Epidemics have been recorded throughout history, the severity commonly categorized by the number of lives they have taken.  In that regard, the present coronavirus in PA (COVIDE-19) has been seen as a major threat and efforts have been taken to control its effects.  There have been political recriminations, but this paper deals with attempts to manage the spread.  Reputable quantitative and qualitative data are available to trace progress.  Decisions are seen as Lindblomian.  That is, value goals and empirical analyses have been intertwined.  A contemporaneous account is made of the disease’s progression, with reflections on the virus’ spread in Sweden and the inevitable unforeseen consequences.  Statistical treatment of available information suggests:

• Spread of the virus varied directly with population density and the number of nursing homes in the individual counties.  It varied inversely with distance from the Philadelphia epicenter.

• Because deaths were significantly related to the number of positive cases, parallel statements could be made with regard to the independent variables of population density, distance and number of nursing homes

• Comparison with the Swedish relatively relaxed treatment of the disease, the PA restrictions might be questioned.  Both the number of positive cases and deaths were higher in PA than Sweden.

• The mandated usage of masks in PA could not be statistically supported.

An apparent paradigm shift may be in progress as a result of this experience.  Essentially, the Swedish model seems to be being used in the recovery process.