COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 78

starting strength gym
Page 78 of 371 FirstFirst ... 2868767778798088128178 ... LastLast
Results 771 to 780 of 3709

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #771
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    • wichita falls texas june seminar date
    • texas starting strength seminar september 2020
    Quote Originally Posted by MWM View Post
    spacediver, I accept that the true rate of excess mortality most likely lies somewhere in between the published death toll and the 12% of cases mentioned. However, pointing out the issues with general influenza attribution as you've done only strengthens my case, because it suggests that the published seasonal flu statistics may be lower than reality. Regardless, you miss the point by pinning the weight of my argument on whether or not Italy's coding of the death statistics is unusual either for their country or for this virus. The point is that those statistics make the virus appear to be much more lethal than it probably is, because they are not published in any sort of medical/statistical/epidemiological context. If the virus is extremely widespread, as many experts now believe it is, and 1,000 people died on one day after testing positive for it in Italy, then you must ask how many of those deaths are in excess of the ~1,800 average daily death rate for that country.

    It could be that not a single one is in fact an excess death, because so many people have the virus that they are bound to make up a significant portion of the normal daily death rate, and even those directly killed by the virus would have died anyway on the same or a similar timeframe from another cause. You could use statistics in a similar way to paint prostate cancer as a terrifying killer of old men, except that the vast majority of men who have it will not be killed by it, but will die of something else. But here's the rub: Covid19 is probably more likely to kill someone than prostate cancer, but when it does, how can we be sure that such a person would not have died from any other widespread coronavirus, or other kind of flu, or any other natural cause whatsoever? We all have to die of something. Once again, this is not the Black Death, and nor is it the Spanish Flu.
    This is exactly why I chose to use the data from the paper you shared, since it attempts to correct for this bias (see the bolded part of your quote).

    If I'm understanding you correctly, you seem to be suggesting that the current Italian reported COVID deaths are being over-reported, relative to the FluMOMO data* (even though the FluMOMO data corrects for bias).

    This may indeed be possible, but is there any evidence to support this claim?

    For argument sake, let's suppose that the covid deaths in italy are indeed being over-reported relative to even the FluMOMO data. Let's suppose that if we were to adopt the same criteria for pathogen-associated death between FluMOMO and COVID-19, only half the current COVID-19 deaths should be classified as such. If that were the case, then instead of a current maximum of 919 deaths per day, it would be on the order of ~450 deaths per day.

    That is slightly lower than the peak of the influenza related deaths in 2016, which means that Italians are either lying or have a short memory. Remember, they're saying this is the biggest healthcare crisis they've had since WW2, not since 2016.

    So, just being as reasonable as possible (i.e. being a good Bayesian), what is the more likely hypothesis:

    1: Covid Deaths are being over-reported (relative to FluMOMO data) + Italians are lying/ have short memory
    2: Covid Deaths are not being over-reported (relative to FluMOMO data) + Italians are not lying.

    My bet is on 2.

    And don't forget, peak death rate is a function of transmissibility + case fatality risk. You could have a very low case fatality risk, but if everyone gets infected in 2 days, the peak death rate is going to be enormous.

    And peak death rate has consequences beyond total number of dead.

    Note: right now, I'm only trying to address the question of whether what's happening in Italy is an outlier relative to their recent history (i.e. since WW2).

    Acknowledging this does not imply that action should be taken in Italy, or that other countries can expect similar outcomes.

    *I think it only makes sense to speak of over-reporting or under-reporting pathogen-related deaths relative to something else. For reasons discussed earlier, it may not even be meaningful to speak of a "true" pathogen-related death rate.

  2. #772
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    53

    Default

    One more crucial point I neglected to make in my earlier post about his backtracking: Neil Ferguson, the academic who predicted that Covid19 would kill half a million in Britain alone and on whose advice the government have responded to it, has admitted that two thirds of the people who die from the virus in the next nine months would most likely have died this year from other causes.

    The case for this despotism gets weaker by the day, but yet the British government has just announced that 'restrictions could last for another six months.' You couldn't make it up. If this was a novel people would scoff at its plot for being preposterous.

  3. #773
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    41,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM View Post
    It could be that not a single one is in fact an excess death, because so many people have the virus that they are bound to make up a significant portion of the normal daily death rate, and even those directly killed by the virus would have died anyway on the same or a similar timeframe from another cause. You could use statistics in a similar way to paint prostate cancer as a terrifying killer of old men, except that the vast majority of men who have it will not be killed by it, but will die of something else. But here's the rub: Covid19 is probably more likely to kill someone than prostate cancer, but when it does, how can we be sure that such a person would not have died from any other widespread coronavirus, or other kind of flu, or any other natural cause whatsoever? We all have to die of something. Once again, this is not the Black Death, and nor is it the Spanish Flu.
    I think most people here can understand this comparison.

  4. #774
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    1,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM View Post
    Neil Ferguson, the academic who predicted that Covid19 would kill half a million in Britain alone and on whose advice the government have responded to it, has admitted that two thirds of the people who die from the virus in the next nine months would most likely have died this year from other causes.
    The time variable is crucial here. Those inevitable deaths would have been spread over a longer duration.

    The catalytic action of COVID-19 will result in a critical cases and deaths being deposited over a relatively short time period.

  5. #775
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    397

    Default

    There are 2baselines that must first be established before we can talk about the progression and virulence of a certain disease in general and this disease in particular. The 1st is “ How many people die in the world per year and the the breakdowns of that by geography, specific illnesses, etc”; then in regards to this disease, “ how many die from respiratory diseases, also by geographical region,etc, in a given year, month and even daily....and the would the breakdowns of the victim, the specific characteristics of the victim, age, location, health history, etc,

    If 80 thousand Americans, died of the flu in 2018, and 60 thousand died of pneumonia...then the baseline is 120 thousand Americans die of respiratory diseases ( all of them caused by some virus or bacteria ), then 120,000 deaths in the U.S, is the baseline with a Margin of error of 5 percent...now these numbers have to be broken down by months, weeks, and even days to measure it’s short term impact...

    So roughly 12,000 a month is the baseline and actually Jan., Feb and March is flu and pneumonia season and so each of those moths is more like 15-20 thousand a month..we can’t measure by actually virus and we having only been collecting that data for a few years..

    We can only look at aggregate data and right now more than 15000 people a month would have to be dying to say the numbers are abnormal...

    And that has not happened yet..

    There is nothing about this virus , except some in measures that show it is less virulent that your “regular” pneumonia,

    It is coming in those same months it always does, it is causing illness and death in those same groups it always does, it is clustering in certain areas as it always does, etc...






    So until respiratory diseases

  6. #776
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    565

    Default

    Another presentation of COVID data:

    https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/examples/COVID19US

  7. #777
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    361

    Default

    Do you understand how many extra people will die from suicide and drug overdoses as a result of this "flatenning of the curve" fanaticism? And these will mostly be people who were relatively healthy in their middle ages instead of people who were mostly elderly and ill.

    After the last recession, suicide deaths increased by 35% and opioid deaths by ~450%. We could easily see an extra 50,000 - 100,000 dying a year for a decade or more, because people were afraid to think for themselves. And, those are only the easily measurable deaths. There will be many more who die because the media and the government convinced the virtue signalling mob that panic and shut down was the correct thing to do. Many people will be forced into poverty and lives of despair; Do you think those people will care much about their health? They will suffer, but nobody will ever count them or care.

  8. #778
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spacediver View Post
    The time variable is crucial here. Those inevitable deaths would have been spread over a longer duration.

    The catalytic action of COVID-19 will result in a critical cases and deaths being deposited over a relatively short time period.
    You might have a point were we not three months into the year already. The timeframe being referred to is the same.

    Even if it wasn't, the difference is not nearly so substantial as to warrant anything approaching the mass house arrest we are undergoing. It would be enough of a difference to cause a mild increase short-term increase in the need for medical intervention. Unfortunately we know that such a mild increase is enough to bring our healthcare systems to the brink of disaster, but given that's the case why don't we lock down the world and crash the economy every winter?

  9. #779
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spacediver View Post

    So, just being as reasonable as possible (i.e. being a good Bayesian), what is the more likely hypothesis:

    1: Covid Deaths are being over-reported (relative to FluMOMO data) + Italians are lying/ have short memory
    2: Covid Deaths are not being over-reported (relative to FluMOMO data) + Italians are not lying.

    My bet is on 2.
    Look dude, you can science all you want. Italians had a literal "Hug a Chinese Day" on February 1st, 2020 to fight racism. This is the first time that political correctness and virtue signalling is literally killing people in an overt and observable manner.

    Normally, political correctness and virtue signalling leads to loss of life through unseen and incalculable (Though it is a large amount) opportunity cost lost. In this instance, Italy's virtue signalling by hugging super spreaders intentionally sent out across the world by China lead to an enormous increase in the spread of this low quality high infectious nothing-burger. Go woke, go broke sad to say.

  10. #780
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    53

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    The latest statement from Prof Sucharit Bhakti:

    YouTube

    Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel

    A key passage:
    2. Dangerousness
    A number of coronaviruses have been circulating for a long time – largely unnoticed by the media. [2] If it should turn out that the COVID-19 virus should not be ascribed a significantly higher risk potential than the already circulating corona viruses, all countermeasures would obviously become unnecessary.

    The internationally recognized International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents will soon publish a paper that addresses exactly this question. Preliminary results of the study can already be seen today and lead to the conclusion that the new virus is NOT different from traditional corona viruses in terms of dangerousness. The authors express this in the title of their paper „SARS-CoV-2: Fear versus Data“. [3]

    My question: How does the current workload of intensive care units with patients with diagnosed COVID-19 compare to other coronavirus infections, and to what extent will this data be taken into account in further decision-making by the federal government? In addition: Has the above study been taken into account in the planning so far? Here too, of course, „diagnosed“ means that the virus plays a decisive role in the patient’s state of illness, and not that previous illnesses play a greater role.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •