pwny Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 So no, there’s absolutely no evidence that data is being reported incorrectly. Because even if we remove all COVID-19 known and probable deaths, there was still a significant uptick in deaths overall, largely related to overrun hospitals that couldn’t care for people. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_shadows Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 I personally don't like using probable deaths in the numbers because there is absolutely no way whatsoever to know which ones were or weren't truly Covid deaths. An example that was given to me by my doctor is that if you have a heart attack but happen to have a fever of 103 you qualify as a probable Covid death. Now that's not to say that none of the probable deaths are Covid, some of them absolutely are... Maybe even a high or very high percentage of them... But there is no way to know for sure. Unfortunately we will never know the absolute number of people who died from this virus, it's simply not possible... Just like it's not possible to know exactly how many people were infected. The best thing we can do is stick to confirmed cases and confirmed fatalities, if you start counting probable fatalities you might as well start counting probable recoveries as well.. Meaning people who had symptoms of the virus but were never tested to confirm it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlevinKelevra Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, rob_shadows said: I personally don't like using probable deaths in the numbers because there is absolutely no way whatsoever to know which ones were or weren't truly Covid deaths. An example that was given to me by my doctor is that if you have a heart attack but happen to have a fever of 103 you qualify as a probable Covid death. Now that's not to say that none of the probable deaths are Covid, some of them absolutely are... Maybe even a high or very high percentage of them... But there is no way to know for sure. Unfortunately we will never know the absolute number of people who died from this virus, it's simply not possible... Just like it's not possible to know exactly how many people were infected. The best thing we can do is stick to confirmed cases and confirmed fatalities, if you start counting probable fatalities you might as well start counting probable recoveries as well.. Meaning people who had symptoms of the virus but were never tested to confirm it. There are well established historical baselines for # of deaths per year which can be adjusted on actuarial basis for the YoY change in demographics. The change compared to that, the excess deaths, can be very reasonably labeled as covid deaths. That doesnt help in real time, but your claim of never is ...well ... not helpful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlevinKelevra Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 So bergstrom is out on twitter saying exactly what I already told you was wrong with ihme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WizeGuy Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 (edited) 7 hours ago, mission27 said: 15% would not surprise me. That's about what was found in hot spots in Germany. Whoa, 50% is way too low for herd immunity. 66% is probably on the low side of estimates. From the studies I've read, in order to achieve herd immunity we'd need anywhere from 65%-85% of the population to become infected, and that's hoping immunity lasts long enough to even reach those numbers. Edited April 15, 2020 by WizeGuy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 Coronavirus updates: Social distancing measures may be necessary into 2022, researchers say no 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 31 minutes ago, Danger said: Coronavirus updates: Social distancing measures may be necessary into 2022, researchers say no There is no easy answer to this question of opening up versus staying home. Either way, lives will be ruined, and in large numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 1 minute ago, naptownskinsfan said: There is no easy answer to this question of opening up versus staying home. Either way, lives will be ruined, and in large numbers. There will come a point where people will just outright refuse. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naptownskinsfan Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 4 minutes ago, Danger said: There will come a point where people will just outright refuse. Yep. I completely understand not wanting to overwhelm the health care system, and if we get through most of this social distancing through April/May, we've done that and bought everyone some time. I also understand that some pockets of the country in large cities may have to do some social distancing items when flare ups happen in the future. However, there are going to be a lot of people who will risk getting themselves sick over being financially ruined, having their family homeless, etc. For them, death is just as bad as that, or worse. And I can't fault that logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WizeGuy Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 55 minutes ago, Danger said: Coronavirus updates: Social distancing measures may be necessary into 2022, researchers say no This is if we don't find a vaccine or an effective treatment. It's stated in the study. So, there are still many variables at play here. These type of articles tread the line of fear mongering, imo. It gives a population that's already anxious more reason to worry. We don't know the total infected, how long immunity lasts, if effective treatment will be available, if a vaccine will become available, if mutations will occur, etc...it's a model that has so many unknowns, and of course, the 'journalists' run with the juiciest headline because it's click-bait.No one's an expert on what the future holds with this virus. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 58 minutes ago, Danger said: Coronavirus updates: Social distancing measures may be necessary into 2022, researchers say no Tbh I hate headlines like this If we don't have a vaccine until 2022 will this always be a threat and could we need to institute distancing measures in particular places if outbreaks popped up? Absolutely They are not suggesting a lockdown or anything remotely close to a lockdown through 2022 and I think that's what people will read from that headline and get freaked out 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 4 minutes ago, mission27 said: Tbh I hate headlines like this If we don't have a vaccine until 2022 will this always be a threat and could we need to institute distancing measures in particular places if outbreaks popped up? Absolutely They are not suggesting a lockdown or anything remotely close to a lockdown through 2022 and I think that's what people will read from that headline and get freaked out Remember, this was going around for 4 months with cases all over the place before we started lockdown and people lived their lives We don't want to be that careless again which is why we need testing and tracking, but society can function with low to moderate levels of COVID-19 and we will 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/jj-coronavirus-vaccine-we-plan-to-begin-production-at-risk-imminently-210204457.html J&J targeting early 2021 rollout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acowboys62 Posted April 15, 2020 Share Posted April 15, 2020 5 hours ago, pwny said: But sure, the total was overestimated before because we were lying about who had it. This is so stupid for them to do. Can't they just create a separate category and let people draw their own conclusions? 100% confirmed and then possible with an asterisk. Crap like this is what everyone should be mad about, zero data integrity with the reporting. They call it a public health crisis but all parties are hiding things from /slow to update the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts