COVID-19 - Links, Discussion,

[sonuvazag]

The 2009 Swine Flu had 3,433 confirmed deaths in the United States, but hardly anyone uses that figure today because the CDC later estimated there were 12,469 deaths (range: 8,868–18,306). The number I see most often is just a round 10,000, but Trump, for example, likes to say there were 17,000 deaths from the Swine Flu and he'll point out it was a total catastrophe, which is interesting because, when it comes to confirmed deaths, there have already been nearly 10 times as many from COVID-19.

When authorities like the CDC eventually make their estimates on total COVID-19 fatalities, it will obviously be much higher than the confirmed number, and the process of getting to that estimated number will be no different from any other historic epidemic. HT to LTownZag who explains the process in greater detail in the previous post.

[Jazzgirl_127]

And deaths from pneumonia that set in due to the victim having influenza in 1918 would have still counted as death from influenza because they wouldn't have gotten the pneumonia without the influenza? I've only seen tweets claiming that someone's friend's cousin's neighbor's grandma had a heart attack but was listed as having Covid...so I'd be interested in unbiased sources that claim this is happening.

There are also people who early on were told by doctors that they most likely had Covid but they wouldn't test them because they were conserving tests at that time for only people who had travelled outside the country. I'm not sure how or why they didn't think it was worth testing people for a HIGHLY contagious disease when they exhibited all of the symptoms other than us (refusing tests offered by the WHO months ago) not having tests because of how ill prepared the countr was. Hopefully the people who weren't allowed to get a test didn't die, wouldn't want to possibly inflate the scoreboard if the ME diagnosed it as Covid without an actual test that they were refused while alive

When this is all said and done, 4,000 *possible* mistaken causes of death are going to be a drop in the bucket, but if that's the hill people want to die on, go for it. Fine, we'll take away 4,000 from the total reported, that still leaves us with 30,000 Americans dying in a month. Right now in a neighboring county they're freezing an old ice rink because there's an outbreak in a nursing home and if it's as deadly for that community as it was at the nursing home in Washington the morgue will run out of space.

This should not be happening.

[LongIslandZagFan]

Interesting how Sweden handled its economy

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...demic-11966132

Sweden experiment is failing:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-reaches-1000

[MDABE80]

Trouble with those graphs is that they're based on ALL cause which doesn't depict the true/accurate story. What John Doe wants to know is how many people have the disease and how many people die from it. Those 4000 cases died from who knows? They ended in the wastebasket diagnosis of "COVID" even though we don't know what killed them.
When I was a commissioner at FDA (New drugs and devices) or NIH (Grants and medical contracts) the biostatistical sections always argued for all cause mortality . Why? Because it "purified" the data sets which are easier to manage and therefore easier to publish. And when you publish...….

Same thing happened with our randomized trials...…..For example, we randomized several hundred pts with unstable angina ( coronary disease that became active with unpredictable thresholds for disabling chest pain) . Although some were actually treated medically, because they were allocated to the surgical group they were counted as surgically treated. Why because the stat guys/gals ( the same ones busy now) employed an "Intent to treat principle"/which purified the data and they thought ( No MD's) data would be easier to manage. Small wonder that they thought was no difference in the outcome between the two therapies. So a series of papers were published indicating there was no difference I the therapies even though when "intent to treat" was eliminated, it was obvious surgery was tons better in the short and long term.

I apologize for the long winded reason why I have trouble with government data and unless I know the methods of data management..I just don't trust it. SO while the graphs look enticing, they may not show what's reality when ALL Cause mortality is used. So when the fancy displays are used, they may not be accurate. probably not.
SO does it matter when 4000 cases die when they are counted as COVID mortality? I mean "dead's dead right? Yes...very much so. why, because therapies are generated based on the data given. Wrong data/inaccurate data =wrong therapies. And if a therapy fails, it may be because the underlying data given likely are tailored to a model generated by the biostatistics section. Modeling at this point is haphazard. Likewise is "predicted" mortality or morbidity predictions

And when it becomes politicized as in now, it's hard to know reality. SO the question remains " How do we know for sure..for sure? Actually with a new disease we don't know much "for sure".. And I think the uncertainty in Tony's Fauci's daily presentations reflect that.

Enough of my thoughts for now. Things change week to week. Opinions from 1 month ago must, therefore , be tailored to the current data. AND it gets worse when the virus itself mutates..... Chasing down HIV heart disease ( my fiancé died from this 25 years ago --an MD surgeon) when it mutated every other month or so..was equally as difficult.

[LTownZag]

When authorities like the CDC eventually make their estimates on total COVID-19 fatalities, it will obviously be much higher than the confirmed number, and the process of getting to that estimated number will be no different from any other historic epidemic. HT to LTownZag who explains the process in greater detail in the previous post.

Thanks, SonuvaZag.

I'm learning this stuff as I go, via articles and podcasts. I noticed the coronavirus situation was being taken seriously by a lot of polymath super-smart nerdy thinkers back in Jan and early February, mostly
via people who are accustomed to thinking abstractly and in exponential term, or with emergent phenomena that aren't just "rounded down" to be assumed to be a variant of a familiar example (flu, cold, etc). I'm always linking my sources, since I don't want to be taken as an authority myself and want people to be able to read these articles and listen to these interviews too. If anyone ever notices that I'm incorrect regarding something relating to this epidemic, please let me know ASAP. The last thing I want to do is spread misinformation.

By the way, Washington is now in the top-10 states for the rate of contagiousness (new cases per each existing case). I wonder if our (thus far) success has lead to complacency?

https://rt.live/

[LTownZag]

And deaths from pneumonia that set in due to the victim having influenza in 1918 would have still counted as death from influenza because they wouldn't have gotten the pneumonia without the influenza?

Yes, that is correct. Here's a fantastic interview with John Barry, the author of the definitive book on the 1918-1919 pandemic. Many of its victims (more than 1-in-3) had a proximate cause of death of Pneumonia.

HIV/AIDS for example, isn't the proximate cause of death for nearly anyone. It renders the immune system ineffective though.

https://peterattiamd.com/johnbarry/

His book is The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History

[sonuvazag]

Thanks, SonuvaZag.

I'm learning this stuff as I go, via articles and podcasts. I noticed the coronavirus situation was being taken seriously by a lot of polymath super-smart nerdy thinkers back in Jan and early February, mostly
via people who are accustomed to thinking abstractly and in exponential term, or with emergent phenomena that aren't just "rounded down" to be assumed to be a variant of a familiar example (flu, cold, etc). I'm always linking my sources, since I don't want to be taken as an authority myself and want people to be able to read these articles and listen to these interviews too. If anyone ever notices that I'm incorrect regarding something relating to this epidemic, please let me know ASAP. The last thing I want to do is spread misinformation.

By the way, Washington is now in the top-10 states for the rate of contagiousness (new cases per each existing case). I wonder if our (thus far) success has lead to complacency?

https://rt.live/

That could be the case. Or perhaps it's spreading to less urban communities who aren't taking social distancing as seriously in the first place. In any case, it is a reversal of the trend.

[MDABE80]

Whats the "Y" axis Son??

And then there's this https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/co...ts/ar-BB12Q90W

Accounts for delays in getting a high resolution test with high sensitivity and specificity. I'm hearing this test was 30% sensitive and 30 % specific. Predictive value of the test is horrible.

[ZagaZags]

Sweden experiment is failing:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...l-reaches-1000

Damned if we do and damned if we don't. Does this mean we need to shut down America until 2021? Not really sure what the answer is. I do know if we don't open up for business soon, we are doomed regardless.

[LongIslandZagFan]

Damned if we do and damned if we don't. Does this mean we need to shut down America until 2021? Not really sure what the answer is. I do know if we don't open up for business soon, we are doomed regardless.

There will be a midway choice. NY looks like we are slowly getting past this. The models out there show everything bottoming out around June 1... at least for the NYC area. Opening will be slow and gradual and a close eye will be kept on the numbers of people testing positive. Businesses will likely be open this summer, but expect to see some social distancing rules and everyone wearing masks. I do think that there will be enough testing, tracing, and therapeutics in place so that if there is a second "spike" we'll have enough things in place that it will be mitigated much better.

[LongIslandZagFan]

That could be the case. Or perhaps it's spreading to less urban communities who aren't taking social distancing as seriously in the first place. In any case, it is a reversal of the trend.

Stark differences between densely suburban, like LI, compared to area like say Binghamton, population around 110K... note this is based on what my son has seen up there... is compliance with laws/just general safety of using masks. My son, up there, wears a mask in public no matter what... but he says he is the outlier up there... most locals are going about their business without it. Long Island, when I go out, there is like maybe 1 in 300 people that I see not wearing a mask. You've seen this thing get into towns of 2-300 people in the middle of nowhere.. so those places like Binghamton, may eventually catch up on the density as they seemingly never had their guard up.

[sonuvazag]

Whats the "Y" axis Son??

And then there's this https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/co...ts/ar-BB12Q90W

Accounts for delays in getting a high resolution test with high sensitivity and specificity. I'm hearing this test was 30% sensitive and 30 % specific. Predictive value of the test is horrible.

Effective Reproduction (Rt). I pulled that image from the website LTown linked: https://rt.live/

[sonuvazag]

Stark differences between densely suburban, like LI, compared to area like say Binghamton, population around 110K... note this is based on what my son has seen up there... is compliance with laws/just general safety of using masks. My son, up there, wears a mask in public no matter what... but he says he is the outlier up there... most locals are going about their business without it. Long Island, when I go out, there is like maybe 1 in 300 people that I see not wearing a mask. You've seen this thing get into towns of 2-300 people in the middle of nowhere.. so those places like Binghamton, may eventually catch up on the density as they seemingly never had their guard up.

Absolutely, there are regional differences and many varieties between urban and rural. I worry about the false sense of security in some places.

And I'm wondering if LTown is right as it pertains to Spokane. I'm seeing masks but they are closer to outliers. Last week, the state of Washington was in the top three states for slowing the spread (almost to 0), so this is a pretty dramatic turnaround.

Subjectively, I would say we had our guard up pretty early in Spokane because of our proximity to Seattle but I wonder if there is a collective letting down of the guard. I don't mean to make this political, but it's just a fact that the liberty types around here are getting increasingly noisy about how eager they are to restart life as normal (I believe this is something we all long for on some level) and I suspect their message hits home more effectively after it's clear we have not been overwhelmed by hospitalizations yet. No one, including me, can be really sure how much of that is a result of the precautions we've taken.

[willandi]

Absolutely, there are regional differences and many varieties between urban and rural. I worry about the false sense of security in some places.

And I'm wondering if LTown is right as it pertains to Spokane. I'm seeing masks but they are closer to outliers. Last week, the state of Washington was in the top three states for slowing the spread (almost to 0), so this is a pretty dramatic turnaround.

Subjectively, I would say we had our guard up pretty early in Spokane because of our proximity to Seattle but I wonder if there is a collective letting down of the guard. I don't mean to make this political, but it's just a fact that the liberty types around here are getting increasingly noisy about how eager they are to restart life as normal (I believe this is something we all long for on some level) and I suspect their message hits home more effectively after it's clear we have not been overwhelmed by hospitalizations yet. No one, including me, can be really sure how much of that is a result of the precautions we've taken.

When I have ventured to get groceries, here in Deer Park, it seems to be about 50/50 with masks. They did have some N95 masks for sale, $10.00/each. I am wearing a cloth mask, 3-4 layers, made by a friend of ours, as one of a thousand, or so, that she has made and sent to people in need.

I am anxious to get my store open, and as a small store with only 3-4 customers a day, could probably do so safely. I do have enough money to last for another month or two, and would rather not die than make a few dollars.

No one can know if it is precautions or not. The learning curve could be huge.

[RenoZag]

Google & Apple : Contact Tracing via Cellphones

Interesting Read: https://onezero.medium.com/apple-and...e-90c705541eaa

Apple and Google are hoping to beat that number in the United States and other countries by eventually building basic tracing functionality into the operating system, so that at least some contact tracing features can work even if people don’t download an app. (The details are still being worked out.) That might help, but it’s likely months away, and even then public health authorities may be fighting an uphill battle to get individuals to opt in to a service whose primary benefit is to others, not themselves.

There is, however, a path by which contact tracing apps might go mainstream even without governments making them mandatory. It’s one that few have yet discussed, and Apple and Google themselves declined to comment on it when asked by OneZero. It involves private entities — workplaces, schools, and even social gatherings — telling people they have to use the app if they want to participate.

“Companies will require it before you’re allowed to go back to work,” predicts Ashkan Soltani, an independent security researcher and former chief technologist at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, in a phone interview. “Your grocery store could require that you show it before you’re allowed to enter the store.”