COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

[Mark Rippetoe]

The politically biased censorship/information control machine has kicked into a higher gear. How do we counter this widespread censorship?

Just like this. It's all we can do.

So, the actual document is linked in the comments on the tweet. I skimmed it and can't find that in there, and there are other comments complaining about the same thing. I concede that I read it quickly and may have missed something, but it appears to say the opposite of that. It's basically "death certificates for dummies".

Says that where COVID-19 is the underlying cause of death, it should be listed last in the chain of causes leading to death (IE "ARDS" due to "pneumonia" due to "COVID-19"), that unconfirmed cases should be clearly specified as "probable" or "presumed", and that pre-existing chronic conditions that did not cause COVID-19 but made someone more vulnerable to dying from it should be listed in Part II, "other significant conditions leading to death", rather than the other way around.

It explicitly says only to note COVID-19 if it played a role in the death. It also explicitly warns that it's a common mistake to use "illogical sequences" in the cause of death, in other words, to do goofy things like claiming something was "due to COVID-19", when it was not.

Fake news.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdf

All points of view. This is why Bruno "Hippocrates" Lawrence gets to post here. And just because the CDC has a document, that doesn't mean that people are following the guidelines. Humans, power, money, etc.

Again: YouTube

And now: https://twitter.com/i/status/1247671600427814917

Prediction:
Mass exodus form NY once this thing blows over.
Who is going to leave?
#1- Those who are most vulnerable. (older people)
#2- Those who can afford to move on a whim. (people with money)

Pretty obvious, and this will mean disaster for the recipients of New Yorkers. Just like Austin and Californians.

[wiigelec]

Er...no. Spread of an infectious disease will be reduced by cutting down personal contacts.

You seem to have missed the part where it was postulated that the virus has been spreading long before any lockdowns were instituted...

[Jovan Dragisic]

Just like this. It's all we can do.

You can get these two guys with the squat eugenics theory to write up a position paper on how increasing your numbers on the bar can bring the CFR down by a certain percentage point. You can even get the wider community involved in math backup, Lord knows this thread has enough statistics experts who give scalding reviews of the epidemiological models in a single paragraph.

Btw, Serbia's government is very far ahead of Trump's team in the Twilight zone. A brief sequence of their statements and moves (if I don't mention the speaker, it's always the president):
First news of the virus - It's an American bioweapons test against China
Virus leaves China - It's a Chinese virus bioweapons test against the US
Virus starts doing its thing in Italy - they get their CDC guy to go live, he says this is the funniest virus in history, says Serbian women should travel to Italy, they are bound to get some cheap shopping done
Virus moves into Serbia - virus is less dangerous than the flu
People start dying - curfew from 20.00 to 05.00 for everyone, enforced by the army, you can walk the dog for 20 minutes during the curfew, the CDC dude denies ever saying the virus was funny
More people start dying - people older than 65 living in urban areas can only leave the house once every four days, same goes for people older than 70 in rural areas
Even moar people start dying - curfew 17.00 to 05.00, no more dog walking. Complete crackdown on media and shit. They find a dude criticizing the government on Facebook, they do a trial over Skype, dude gets sentenced to 3 years in prison, via Skype
People keep dying - curfew goes on as usual during the week, but noone can leave the house from 17.00 on Friday to 05.00 on Monday

Let's keep it between us, you don't want Trump or his son in law don't to hear about this approach.

[MAD9692]

Prediction:
Mass exodus form NY once this thing blows over.
Who is going to leave?
#1- Those who are most vulnerable. (older people)
#2- Those who can afford to move on a whim. (people with money)

You think? How do you know? Just a hunch? My entire family and all of my friends live in NY. Old and young. Here is what I know: They don't really give a shit. While the majority of people around me in the South are freaking out, my friends and family in NY shrugged it off. Like the rest of us they are annoyed with the lockdowns but none of them stressed the virus. Even the ones that had it. I will note that none of them live in apartments. That is my experience.

[Yngvi]

Prediction:
Mass exodus form NY once this thing blows over.

This was already happening before the virus. California, also. There has been substantial migration out of NY and CA for a long time. The people who move to NY and CA are mainly immigrants who are dependent on the support systems of big cities and don't know much about the United States.

You can get these two guys with the squat eugenics theory to write up a position paper on how increasing your numbers on the bar can bring the CFR down by a certain percentage point. You can even get the wider community involved in math backup, Lord knows this thread has enough statistics experts who give scalding reviews of the epidemiological models in a single paragraph.

You are smarter than this, Jovan:

1. This is in no way eugenics; It is simply the SRA cycle on a collection of individuals. Eugenics is multigenerational.

2. In order to dispute the theory that squatting and by extension improving physical strength positively influences CFR, you must make one of two assumptions:
- Squatting does not improve any of: general health, cardiovascular health, lung capacity, blood sugar metabolism or immune system function.
or
- CVD, Diabetes, Sedentary lifestyle, reduced cardiovascular capacity are not comorbidities for Covid-19.

Either of those assumptions would be a mistake.

[woodman]

You seem to have missed the part where it was postulated that the virus has been spreading long before any lockdowns were instituted...

I said no such thing. Clearly the virus was spreading for some time before lockdowns. Reducing contacts with those infected reduces spread of the virus before and after lockdowns. And reducing contacts with the infected limits viral spread and therefore will affect graphs of those affected and death rates.

[lazygun37]

And once again, NYC data is interesting: Daily Counts:

COVID-19: Data - NYC Health

And once again, NYC data is interesting: Daily Counts:

COVID-19: Data - NYC Health

As I pointed out before (but you've kept ignoring), the last few days of this data set are always incomplete, because reports of deaths (obviously) keep coming in for at least several days after any given date.

So, completely unsurprisingly, (a) the numbers for dates in late March/early April have continued to increase significantly, and (b) the highest daily death rate is no longer March 31, but April 5 (which is probably *still* significantly incomplete).

Based on this, do you still think the NYC numbers support the idea that it's just not that bad?

[spacediver]

Here are some antibody testing developments to keep an eye on:

‘These are answers we need.’ WHO plans global study to discover true extent of coronavirus infections | Science | AAAS

The US Has Reportedly Begun Blood Tests to Hunt Down Immunity to Coronavirus

[Mark Rippetoe]

And once again, NYC data is interesting: Daily Counts:

COVID-19: Data - NYC Health

As I pointed out before (but you've kept ignoring), the last few days of this data set are always incomplete, because reports of deaths (obviously) keep coming in for at least several days after any given date.

So, completely unsurprisingly, (a) the numbers for dates in late March/early April have continued to increase significantly, and (b) the highest daily death rate is no longer March 31, but April 5 (which is probably *still* significantly incomplete).

Based on this, do you still think the NYC numbers support the idea that it's just not that bad?

We're having a different conversation now. If you'd like to participate, go ahead.

[Bbinck1]

For what it’s worth, I practice intensive care medicine in an epicenter. It is a very scary disease in that it can kill people very quickly and there is relatively little that can be done to stop the severe cases. I have seen it first hand and it is by far the scariest shit I have ever seen, and I have seen bad stuff. That said, my current feeling is that if you have it bad you die with a very high likelihood. And if there is a ventilator, you just die with a ventilator. I am not sure torching our economy was worth it. And we will be in a depression regardless.