, there's differences in terms of how much news people consume and so that may explain why there may not be as many people that are so that are more frightened. You know, I think people try to protect themselves and perhaps really focus on day to day and and you know I'm still happy that people are cautiously optimistic because that would allow our economy to have a better opportunity to be more sustainable. Okay, my reactions are the people who said that 1% is that I don't think coronavirus is a real concern. I mean we don't know who they are they're anonymous we can't tell from the responses or database who said what, but that group of people is really out of touch. Because this is this is a global, a global threat of major magnitude to the whole world. People are dying as we speak in great numbers. It doesn't compare to anything we've ever seen before in our lifetimes and, frankly, in hundreds of years. And it has the great prospect of getting much worse before it gets better so to say I don't think coronavirus is real concern is really in space. I don't know enough is likewise that's almost 6% that's that's a that's a troubling answer for those 6% because because we're surrounded with media about it. We see it on television we see it on the newspapers you know, every newspaper that you can find, you know, like 8090% of the news stories are about a coronavirus. And how I don't know how and people talk about it. And of course this think tank if you want to know more, you can go on think tank we have seven or eight shows every day, and all night long I just plenty of places we can learn about coronavirus. So when people say I don't know enough I'm really troubled about that. I guess I'm extremely frightened is a category that seems low. That's over 5% and frankly, there's plenty of reason to be extremely frightened. Anyway, let me turn it over to you now Catherine what do you think about these answers. Well, you know if you're not watching the news. You know, I agree with you Jay, because it's people should know by now. And I'm not surprised with the answers, but I have to say I'm a little surprised at the cautiously optimistic. I think that it's I thought I would see that number go down, because I think it's getting a little bit more dire. Maybe Hawaii, I have to say that I am actually quite pleased with how things are going. We've got only 12 deaths compared to significant amount of deaths in other places. And when you look at the numbers in relation to a million population. There are the pretty much the lowest. There's one other state that is as low as we are. And so that's impressive for Hawaii. But if you look at the whole country, it's a scary proposition as cases are exponentially increasing, especially as people protest and don't follow social distancing guidelines. And if you look at the whole world, you know, you could be very frightened there are there are countries that have huge numbers of cases and deaths, and they're only beginning their curves, and they have substandard medical infrastructure. No, no, no medical equipment. They're really in for it. And to the extent that they, they get sick, it'll come back to us. You can, you know, Trump can shut down the borders only once. It will find a way back to us. What happened in 1918-19, we thought we'd beat the Spanish flu, but our troops were in Europe. And when they came back, it managed to find us right at home and, and the second wave was much worse than the first. So I don't know if people really understand about the waves of virus. You know, it doesn't take much to achieve another wave and another wave after that. And the only way you can really stop this is by some powerful therapeutic medicines, which we don't have and we don't have trials on them, or a vaccine, which we don't have, and we don't have trials on that. So it's hard for me to see why people would be optimistic if they look at those, you know, salient points. But we'll see, maybe we'll do another one like this and ask similar, similar questions in a few months and see what we get. Okay, the next question, this is question four. How well has county government, that's county government of the state of Hawaii done in this crisis? I mean, they're done very well. In all respects, they've done well, but they haven't been candid. They've been candid, but they haven't done very well. They've neither been candid nor they've done well. So we split it up between, you know, the communication of the public and the de facto result. And the other two is it's too early to say, and I don't know enough to say those in the last one. And I guess the big ones, it's really interesting. This is interesting, I tell you. The big ones are, I got to get it on my screen here. The big ones are 27% say it's too early to say. And maybe that's because the government is saying it's too early to say. And then the next one would be, let's see, they've done very well in all respects. And that's tied for they've been neither can't have been neither candid nor have they done well it's very interesting. That's a tie for those two. So, I don't know, I guess I don't feel too badly about the county we had Kirk Caldwell on G on Monday afternoon that was interesting to hear him talk about it and I think communication is pretty good. And as you say we have pretty good numbers here. And maybe they're right these people when they say it's too early to say, what do you think. Okay, I'm happy to report that we only have 12 deaths, as I mentioned, when I'm talking to people from other states, I'm always talking about the safety of my island, and, and I feel reasonably safe and that I believe that the decision that everyone masked. I think that was a good decision and that will result in fewer cases. So, I think they've made powerful decisions as time has gone by in a reasonably quick manner as as we've gotten information. So, I think that I'm not surprised at these results it's kind of all over the place, spread over but it seems that people are not extremely dissatisfied. Look at the state now that's the next question. And the leading category there for 34%, almost 35% is the state has been neither candid nor have they done well. That's an interesting answer and different from the county isn't it. The next, the next highest, you know, group of answers it's too early to say for 21 nearly 22% and the next one after that is, they've been candid the state has been candid but have not done very well at 16 or 17%. So what do you think about that disparity between the state and the county there. And one thing that Governor Igay said that I don't think bode well with the citizens and that is, he's talking about pay cuts to those first responders and teachers, and I think that would color people's opinion on this, and I don't remember what that was said before the survey was completed and I don't know if that had anything to do with it but it apparently people are not so happy with Governor Igay's performance. I think part of that is, you know that they didn't stop the inflow quickly enough and take the quarantine steps quickly enough. You could have done better lives could have been saved that way. Okay, let's go to the federal. The federal is very clear. It's the same questions. The federal very clear everybody 70% and more say that they had this federal has been neither candid nor have they done well. I would certainly read with that. And the other choices are all pretty small. 8.4% say they've done well in all respects. I wonder what those people are thinking 7.4. They've done well but haven't been candid. They've been candid but not done very well that was 6.5 and too early to say, no, it's defensible here for the federal. And I don't know enough to say it's 1%. Those people really ought to find out what's going on. What do you think about these answers? What do you think about that 70% they've neither been candid nor have they done well. This is all about Trump. It is and I think that the messaging on the federal level has been very inconsistent and and it's kind of been all over the place. I'm not surprised at all. I think that our viewers are likely to take that position. And I, as I said in the last show, I think this that if we were in a red state, I think that the result might be different. I don't know whether, you know, but, you know, I have to say that what we hear what we're hearing on the federal level doesn't sound so good and I can understand why people have this, take this position. Sorry, man. You know, he wants to go back to good old days which we can't get back to anyway. And then he's telling states they should liberate themselves from any restraints and people are responding to that. He's base talking. Republican Trump is his base. And those people could wind up infecting their whole state or reinfecting their whole state again. It's what he's done is really, really amazing. And it gets worse. That is a real cold bath of cold water. So I can see people reacting. Okay, now we're talking about medical professionals. This is question seven. They've done well in all respects, 16% they've done well despite shortages, 48%. They haven't been able to do well because of shortages, 13%. That's very interesting. They haven't done well for other reasons. They're very small, less than 1%. It's too early to say 6%, 6%. And I don't know enough to say this time, 14%. It's different. It's different. 14% don't have to say. So what are your thoughts about it? Well, I'm impressed personally with what healthcare providers have been able to do despite problems with PPE. And in looking at news coverage from Japan, from UK and other countries, it seems like it's a global problem. There's a shortage of PPE and you hear of people having to wear the same mask for multiple days or having to wear the same gown for multiple days or even to wear a garbage bag. I think that the media coverage does clearly say that they're doing their best despite the problems. And that's why I think they've answered that way. Yeah, I think also a big influence on this answer or the answers to this question is that we see in the media, the people, we talk to them, there are interviews of how they engage with their patients. And they're so real, they're so human, they're so kind. They're so altruistic. It's hard not to love them. They are an extension of us, all of us of our ethics, our morality, our national spirit. And so we love them. We're also a little afraid that we wouldn't do what they're doing. It takes a lot of courage to do what they're doing and we admire their courage. And I think that plays in this series of answers. Notice we didn't distinguish between state and national in that question. So the whole media experiment experience is playing in that question. Okay, the next one, this is number nine. The question was, are you satisfied with the level of, this is eight, rather, are you satisfied with the level of testing and predictably, because we don't have a lot of testing. The one that I'll give you all the answers. Yes, I'm satisfied and I have been tested less than 1%. Yes, I'm satisfied but I've not been tested 6%. I am disappointed with the level of testing, 82%. That's the highest of any answer on any question in our survey. Next, I don't think asymptomatic testing is necessary. That's one closer to 2%. I don't think any testing is necessary. 0%. That's good. It's too early to say 3%, almost 4%. And I don't know enough to say 4%, almost 5%. So clearly the winner is I am disappointed with the level of testing. And again, we didn't distinguish between state and federal. So I guess they're talking about the whole ball of wax, which they should talk about. And I guess you could say that we don't have enough testing in the state and people in this country and people have found out that's what their consciousness tells them. What are your thoughts? I would imagine that most people responding to the survey have not been tested and they probably desire to be tested, but they've also heard that in order to open things up, one way to do it is to have massive testing and it's not available. And if you go through those drive-throughs where there might be 1,000 people in line, you're asked questions and if you don't answer those questions in a certain way, you're not tested. So we're in a position where we need testing, but it's not available. And clearly, that's why people are responding that way. Okay, let's go to question 9. We have only 10. Are you satisfied with ThinkTech's coverage of the crisis? The choices are I am satisfied. For 46, almost 47%. I am not satisfied. 3, almost 4%. I would like to see more coverage on ThinkTech. The same, 3, almost 4%. I'd like to see less coverage on ThinkTech. Not quite 1%. I guess they want to see other things. I do not know enough to say 44, almost 45%. I guess those are the people who still, they don't watch, they don't know what we have. That's why they can't say. So we're doing pretty well for almost 47% of people who are satisfied. What do you think about the answers here? Well, you know, I think that this show has a significant amount of coverage on COVID-19 and more so than many news outlets. And so I think that that's not surprising that people would be generally satisfied. I'm not sure the ones that are not satisfied that they think that you could have more. I'm not sure how you could do that. But I think ThinkTech provides a lot of useful information on the topic. Well, to give you context on it, we have roughly 30 shows a week. And since we started covering COVID-19, since we concluded this was going to be an important news thread, which was actually early in the game. In January, we've done something over 130 shows on, that's a lot on ThinkTech, about coronavirus having to do with the, you know, various issues. If you want to see them, by the way, they're all included in the Corona Watch playlist on our YouTube site, youtube.com slash ThinkTech away. Let's go to the last question. And this is for the people who would like to see more coverage on ThinkTech choices. I'd like to see more Hawaii local coverage, 46, almost 47%. I'd like to see more US national coverage, something over 16%. I'd like to see more international coverage, 23, almost 24%. That's interesting because I really think that people ought to be internationally globally aware about this. This is the high point. I'd like to see more scientific and medical coverage, 50%. There you have it again, people interested in that. I'd like to see more community and social coverage, 20%, a little over 20%. I'd like to see more business and economic coverage, twice as much, 40, 41, 40, almost 42%. And that's it. So that tells us a lot about how we should, you know, allocate our time and our shows going forward to see, you know, whether we can cover all these bases. What are your thoughts and some of this has to do with much more on medicine, your show, Catherine. Yes, I think that in the beginning, people, there was a phase where we needed to learn about what we needed to do on the medical basis. I think that there's more of a concern right now in terms of how do we get back to work? How do we live with this situation? How do we transition from being stay at home to social distancing and wearing masks and actually getting our economy back up? So I think that there has been a shift in what people are interested in, what people need to know. And the big question out there that we need to know is the economic part. Yeah, but, you know, we can't go headlong into the economic part until we find out where we are on the curve. And we're not going to find out where we are on the curve until we have testing. It's the same old issues that have been going on for all these weeks. So it's a, this is all moving the solution anyway is moving much more slowly than you would expect. We'll have another survey, you know, starting a two week opening, two week period starting May 1. And we'll distribute that the same way. And I hope you'll be available to help me analyze it, both in the middle of the survey and when it's concluded. Thank you so much. Great to have this discussion. Now you have to wash your hands. All right. Thank you, Jay. And I will wash my hands and sanitize and keep my social distance. Okay, we'll see you when much more on medicine tomorrow.