Posted on 07/10/2020 2:18:32 AM PDT by DoughtyOne
I know this does factor in. I just can’t get a handle on
how much it does. Is it 10% more? Is it less than 10%
more? Is it 50%? Who knows. We see some reports, but
that’s about it.
It’s sort of like when we have an earthquake here in
Los Angeles. The media runs out and takes video of the
worst looking thing they can find.
Back East, folks are convinced we’re all dead. In reality,
very few people die.
The fact this is being done is enough to call any reporting on the virus as suspect. I realize the poor unthinking sheep will somply hear the words and immediately go into a panic mode which is exactly why the media spreads their fear porn.
Obama ordered H1N1 testing to stop in 2009 against the advice of the CDC. Do you remember the media outrage then? Neither do I. Here’s a question. In 2009 when H1N1 hit and Obama stopped the testing, where was Fauci? Why hasn’t someone asked him what he thought about that decision?
So why did Obama stop the testing? You know as well as I that no testing means no reported cases.
It’s all bullshit
This is discouraging.
I really thought that summer would put a dent in increase of cases.
Thank you for dismissing the entire field of epidemiology.
By definition, the fatality rate is *exactly* what I posted. Deaths divided by cases times 100 is, by definition, the fatality rate. And that is exactly what I posted.
Oh, because of that false narrative that people who, for instance, have had diabetes for years that they have successfully controlled with glucose monitoring and insulin shots, and catch Covid-19 and die from it actually died of the diabetes? While that narrative is a horrible way to trivialize the dangers of Covid-19 for people with pre-existing conditions, it is also a complete fiction. It also does not change the death rate.
No it’s not and you really have no clue what you are talking about. Do a bit of homework on the subject and if you have the capability of “learning” will soon become aware of your ignorance of that fact.
OK so show me the data proving that the people with comorbidities who were on average 80 yrs old were doing so wonderfully and make sure you include the almost 50% who died in Nursing Homes.
Did you know if a person is tested positive for the virus on Monday it is reported as a new case but if he is tested again on Thursday and again tests positive it is again reported as a new case?
WE have been scammed and if you cannot at this time see it then there is no hope for you.
Where did the X 100 come from?
133291 deaths divided by 3,118,168 cases=.0427 death rate.
If you want the death rate to be 100 times higher than it is then I’d multiply x 100 too......
Here’s a way to calculate “death rate”
327,000,000 population of U.S
133,291 deaths
.00041 percent of U.S population has died from Covid.
And for that we’ve shut down our economy, schools, athletic events. Have many people scared to death, cowering in their homes. Millions unemployed...etc. etc.
Uh, .047 = 4.7%
Our testing is in excess of the number of cases, so I think the number of missed cases is actually fairly low. The more in excess the testing is, the less likely there are missed cases. In addition, the positive test results are lumped together whether they are a first-time or a repeat positive test for the same person, meaning that the real positive rate is lower than the raw data suggests.
The CDC estimates from that pandemic planning paper are NOT the IFR, although they have been widely bandied about as definitive rates.
At this link, https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality, it shows CFRs for various countries, calculated in exactly the same way I calculated.
You can estimate anything you want about asymptomatic cases, but those estimates are meaningless without hard data to back up their validity. So far, we have no hard data. The antibody tests are almost useless for determining if a person has had a past infection, because cross-reactivity with common coronaviruses cause many people who have had the common cold to have a positive antibody test. Depending on how long it takes the body to clear virus, it may be possible to do virus testing after recovery—and we have no data on how long virus remnants remain after illness.
The CFR is what it is, and I’m going to continue using it. That’s because I’m a scientist, and using anything other than verified data is repugnant to me. And what is even more repugnant is throwing estimates based on no data into calculations because they give “better” numbers than the actual data and therefore are more effective for advancing a political narrative.
If you're genuinely interested in deaths actually caused by Covid look at the Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19
Excess death statistics factor in those who in a normal year would die of their comorbidities.
Oops. Sorry. Brian Fart.
Carry on....
I've actually worked in pandemic response, which means I have used CFRs in my daily work. What is your experience in any field related to public health?
BTW, here is the definition of case-fatality rate from the CDC's online course, "Principles of Epidemiology in Public Health Practice, Third Edition An Introduction to Applied Epidemiology and Biostatistics", Section 3.
Case-fatality rate
The case-fatality rate is the proportion of persons with a particular condition (cases) who die from that condition. It is a measure of the severity of the condition. The formula is:
Number of cause-specific deaths among the incident cases
divided by
Total number of incident cases
The case-fatality rate is a proportion, so the numerator is restricted to deaths among people included in the denominator. The time periods for the numerator and the denominator do not need to be the same; the denominator could be cases of HIV/AIDS diagnosed during the calendar year 1990, and the numerator, deaths among those diagnosed with HIV in 1990, could be from 1990 to the present.
Thank you for the link!
People in nursing homes, by definition, are not completely healthy. So introducing a virus there *is* going to cause some premature deaths--yes, even in an elderly population, an avoidable death is still a premature death.
What you still don't get is that you can completely ignore the deaths of those 80 and above and the death rate from Covid-19 is significantly higher than the death rate from seasonal influenza in every age range 20 and above.
Using Maryland numbers, the death rate of people age 20 to 29 is 0.158%. This is 1.58 times higher than the flu death rate, which is estimated at about 0.1%. But since most of those who die from seasonal flu are age 2 and lower or age 65 and up, that means that the death rate from flu in the 20-29 age group is lower than 0.1%. This makes the real difference in death rate greater than 1.58 fold. I cannot say how much greater, since I have not analyzed the flu numbers by age.
Oh, and here's a story I found about a young man who, just like you, dismissed Covid-19 as a big hoax/conspiracy: 37-year-old Port Clinton war vet dies from COVID-19 complications on Fourth of July. He had posted on Facebook how *he* wasn't falling for the hype. In a post a few months later, he complained about how bad he felt from Covid. Then he died two days later. When I first encountered this story on another forum, I thought it was one of those internet hoaxes. So I did a bit of internet research and found his obit and the linked story. Oops.
Sometimes I forget to notate that "x 100" is to make the answer a percent. This is basic elementary school math. I did include the percent sign when I posted the calculation.
That’s a good graphic.
Serology testing for past Covid-19 infection is utterly useless. Recent research, in fact, has highlighted just how useless it is. Some people who have had Covid-19 don’t produce antibodies at all, and in those who do, the antibodies disappear in most recovered patients in about three months. The big unanswered question here is whether/how long cellular immunity (absent antibodies) remains after recovery.
The news article:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/12/immunity-to-covid-19-could-be-lost-in-months-uk-study-suggests
The medical article:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.09.20148429v1
The researchers showed that people who have had mild cases of Covid-19 developed lower antibody titers during the disease, and that the titers decreased to baseline by 50 days after developing symptoms. So the narrative that there have been gadzillions of asymptomatic cases and that they are revealed by serology testing is utterly false. I have been pointing out the questionable nature of this narrative based on the cross-reactivity of antibodies between related viruses; this study provides corroboration from a different angle.
“Number of cause-specific deaths among the incident cases
divided by
Total number of incident cases”
I am sorry but you are being extraordinarily obtuse.
The “total number of cases” CANNOT be determined by the number of positive test results that have been reported to date as that number is in reality a fraction of the number that have been infected. You are comparing apples to oranges and producing a “case/fatality rate” that has no validity and signifies absolutely nothing.
I am going to take Mark Twain’s advice now concerning arguing with a fool. Have a wonderful day.
“...death rate from Covid-19 is significantly higher than the death rate from seasonal influenza in every age range 20 and above.”
Don’t trust the numbers, any of them. We just learned of massive irregularities in reporting in Florida where in certain counties reports showed 100% of those tested had China Virus.
It’s 100% political and it’s all about “getting Trump.”
You are blind to not see this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.