Coronavirus Thread

[RonJohn]

This from mid-April makes a case for under reported deaths.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...igher-than-reported-infographic/#635fec9a5437

I have the same problem with that article as I have with several from more conservative venues. It seems to start with an answer, and then look for data that backs up that answer. The article from the Washington Post that this one is based off of uses estimated numbers of deaths from a Yale study. The estimate for the week ending 4/4 looks similar to the numbers actually recorded on the CDC page. However, on the CDC page, the average seasonal deaths for that week would be about 56K. According to the WP, the average seasonal deaths for that week looks closer to 51-52K. A difference between 6K extra and 10K extra means a lot when the conclusion that COVID-19 deaths are under reported by 50% is based on a 7.7K difference in known and expected.

The known data from the CDC will be available eventually. That can be compared to averages from previous years. What is available now in that data indicates that deaths this year will be higher than the averages. However, that will have to be compared to previous variances to see if they are actually out of normal. All of this takes time to acquire, tabulate, and analyze. Just getting the data for the week ending 4/4 will take another five weeks. The big problem is that people want answers now, not when answers are available. Also, people are trying to use data to make political points instead of using data to actually find out what is happening or has happened.

 

[MWBATL]

I have the same problem with that article as I have with several from more conservative venues. It seems to start with an answer, and then look for data that backs up that answer. The article from the Washington Post that this one is based off of uses estimated numbers of deaths from a Yale study. The estimate for the week ending 4/4 looks similar to the numbers actually recorded on the CDC page. However, on the CDC page, the average seasonal deaths for that week would be about 56K. According to the WP, the average seasonal deaths for that week looks closer to 51-52K. A difference between 6K extra and 10K extra means a lot when the conclusion that COVID-19 deaths are under reported by 50% is based on a 7.7K difference in known and expected.

The known data from the CDC will be available eventually. That can be compared to averages from previous years. What is available now in that data indicates that deaths this year will be higher than the averages. However, that will have to be compared to previous variances to see if they are actually out of normal. All of this takes time to acquire, tabulate, and analyze. Just getting the data for the week ending 4/4 will take another five weeks. The big problem is that people want answers now, not when answers are available. Also, people are trying to use data to make political points instead of using data to actually find out what is happening or has happened.

Bravo. Bravo to your entire post. I couldn't have said it better myself (and I've been trying and obviously failing.)

 

[FredJacket]

....seems to start with an answer, and then look for data that backs up that answer.

This seems to be another epidemic we're dealing with these days. The Information Age (nearly unlimited access to info/data) is a minefield. Be careful out there folks.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

I think it is rather obvious that all the big government types throughout the world are hoping that the Swedish experiment fails, because a Swedish success story would mean that the government wasn't needed to "take care of the people". At worst, from what I have seen so far, it is a break-even deal, meaning the big government types still lose. From what I understand, the majority of deaths in Sweden have been among the elderly, just as has been the case in countries that shut down. Overall, Sweden has fared better than some countries so far and worse (but not by much) than other countries. There would seem to be quite a few factors involved in that, other than just the non-shutdown policies. I personally am hoping for a major success story to come out of Sweden, because it will be a slap in the face to the draconian politicians in this country, as well as elsewhere, who want to tell the people what they can and can't do, on penalty of heavy fines and even imprisonment. The bottom line for me is that Mother Nature will play its course, and there is nothing that draconian measures can do to stop it, or really even slow it down. The same will be true in this country if the states now beginning to open up find that there is no substantial increase in the infection rate or the death rate.

 

[GoldZ]

Are the Swedes small gov people? Is it reasonable to conclude at this point that Sweden's higher numbers vs others is not related at all to the let it rip approach ?

 

[GoldZ]

I have the same problem with that article as I have with several from more conservative venues. It seems to start with an answer, and then look for data that backs up that answer. The article from the Washington Post that this one is based off of uses estimated numbers of deaths from a Yale study. The estimate for the week ending 4/4 looks similar to the numbers actually recorded on the CDC page. However, on the CDC page, the average seasonal deaths for that week would be about 56K. According to the WP, the average seasonal deaths for that week looks closer to 51-52K. A difference between 6K extra and 10K extra means a lot when the conclusion that COVID-19 deaths are under reported by 50% is based on a 7.7K difference in known and expected.

The known data from the CDC will be available eventually. That can be compared to averages from previous years. What is available now in that data indicates that deaths this year will be higher than the averages. However, that will have to be compared to previous variances to see if they are actually out of normal. All of this takes time to acquire, tabulate, and analyze. Just getting the data for the week ending 4/4 will take another five weeks. The big problem is that people want answers now, not when answers are available. Also, people are trying to use data to make political points instead of using data to actually find out what is happening or has happened.

People want reasonable answers now with reasonable accuracy to make life or death decisions on, and to try to reach a very difficult to achieve balance between larger death totals among the vulnerable and the economy. Trending data is necessary. Waiting until perfect data is available is not an option.

 

[ramblinwreckguru]

People want reasonable answers now with reasonable accuracy to make life or death decisions on, and to try to reach a very difficult to achieve balance between larger death totals among the vulnerable and the economy. Trending data is necessary. Waiting until perfect data is available is not an option.

I agree. Let er rip and see what happens. We should be able to see how well GA is doing in 2-3 weeks, right?

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Are the Swedes small gov people? Is it reasonable to conclude at this point that Sweden's higher numbers vs others is not related at all to the let it rip approach ?

That's the irony here. Sweden IS, overall, a big government country, and that's why the American left has always pointed to them in attempting to justify their big government approach. But when Sweden didn't "play the game" in regards to the virus, the American left immediately turned on them

 

[MWBATL]

Are the Swedes small gov people? Is it reasonable to conclude at this point that Sweden's higher numbers vs others is not related at all to the let it rip approach ?

They chose a small gov't response and voluntary compliance (I suspect you already know this).

It is interesting to watch.. my understanding is that a higher % of their deaths are in nursing homes.

 

[RonJohn]

People want reasonable answers now with reasonable accuracy to make life or death decisions on, and to try to reach a very difficult to achieve balance between larger death totals among the vulnerable and the economy. Trending data is necessary. Waiting until perfect data is available is not an option.

I recall that the head of the IHME was quoted as saying he didn't like it that his model was being used for policy decisions. (I don't have a link for that quote, so maybe I imagined it.) It is important for people who understand the data to look thru it and make educated decisions based on the imperfect data.

What I object to is people on forums and people in the media grasping on bits and pieces of information that support their beliefs or positions. Anyone can make a chart. Anyone can get some data from one place along with different data from a different place and put apples/oranges together on a chart to show whatever they want to show. People tend to believe they "understand" data in areas that they have no experience. However, if you follow what people on here are posting, their understanding and analysis usually completely falls in line with their "side" of arguments. That is not a pattern that comes from objectively observing data and arriving at conclusions based solely on the data.

Even in the WP, they put data for estimated number of deaths on top of data for expected number of deaths. The expected number doesn't match the CDC data which is the average for that week for the years 2017-2019. Where did the WP get the data for their chart? Why does it not match the CDC expected death numbers? That single difference would change the WP analysis from 50% of extra deaths are unexplained to all extra deaths are explained. The source for a data point that would change the entire analysis isn't explained, it is just assumed in the article.

 

[GCdaJuiceMan]

I recall that the head of the IHME was quoted as saying he didn't like it that his model was being used for policy decisions. (I don't have a link for that quote, so maybe I imagined it.) It is important for people who understand the data to look thru it and make educated decisions based on the imperfect data.

What I object to is people on forums and people in the media grasping on bits and pieces of information that support their beliefs or positions. Anyone can make a chart. Anyone can get some data from one place along with different data from a different place and put apples/oranges together on a chart to show whatever they want to show. People tend to believe they "understand" data in areas that they have no experience. However, if you follow what people on here are posting, their understanding and analysis usually completely falls in line with their "side" of arguments. That is not a pattern that comes from objectively observing data and arriving at conclusions based solely on the data.

Even in the WP, they put data for estimated number of deaths on top of data for expected number of deaths. The expected number doesn't match the CDC data which is the average for that week for the years 2017-2019. Where did the WP get the data for their chart? Why does it not match the CDC expected death numbers? That single difference would change the WP analysis from 50% of extra deaths are unexplained to all extra deaths are explained. The source for a data point that would change the entire analysis isn't explained, it is just assumed in the article.

Big facts.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Big facts.

I just read that of all the Copid-related deaths in the US (the number I saw was in the 42.5K range), 45% of them were in New York. That means that there have been only 23K deaths from the virus in the rest of the country, and that is far less than the number killed annually on the roads. Do we shut down the economy and require that people not drive because of the number of automobile accident deaths? Of course no. So that tells me there has been a helluva lot of overkill (no pun intended) in this crisis.

 

[684Bee]

This article in the AJC is about a friend that I graduated high school with reopening his restaurants:

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--reg...pened-his-restaurants/PaVOCrC3XeEqIwRzWaTbOM/

 

[Milwaukee]

I love how the 2 doctors that annihilated the entire narrative are now being blocked from YouTube and condemned by other doctors from the left. That tells you all you need to know, they let the cat out of the bag and the left are now panicking to block people from knowing. The problem is most of us have known all along lol.

 

[bobongo]

I think it is rather obvious that all the big government types throughout the world are hoping that the Swedish experiment fails, because a Swedish success story would mean that the government wasn't needed to "take care of the people". At worst, from what I have seen so far, it is a break-even deal, meaning the big government types still lose. From what I understand, the majority of deaths in Sweden have been among the elderly, just as has been the case in countries that shut down. Overall, Sweden has fared better than some countries so far and worse (but not by much) than other countries. There would seem to be quite a few factors involved in that, other than just the non-shutdown policies. I personally am hoping for a major success story to come out of Sweden, because it will be a slap in the face to the draconian politicians in this country, as well as elsewhere, who want to tell the people what they can and can't do, on penalty of heavy fines and even imprisonment. The bottom line for me is that Mother Nature will play its course, and there is nothing that draconian measures can do to stop it, or really even slow it down. The same will be true in this country if the states now beginning to open up find that there is no substantial increase in the infection rate or the death rate.

Sweden is not the model to follow. New Zealand is:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/asia/new-zealand-coronavirus-outbreak-elimination-intl-hnk/index.html

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Sweden is not the model to follow. New Zealand is:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/asia/new-zealand-coronavirus-outbreak-elimination-intl-hnk/index.html

I heard something about NZ last night, but no details.
BTW, not that I am particularly happy to see you posting again (LOL), I am glad you were not banned, which was something some of us thought might have happened.

 

[bobongo]

I heard something about NZ last night, but no details.
BTW, not that I am particularly happy to see you posting again (LOL), I am glad you were not banned, which was something some of us thought might have happened.

Thanks for the backhanded compliment. No, I simply took a break.

 

[684Bee]

I love how the 2 doctors that annihilated the entire narrative are now being blocked from YouTube and condemned by other doctors from the left. That tells you all you need to know, they let the cat out of the bag and the left are now panicking to block people from knowing. The problem is most of us have known all along lol.

Tolerance is a one way street.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Thanks for the backhanded compliment.

Hey, I almost always disagree with you, but I would never report you or wish that you would be banned.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Tolerance is a one way street.

I heard last night that their videos had been removed from Youtube, but they were still there when I looked last night. Have they been removed today?